Visiting Monk Sherborne in search of Jane Austen's less known brother, George

Jane Austen comes from a large family of eight children, including 2 girls and six boys. Janeites are familiar with Jane's sailor brothers, Frank and Charles, her clergyman brother, James, and the country squire, Edward and the banker-turned soldier-turned clergyman, Henry. Jane's less known older brother, George, however, largely remains a mystery. 

What we do know about George is that he was born second, in 1766, following Jane's eldest brother, James, and he was nearly ten years older than Jane. As was customary at the time within gentry circles, the Austen siblings were all sent to stay with a wet nurse in a local cottage or farm house for the first few years of their lives. 

However, George didn't return to the family home; he suffered from seizures and had some type of disability and was therefore cared for in a local cottage. Jane Austen's father, George Austen, was a clergyman and concerned with ideas of goodness and virtue within his family. He writes of George, "We have this comfort, he cannot be a bad or a wicked child" (Tucker, 1983). 

Jane is likely to have spent time with George as an infant, as George was still nearby in Steventon when Jane was born. When George was 6 years old, he was taken to stay with the Culham (or Cullum?) family in the village of Monk Sherborne near Basingstoke. 

A few weeks ago, on a clear, crisp autumn's day, I decided to drive to the beautiful, sleepy village of Monk Sherborne to see if I could discover where George lived. 

Entering the village

The roads leading up to the village were narrow and winding, and the area was very leafy and the village quiet and sleepy. 

I had a lovely autumnal walk through the village, with leaves falling, acorns and apples dropping and birdsong to accompany me all the way. I admired these quaint cottages, many of which would have been around when George Austen lived here. 

The house next door to the cottage where George stayed.

The Cullums lived at Beam End Cottage at the end of the village, on the road to Sherborne St John.

The road where George Austen boarded.

Beam End Cottage is now called Apple Tree Cottage. Apple Tree Cottage is a small cottage in a stunning rural property away from the rest of the village. It truly felt like the house was tucked away from elsewhere - perhaps this place was chosen intentionally for George?

Apple Tree Cottage where George Austen boarded. 

The Cullum family were agricultural labourers who were tenants on this rather large farm; the land actually belonged to Queen's College. Francis Cullum was a respectable member of the community, becoming parish clerk at Monk Sherborne. The family augmented their income by nursing Austens' children and caring for disabled family members. The Cullums received 15 pounds a quarter (the equivalent of 800 pounds today) for this service. 

Jane's eldest brother, James, was vicar at nearby Sherborne St John at the time. Working so close to George's cottage, James Austen probably oversaw George's care and administered his fees, which may have been paid by Edward from Mrs Austen's inheritance. 

After Monk Sherborne, I drove to Sherborne St John and had a little walk around the church where James Austen was vicar. I enjoyed my small walk around this charming village. 

St Andrew's Church in Sherborne St John where James was vicar.  

You may be wondering what George's disability was? We can assume that George may have had epilepsy and probably had developmental difficulties. However, since George lived a long life, he most likely didn't have Down's syndrome, and he was able to walk. It is possible that George was deaf and dumb, as it is thought that Jane knew sign language. We know this because in December 1808, following the death of her father when Jane was living in Southampton with her brother, Francis' family, she socialised with the Lance family, a prominent merchant family in the city. Jane writes to Cassandra about socialising with Valentine FitzHugh one evening, who was the brother of Mrs Lance: 

"He has lived in that house more than twenty years, and, poor man! is so totally deaf that they say he could not hear a cannon, were it fired close to him; having no cannon at hand to make the experiment, I took it for granted, and talked to him a little with my fingers, which was funny enough. I recommended him to read Corinna" (a book by Madame De Stael with a reference to cannons).

This use of sign language was dramatised in the film, Becoming Jane. 

Whatever George suffered from, it may have been a hereditary illness, for Jane Austen's uncle Thomas, brother of Jane's mother Cassandra, also had a disability; they were both cared for together at Monk Sherborne. 

Did the Austens visit George and his uncle at Monk Sherborne? No records survive of any family visits to the Cullums, but it is likely that they visited on occasion. James would have been the most common visitor thanks to his vicinity. 

At a time when developmental disability was considered a stigma, George was rarely mentioned in family letters; he lived a sort of silent existence. Similarly, George was omitted from the early biographies written by family members; for example, Jane's niece and biographer, James Edward Austen-Leigh lists James as the oldest son and Edward as the second son, with no mention of George whatsoever. 

  All Saints Church in Monk Sherborne where George is buried. 

Unlike Jane Austen, George Austen lived up to the ripe old age of 71. None of the Austen family members attended his funeral in 1838. However, one of the Cullum sons, George, witnessed his passing and recorded him as a "Gentleman" on his death certificate. Sadly, there is no gravestone for George in the Monk Sherborne church graveyard where he is buried. 

