I loved reading this résumé of the Ladies' Dining Society, but of course I'm biased! Kathleen Lyttelton also became the President of The National Union of Women Workers in 1901 and 1902. Thank you Ann for writing about the Society.
Many thanks, Andrew! Yes, it's amazing how much she did for women workers, and a lot of her newspaper columns were dedicated to promoting professional opportunities. I will write more about her soon - she packed so much into her relatively short life!
This is, as ever, so interesting. But...DONS WEREN'T ALLOWED TO MARRY? We have already read about how WOMEN WEREN'T ALLOWED TO TAKE DEGREES. What kind of education was anyone able to receive, when the people in charge of providing it were clearly insane?
Thanks Nick and yes, totally nuts. The idea was that Oxbridge colleges should remain like intellectual monasteries, older men teaching and living celibately with younger men, what could go wrong with that? As a young don Leslie Stephen worried about the Victorian trend for marrying because 'a married fellow will, I fear, oftener think more of his wife than his college'. (It's funny that the Cambridge colleges now celebrating 40 years being co-ed were the ones who held on the longest to their all-male status - into the 1980s).
This is my chance to shoot my shot: I've told @Ann Kennedy Smith in the past how these stories would make a great TV series and now you're also hooked on then and happen to be a great script writer... Anyway, I'll leave it to you two to discuss further how you'd like to go about the screen adaptation 😉
Ha, thanks Cristina! The Bridgerton producers probably don't need to worry about a rival series just yet, but you never know. Need to get the book into shape first!
What an enjoyable and meaningful read! I love the way these gifted women refused to be defined by the limitations of their socio-cultural environment and instead cultivated their own haven of full presence shaped by intellectual curiosity & autonomous expression framed by ethical awareness.
It brings to mind some of Margaret Fuller’s “Conversations” designed to provide intellectual & aesthetic discourse for women. She wrote, “We would have every arbitrary barrier thrown down. We would have every path laid open to woman as freely as to man….then and then only will mankind be ripe for this, when inward and outward freedom for woman as much as for man shall be acknowledged as a right, not yielded as a concession.” The inspirational women you feature model a similar courage and impassioned determination to transcend patriarchal barriers to define their own vision of edifying empowerment.
What a great quote by Margaret Fuller - I especially love the bit about having arbitrary barriers thrown down. It shows the importance, I think, of people being stronger by connecting with others and simply ignoring those conventional (and convenient for the dominant class) barriers. The women in this group were very different in their characters, but agreed on equal access to education, books and learning and helping others to find that path too. Thank you for your stimulating comment.
Thank you for this fascinating account,.This is required reading after Woolf’s description of Cambridge for anyone wishes for a bit of cheering up.
What these women managed to do is not Nobel-prize-winning inventions but examples of how so many women at the time found ways to assuage their experiences of male intellectual dominance with wit and imagination.
Thanks Pauline! Yes, I think Woolf was angry about Cambridge for a good few years because her brothers got to go, and she didn't - plus she knew that she was brighter and harder-working than most of her brothers' friends. And I agree with you about how quietly subversive and imaginative these women were, giving support to others who were also negotiating that weird Victorian world.
It got me thinking about how some things have changed - and others haven't. A few years ago I attended my one and only college reunion (from the other place). It was hosted by Mary Warnock, whose husband had been Principal of my college. They were both philosophers but she became far better known than he was. The reception was at the House of Lords because by then she was Lady Warnock and could invite guests as a member of the House. Her success and status both point to very positive changes in post-war Britain. But the fact that the reception was at the House of Lords, an unelected chamber still including the clergy and heriditary peers (not to mention being called the House of Lords, not Lords and Ladies), shows us that there is a long way to go before the governance of the country finally leaves the 19th century and joins the 21st.
