Sandy C Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Would Jane being the heir change much for
> Bingley's sisters or Darcy? Granted, in our eyes
> Jane would be a more desirable catch, however,
> Darcy declared her very pretty but she smiled too
> much, Bingley's sisters declared her to be sweet
> but had vulgar relations with an attorney in
> Meryton and relatives in Cheapside.
>
> Even Jane as an heiress still has no connections
> and is not part of the London society and Bingley
> marrying Jane certainly would not bring Caroline
> any closer to the Darcy's and Pemberley as they
> would be if Bingley married Georgiana. I don’t
> believe they were so concerned with an estate so
> much as their ‘darling wish’ was for an estate
> in the neighboring county of Derbyshire so I have
> to agree that Longbourn wouldn’t exactly be a
> big draw for the Bingley sisters.
>
I think it would change because not many women were heirs to landed property in Regency, even Georgina only had a large cash dowry, not a landed estate. Land wealth gave more consequence than cash wealth (e.g. in Emma, the Woodhouses were cash rich but land poor, having only a small estate-- Hartfield, while Knightley was land rich with Donwell estate, but cash poor, having little spare money, but Knightley was first in consequence and Woodhouse second). Bingley's sisters would have the fact of Jane being heiress of a landed estate impressed much more firmly on their minds than any vulgar relatives she might have. And the Longbourn family were a most prominent family in that neighbourhood, and it was at an easy distance from London. Being a gentleman's daughter who was sole heiress to her father's estate of 2,000 a year (in S&S, Col Brandon's estate was also 2,000 a year and he was described as "rich", Mrs Ferrars' estate in Norfolk was only 1,000 a year, and she wanted her son to marry a lord's daughter, Willoughby's estate of Combe Magna was only between 600 to700 a year) -- could easily secure Jane an entry into London society. (If the estate was not settled on eldest daughter in default of a son and could be divided between all five of them -- it would give each a respectable dowry but not enough for entry into fashionable society, in that case, Bingley's sisters would not be keen on the marriage, but I believe it would be different if Jane was sole heiress).
> Of course, there would be no Collins as an heir to
> believe he had to propose to Elizabeth to 'heal
> the breach' and perhaps not even come to Longbourn
> at all which means Charlotte's situation would
> change.
>
I also think there would be no Collins, and hopefully Charlotte would get a more sensible man!
> Then, there is Mrs Bennet...how would she change
> not having to be afraid for their futures. Would
> she have been more sensible, more apt to seek
> guidance for all of her daughters to be taught how
> to properly present themselves in society? Would
> the younger ones even be out yet?
>
But I think in such a scenario, Mrs Bennet would still be worried for her younger daughters and want them to marry well. In Jane's case, however, her reaction would be the opposite -- she would be fearful of fortune hunters who would want the estate and who would not provide for herself and Jane's sisters..
>. But, it wouldn't change Darcy's
> belief that Jane showed no emotion toward Bingley
>
Unlike in canon, Darcy would not be afraid that Jane might be pressured by her mother to accept a man she did not love for the sake of her mother's and sisters' financial security. He would believe that as an heiress, she could afford to follow her heart, even if she appeared rather reserved. Actually, I was thinking of some type of role reversal for Darcy and Eliz, with Eliz suspecting Bingley to be light-hearted and not really in love with Jane, and Darcy being indignant with Eliz for interfering to separate Jane from Bingley who really loved her and not because of the estate.
> Now, I could see Wickham making a play for Jane. I
> mean, But if Jane holds to her personality,
> I can't see her falling for someone like Wickham.
No indeed. Not Wickham!
-------------------------------------------------------
> Would Jane being the heir change much for
> Bingley's sisters or Darcy? Granted, in our eyes
> Jane would be a more desirable catch, however,
> Darcy declared her very pretty but she smiled too
> much, Bingley's sisters declared her to be sweet
> but had vulgar relations with an attorney in
> Meryton and relatives in Cheapside.
>
> Even Jane as an heiress still has no connections
> and is not part of the London society and Bingley
> marrying Jane certainly would not bring Caroline
> any closer to the Darcy's and Pemberley as they
> would be if Bingley married Georgiana. I don’t
> believe they were so concerned with an estate so
> much as their ‘darling wish’ was for an estate
> in the neighboring county of Derbyshire so I have
> to agree that Longbourn wouldn’t exactly be a
> big draw for the Bingley sisters.
>
I think it would change because not many women were heirs to landed property in Regency, even Georgina only had a large cash dowry, not a landed estate. Land wealth gave more consequence than cash wealth (e.g. in Emma, the Woodhouses were cash rich but land poor, having only a small estate-- Hartfield, while Knightley was land rich with Donwell estate, but cash poor, having little spare money, but Knightley was first in consequence and Woodhouse second). Bingley's sisters would have the fact of Jane being heiress of a landed estate impressed much more firmly on their minds than any vulgar relatives she might have. And the Longbourn family were a most prominent family in that neighbourhood, and it was at an easy distance from London. Being a gentleman's daughter who was sole heiress to her father's estate of 2,000 a year (in S&S, Col Brandon's estate was also 2,000 a year and he was described as "rich", Mrs Ferrars' estate in Norfolk was only 1,000 a year, and she wanted her son to marry a lord's daughter, Willoughby's estate of Combe Magna was only between 600 to700 a year) -- could easily secure Jane an entry into London society. (If the estate was not settled on eldest daughter in default of a son and could be divided between all five of them -- it would give each a respectable dowry but not enough for entry into fashionable society, in that case, Bingley's sisters would not be keen on the marriage, but I believe it would be different if Jane was sole heiress).
> Of course, there would be no Collins as an heir to
> believe he had to propose to Elizabeth to 'heal
> the breach' and perhaps not even come to Longbourn
> at all which means Charlotte's situation would
> change.
>
I also think there would be no Collins, and hopefully Charlotte would get a more sensible man!
> Then, there is Mrs Bennet...how would she change
> not having to be afraid for their futures. Would
> she have been more sensible, more apt to seek
> guidance for all of her daughters to be taught how
> to properly present themselves in society? Would
> the younger ones even be out yet?
>
But I think in such a scenario, Mrs Bennet would still be worried for her younger daughters and want them to marry well. In Jane's case, however, her reaction would be the opposite -- she would be fearful of fortune hunters who would want the estate and who would not provide for herself and Jane's sisters..
>. But, it wouldn't change Darcy's
> belief that Jane showed no emotion toward Bingley
>
Unlike in canon, Darcy would not be afraid that Jane might be pressured by her mother to accept a man she did not love for the sake of her mother's and sisters' financial security. He would believe that as an heiress, she could afford to follow her heart, even if she appeared rather reserved. Actually, I was thinking of some type of role reversal for Darcy and Eliz, with Eliz suspecting Bingley to be light-hearted and not really in love with Jane, and Darcy being indignant with Eliz for interfering to separate Jane from Bingley who really loved her and not because of the estate.
> Now, I could see Wickham making a play for Jane. I
> mean, But if Jane holds to her personality,
> I can't see her falling for someone like Wickham.
No indeed. Not Wickham!