To read more about George Austen and Monk Sherborne, do refer to these excellent articles: 

Hampshire Cultural Trust: Looking for George Austen at Monk Sherborne.

Jane Austen Daily: George Austen's Life with the Cullum Family in Monk Sherborne. 

 

To read about the FitzHughs, refer to: 

https://jasna.org/publications-2/persuasions-online/volume-46-no-1/butler-2/

Further references: 

Austen-Leigh, J.E. (2002) A Memoir of Jane Austen and Other Family Recollections. Oxford: OUP. 

Le Faye, D. (2011) Jane Austen's Letters (Fourth Edition). Oxford: OUP.

Tomalin, C. (1997) Jane Austen - A Life. London: Viking.

Tucker, G.H. (1983) A Goodly Heritage: A History of Jane Austen's Family. Manchester: Carcanet New Press. 

My Review of the New Sense and Sensibility Movie

                                                                     Image: Wikipedia 

Have you seen the new Sense and Sensibility movie yet? Today I ventured to see the new film, directed by Georgia Oakley, and I am eager to share my (very mixed) feelings about the adaptation. 

As an avid Janeite, it is difficult to avoid comparing the new adaptation to the previous ones (e.g. 2008, 1995), or to avoid comparing the film to the book. However, I decided to view the adaptation with an open mind. This time, my now 13-year-old daughter joined me, and I was excited to hear her opinion, as she represents a new generation of viewers and might well have an alternative point of view to mine. 

Firstly, I was distracted by the unusual costumes and hair choices (as often happens with modern adaptations!). Many of the main characters had their hair down, and Marianne had long, messy, matted hair throughout the film. This may well have been an intentional choice to reflect her free-spirited nature; however, I'm not quite sure why the more restrained Elinor had her hair 'wildly' down, too. And don’t get me started with the dancing - very strangely choreographed and not at all genteel or period-appropriate even for country dancing.

The costumes seemed strange, too, and, in my very humble opinion, not period-appropriate or reflective of the social standing of the characters. These costumes would have been have been more appropriate for the servant classes than the gentry; there should have been a marked disparity in costumes between the servants and the masters. Perhaps costuming was intentionally chosen to attune to the autumnal tone and colour palette in the movie - everything seemed toned down to autumnal browns, bronzes, and other dark colours. The lack of bonnets would have annoyed many a Janeite, as ladies would not have been prancing about in public with nothing on their heads.That said, if I wasn't a connoisseur of the period, I most probably would have enjoyed the carefully chosen colour schemes reflective of the emotional aspect of the movie. 

On a positive note, I must say that I enjoyed the cinematography in this film very much indeed; the film has been beautifully shot, and locations such as the wild, coastal Devon countryside are portrayed like a period painting. The cinematography somewhat reminds me of Pride and Prejudice (2005) and scenes from Bronte adaptations. Scenes are shot in natural light, and the camera moves with the characters, making each scene feel like you are a part of it. 

Some of the actors are wonderful, too. The legendary Fiona Shaw (the delightful Mrs Croft in Persuasion, 1995) is outstanding as Mrs Jennings and had me in fits of laughter. The main characters are also beautifully portrayed by Daisy Edgar-Jones (Elinor) and Esmé Creed-Miles (Marianne). However, the leading men don’t really appeal to me as Austen characters and lack screen presence, and Mr Palmer is simply odd. 

The production has taken some creative liberties with the plot; there are some scenes that have been altered or added and do not appear in the original book. I won't mention those for fear of spoiling the film for those who haven't seen it, but I would love to hear your opinions if you have! We don't get to see a full resolution at the end of the film either, which differs from the previous adaptations. 

My biggest criticism is perhaps how the dialogue is shown in this movie. I would much prefer to hear authentic dialogue from Jane Austen's book rather than a screenwriter's version of it. Again, this wouldn't be an issue if I hadn't been introduced to Jane Austen and hadn't read the book, as the film itself is beautifully made and the story is a wonderful portrayal of 'sense' and 'sensibility' - reason and feeling. As an adaptation of Jane Austen and her wit, this version disappoints.

Overall, this version doesn't compare to the 1995 masterpiece by Ang Lee, which will forever remain in my heart as the most brilliant portrayal of Jane Austen's Sense and Sensibility and more specifically, of the duality of reason and feeling. I have vivid memories of discussing the movie back in 1995 with my grandad, who sadly passed away two years later; my grandad loved Emma Thompson's Elinor and vastly preferred the movie to the 1995 Pride and Prejudice, which I adored. I will cherish the memories of these debates as some of my last interactions with my grandad and the bond I shared with him in our love of Jane Austen.