Thanks for such an interesting comment, Jeffrey. It is strange how some of these rather elitist traditions endure - part of the charm and historical quaintness (I suppose) of English life (see gentlemen's clubs, Eton etc). But it covers up a lot of inequalities and stifles so much growth. Cambridge University is very aware now that it missed out by not giving opportunities to more brilliant women like Mary Warnock!
Such a pleasure to read this and learn about people making a difference in the world in good fellowship and with conversation. Made me happy this morning!
Very pleased to hear that, Maria. It's just a little taster, really, to give an idea of what women (though it could have been any under-represented group) achieved through friendship and just allowing themselves the time and space to talk and think freely, without Victorian conventions restricting them. Wish I was part of such a group!
I look forward to reading much more as you write it. And agreed that it's a lovely model for conversations among people -- and maybe a spur to create similar contexts for ourselves!
Yes — it's been amazing in so many ways. Am so happy for it. I can't get out of my head, though, sometimes, that image from Forster's 1909 or 1911 (or whenever it was) story, of all of these people exchanging ideas via remote communication and never being in the same place at the same time. One is right to value both, maybe — the online conversations and the ones around an actual table with actual food! Have only just begun Sarah Harkness's book on the Macmillan brothers, but suspect that it will be full of in-person conversation as well as correspondence, and will also make one wish that one were taking part in the discussions!
I love that you love this group and what they stood for, Ann ! I’m sure that the love of a particular subject inspires the best research and ensures history is not lost.
Thank you for every ounce of effort you put into your research and for your wonderful newsletters.
This was such a fun read! What an intrepid group. I would love to have been a fly on the wall at those dinners…
I would love to know more about whether my (very fuzzy, very limited) understanding of Cambridge / Oxford is correct in regards to women, particularly religious women, belonging to the university in the Middle Ages, and only being cut out after enlightenment times? Have you uncovered anything on this in your research? I know it’s a very different era to yours, of course!
Thanks for your great comment, Kerri. As you say, I'm really looking at the late Victorian era, when things shifted again, but I have the sense that 'women of learning' were more respected in the Middle Ages generally. I know that my Cambridge college, Queens', was named after two royal benefactresses (?) hence the apostrophe. So I think women were allowed to endow libraries, colleges etc but were not necessarily be invited in, apart from on special occasions.
Interesting! I didn’t realize that about Queens’. Thanks for sharing- I’m hoping to look into this a bit more, as it’s a spot of curiosity for me. I know for example that a woman venerated as a saint (Frieswide? spelling uncertain!) is credited for starting Oxford in its earliest days by bringing an Augustinian priory to the area.
Fascinating Kerri - and I've just been reading about a priory inspired by Radegund still at the heart of Jesus College, Cambridge. Also this, by chance today:
What an inspiring piece you've written on the Ladies' Dining Society. It makes me think of today and how it can be applied to those who feel excluded for various reasons. Because some things have not changed and these ladies accomplished a lot more than a camaraderie with their society.
Many thanks for such a great comment. You express so well how the subject is still relevant today - a powerful group wanting to hang on to their privileges by denying others access to learning. I just admire these women who in their quiet way, resisted.
Thank you Jill, and I do hope I'm not repeating myself too much! Just wanted to share some of the reasons why I love this group and what they stood for. So much of women's history at Cambridge has disappeared as it's not in the official university records, so I'm glad to get my research out there.
No redundancies noted; It is a lovely way to introduce new readers to the fun you're up to and I'm glad to see your research out there, compensating for Cambridge's inability to document this history.
I loved reading this résumé of the Ladies' Dining Society, but of course I'm biased! Kathleen Lyttelton also became the President of The National Union of Women Workers in 1901 and 1902. Thank you Ann for writing about the Society.
Many thanks, Andrew! Yes, it's amazing how much she did for women workers, and a lot of her newspaper columns were dedicated to promoting professional opportunities. I will write more about her soon - she packed so much into her relatively short life!
