Regency Wedding

While few dresses have survived the 200 years since the Regency Era, Princess Charlotte's silver wedding dress of 1816, still exists. Princess Charlotte of Wales, born Charlotte Augusta on 7 January 1796 – 6 November 1817, was the only child of Princess Caroline of Brunswick, and George, Prince of Wales who later became King George IV.

The Museum of London recently exhibited this gorgeous creation. This elaborate gown in silver lace, called "net" in those days, lays over white silk and cut in the very popular apron style so popular during the Regency Era. Plenty of silver lace also trims this gown. I find it interesting that this dress doesn't look exactly as the dress depicted in the etching published in the May 1816 issue by La Belle Assemble:

As we have been gratified with a sight of the wedding dresses of this amiable and illustrious female, a particular yet concise account of them cannot but be acceptable to our fair readers.

The Royal Bride, happy in obtaining him whom her heart had selected, and whom consenting friends approved, wore on her countenance that tranquil and chastened joy which a female so situated could not fail to experience. Her fine fair hair, elegantly yet simply arranged, owed more to its natural beautiful wave than to the art of the friseur; it was crowned with a most superb wreath of brilliants, forming rosebuds with their leaves.

Her dress was silver lama on net, over a silver tissue slip, embroidered at the bottom with silver lama in shells and flowers. Body and sleeves to correspond, elegantly trimmed with point Brussels lace. The manteau was of silver tissue lined with white satin, with a border of embroidery to answer that on the dress, and fastened in front with a splendid diamond ornament. Such was the bridal dress …

Princess Charlotte died following childbirth at the age of 21. If she had outlived her father and grand father, she would have become Queen of England. Though her life was short, she is still remembered 200 years later in books, magazines and museums.

Regency Marriages and Annulments

Despite what you’ve no doubt read in many historical novels, annulments in Regency England were not easy to obtain.

The old fictitious “we can get our marriage annulled if we don’t consummate it” did not apply in Regency England, nor to my knowledge, at any time in England. Annulments were never easy, quick or painless. Marriages that could be annulled were invalid from the beginning; when either person was already married, when one was under the permitted age, when a minor married by license without proper permission (this included any illegitimate child marrying by license without permission from a guardian appointed by chancery court), or if a person was insane or so feebleminded s/he did not know what she was doing. Then there were annulments granted because of errors in names when people married by banns, because the couple was within prohibited degrees of relationships (i.e. consanguinity), and when one of the couple was impotent (but this have to be proven by a medical examination). A marriage could also be annulled if one party was incapable of sexual intercourse, or absolutely refused to consummate. The absolute refusal was considered the same as impotency, especially that when the person refused to state the reason(s) why.

All questions of validity of marriages were handled by the church courts in England.

Marriages were either valid, void, or voidable. A void marriage is a marriage that never was or had claim to validity. If someone has a spouse living and marries another without obtaining a divorce, the second marriage is void. If a minor married by license without permission, the marriage was void by the Hardwick act. Most void able marriages were marriages between persons within the prohibited decree of affinity and consanguinity. These had to be challenged while the couple was alive. Voidable marriages could not be voided after death of one of the couple.

If a woman’s marriage was annulled, she was reduced from wife to concubine, and her children were illegitimate. Nice, huh? The one time husband was not required to support her or pay her alimony as he had to do if they were separated or had a parliamentary divorce. Despite this, sometimes the wife was the one who instituted the suit in order to be free of the marriage. I asssume the marriage had to be pretty bad to be willing to be reduced to a concubine!

However, if neither sued for annulment, the marriage was valid. Again, consummation was not a requirement.

In my book, the Stranger She Married, the hero hinted that they could have their marriage annulled if she was truly unhappy. The reason for this is because his face was hidden from her and which might have been considered a kind of deception. I found historical precident for it, but I don't know if it really would have worked. Still, since they didn't use it, it didn't really matter. ;-)

Day 8 Winner

Congratulations to Valerie ards of Germany for winning my Regency Romance, The Stranger She Married. I'm excited that I will now have an International Audience. How cool is that?