This is, as ever, so interesting. But...DONS WEREN'T ALLOWED TO MARRY? We have already read about how WOMEN WEREN'T ALLOWED TO TAKE DEGREES. What kind of education was anyone able to receive, when the people in charge of providing it were clearly insane?
Thanks Nick and yes, totally nuts. The idea was that Oxbridge colleges should remain like intellectual monasteries, older men teaching and living celibately with younger men, what could go wrong with that? As a young don Leslie Stephen worried about the Victorian trend for marrying because 'a married fellow will, I fear, oftener think more of his wife than his college'. (It's funny that the Cambridge colleges now celebrating 40 years being co-ed were the ones who held on the longest to their all-male status - into the 1980s).
Nick, I think there is a line to what you experienced yourself when in school
Too right - seventy years later.
This is my chance to shoot my shot: I've told @Ann Kennedy Smith in the past how these stories would make a great TV series and now you're also hooked on then and happen to be a great script writer... Anyway, I'll leave it to you two to discuss further how you'd like to go about the screen adaptation 😉
Ha, thanks Cristina! The Bridgerton producers probably don't need to worry about a rival series just yet, but you never know. Need to get the book into shape first!
You never know indeed :) Will love to read the book when it's out.
What an enjoyable and meaningful read! I love the way these gifted women refused to be defined by the limitations of their socio-cultural environment and instead cultivated their own haven of full presence shaped by intellectual curiosity & autonomous expression framed by ethical awareness.
It brings to mind some of Margaret Fuller’s “Conversations” designed to provide intellectual & aesthetic discourse for women. She wrote, “We would have every arbitrary barrier thrown down. We would have every path laid open to woman as freely as to man….then and then only will mankind be ripe for this, when inward and outward freedom for woman as much as for man shall be acknowledged as a right, not yielded as a concession.” The inspirational women you feature model a similar courage and impassioned determination to transcend patriarchal barriers to define their own vision of edifying empowerment.
What a great quote by Margaret Fuller - I especially love the bit about having arbitrary barriers thrown down. It shows the importance, I think, of people being stronger by connecting with others and simply ignoring those conventional (and convenient for the dominant class) barriers. The women in this group were very different in their characters, but agreed on equal access to education, books and learning and helping others to find that path too. Thank you for your stimulating comment.
Thank you for this fascinating account,.This is required reading after Woolf’s description of Cambridge for anyone wishes for a bit of cheering up.
What these women managed to do is not Nobel-prize-winning inventions but examples of how so many women at the time found ways to assuage their experiences of male intellectual dominance with wit and imagination.
Thanks Pauline! Yes, I think Woolf was angry about Cambridge for a good few years because her brothers got to go, and she didn't - plus she knew that she was brighter and harder-working than most of her brothers' friends. And I agree with you about how quietly subversive and imaginative these women were, giving support to others who were also negotiating that weird Victorian world.
Thank you. Yes, your phrase ‘quietly subversive’ is brilliant!
A quietly wonderful post, Ann.
It got me thinking about how some things have changed - and others haven't. A few years ago I attended my one and only college reunion (from the other place). It was hosted by Mary Warnock, whose husband had been Principal of my college. They were both philosophers but she became far better known than he was. The reception was at the House of Lords because by then she was Lady Warnock and could invite guests as a member of the House. Her success and status both point to very positive changes in post-war Britain. But the fact that the reception was at the House of Lords, an unelected chamber still including the clergy and heriditary peers (not to mention being called the House of Lords, not Lords and Ladies), shows us that there is a long way to go before the governance of the country finally leaves the 19th century and joins the 21st.
Thanks for such an interesting comment, Jeffrey. It is strange how some of these rather elitist traditions endure - part of the charm and historical quaintness (I suppose) of English life (see gentlemen's clubs, Eton etc). But it covers up a lot of inequalities and stifles so much growth. Cambridge University is very aware now that it missed out by not giving opportunities to more brilliant women like Mary Warnock!
Such a pleasure to read this and learn about people making a difference in the world in good fellowship and with conversation. Made me happy this morning!
Very pleased to hear that, Maria. It's just a little taster, really, to give an idea of what women (though it could have been any under-represented group) achieved through friendship and just allowing themselves the time and space to talk and think freely, without Victorian conventions restricting them. Wish I was part of such a group!
I look forward to reading much more as you write it. And agreed that it's a lovely model for conversations among people -- and maybe a spur to create similar contexts for ourselves!
Absolutely! Substack is a great way of having some great conversations too.
Yes — it's been amazing in so many ways. Am so happy for it. I can't get out of my head, though, sometimes, that image from Forster's 1909 or 1911 (or whenever it was) story, of all of these people exchanging ideas via remote communication and never being in the same place at the same time. One is right to value both, maybe — the online conversations and the ones around an actual table with actual food! Have only just begun Sarah Harkness's book on the Macmillan brothers, but suspect that it will be full of in-person conversation as well as correspondence, and will also make one wish that one were taking part in the discussions!
I love this so much! Looking forward to hearing more about these women.
Thanks Rebecca! Your encouragement and appreciation means a lot to me.
I love that you love this group and what they stood for, Ann ! I’m sure that the love of a particular subject inspires the best research and ensures history is not lost.
Thank you for every ounce of effort you put into your research and for your wonderful newsletters.
What a lovely comment, Maureen, your interest really makes it all feel worthwhile. Thank you so much.
Ann,
So much fun - how fast can you write? I'm looking forward to more!
Vicki
Ha, now that is a challenge I'm happy to accept Vicki! Many thanks.
Can't wait for this series!!
Thank you Katie! I will endeavour to organize my thoughts - and having the structure of a series will help. To be continued...
This was such a fun read! What an intrepid group. I would love to have been a fly on the wall at those dinners…
I would love to know more about whether my (very fuzzy, very limited) understanding of Cambridge / Oxford is correct in regards to women, particularly religious women, belonging to the university in the Middle Ages, and only being cut out after enlightenment times? Have you uncovered anything on this in your research? I know it’s a very different era to yours, of course!
Thanks for your great comment, Kerri. As you say, I'm really looking at the late Victorian era, when things shifted again, but I have the sense that 'women of learning' were more respected in the Middle Ages generally. I know that my Cambridge college, Queens', was named after two royal benefactresses (?) hence the apostrophe. So I think women were allowed to endow libraries, colleges etc but were not necessarily be invited in, apart from on special occasions.
Interesting! I didn’t realize that about Queens’. Thanks for sharing- I’m hoping to look into this a bit more, as it’s a spot of curiosity for me. I know for example that a woman venerated as a saint (Frieswide? spelling uncertain!) is credited for starting Oxford in its earliest days by bringing an Augustinian priory to the area.
Fascinating Kerri - and I've just been reading about a priory inspired by Radegund still at the heart of Jesus College, Cambridge. Also this, by chance today:
https://stories.clare.cam.ac.uk/for-her-good-estate-review/
This was such a fascinating read! I always learn so much from you 😊
Ah, that's great Mackenzie, thank you!
What an inspiring piece you've written on the Ladies' Dining Society. It makes me think of today and how it can be applied to those who feel excluded for various reasons. Because some things have not changed and these ladies accomplished a lot more than a camaraderie with their society.
Many thanks for such a great comment. You express so well how the subject is still relevant today - a powerful group wanting to hang on to their privileges by denying others access to learning. I just admire these women who in their quiet way, resisted.
A lovely reintroduction to the namesake of your column. Love it!
Thank you Jill, and I do hope I'm not repeating myself too much! Just wanted to share some of the reasons why I love this group and what they stood for. So much of women's history at Cambridge has disappeared as it's not in the official university records, so I'm glad to get my research out there.
No redundancies noted; It is a lovely way to introduce new readers to the fun you're up to and I'm glad to see your research out there, compensating for Cambridge's inability to document this history.