What do you think?
Rate this book
The Children of the Abbey
This scarce antiquarian book is a facsimile reprint of the original. Due to its age, it may contain imperfections such as marks, notations, marginalia and flawed pages. Because we believe this work is culturally important, we have made it available as part of our commitment for protecting, preserving, and promoting the world's literature in affordable, high quality, modern editions that are true to the original work.
652 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1796
16 people are currently reading
664 people want to read
About the author
Regina Maria Roche
108 books21 followersRegina Maria Dalton (1764–1845) married Ambrose Roche at Rathkyran in Kilkenny, in May 1792. She is considered today to be a minor Gothic novelist who wrote in the shadow of Ann Radcliffe. She was, however, a best seller in her own time. The popularity of her third novel, The Children of the Abbey, rivaled that of Ann Radcliffe’s The Mysteries of Udolpho.
Her book Clermont was Roche’s only real attempt at writing a truly Gothic novel, and is decidedly darker in tone than anything else she wrote. Both novels went through several editions and were translated into both French and Spanish.
(source: Wikipedia)
Her book Clermont was Roche’s only real attempt at writing a truly Gothic novel, and is decidedly darker in tone than anything else she wrote. Both novels went through several editions and were translated into both French and Spanish.
(source: Wikipedia)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews
October 18, 2021
I know three stars doesn't seem like much to write home about, but I actually found quite a bit to like about Children of the Abbey. Given my reading in the period thus far has been consigned to the Gothic romances on the one hand and Jane Austen on the other, this straight up romance, by the nature of the genre, was bound to lack--for me--the thrills of the former and the sly wit of the latter. It's a kind of B genre for me--but I would certainly give Ms. Roche's effort here a strong B+. Indeed Children of the Abbey was a whole lot better than I assumed it would be going into it.
Here's what's good: Roche is a damned good writer. Definitely superior to her peer and fellow romancier (albeit Gothic) Ms. Radcliffe in every respect. The prose is as smooth as Austen, if less witty and pointed, and her plotting and the romance's long, convoluted story is really quite engrossing. All ends are tied up neatly, giving one a quite satisfactory read. After every impediment I felt she could do no more to these star-crossed lovers and at every turn I was foiled as she found ingenious ways to keep them apart, bring them back together, and then pry them apart again. I have to marvel at the narrative's overall ingenuity to keep all of its balls in the air, like an expert juggler. Also Roche's poetic interjections--also a habit of Ms. Radcliffe's--are on point and often beautiful. Whereas I find them mostly ill-timed and distracting in Radcliffe's Gothics, here they actually added to rather than detracted from the narrative and I mostly welcomed them.
Even so, this is still an out-dated and tiresome genre and I'm not at all surprised, reading this, maybe its finest example, that the realistic novel won out over the old-fashioned, episodic romance. The characters' goodness reads as mostly insipid today. Our poor heroine, Amanda, spends the entire 600+ pages either moping, crying, refusing food, or unable to sleep. Her only strength of character lies in surviving the narrative despite her radical self starvation and endless insomnia. I thought of a drinking game, taking a shot every time she weeps, but I'm sure it would kill even the most dedicated alcoholic to do so, even if they were a very slow reader. Also, what are there, like only 20 or so people in all of England that they would incessantly be running into each other at opportune moments? And is all sickness caused exclusively by heightened emotions, grief, and disappointment in love? Are there no viruses or infections? It's all very beyond the pale.
But, well, all of these criticisms really stem from a reader inured to the realistic novel, do they not? While I laughed out loud at so many fantastic and often ridiculous coincidences and beyond melodramatic demonstrations of emotion (also, hysterically, the pretend Welsh accent of the nurse made "In all my born days" become "In all my Porn days." Twice.), for the most part I was able to suspend my disbelief and enjoy the ride. Thus, despite only three stars, I actually recommend the book. But don't go into it with your critical faculties sharpened or your realistic assumptions intact.
Note: I didn't actually read this modern critical edition. I own an old hardcover, undated, but a U.S. printing. Interestingly, a former owner had written her name and address on the flyleaf. I Google street mapped the address and found a lovely Victorian home along the river in Lansing, Michigan. I live in Florence, Italy. So this book has come a long, long way in its life of at least a hundred years. I will take good care of it and hope it finds another reader before physical books become completely obsolete.
Here's what's good: Roche is a damned good writer. Definitely superior to her peer and fellow romancier (albeit Gothic) Ms. Radcliffe in every respect. The prose is as smooth as Austen, if less witty and pointed, and her plotting and the romance's long, convoluted story is really quite engrossing. All ends are tied up neatly, giving one a quite satisfactory read. After every impediment I felt she could do no more to these star-crossed lovers and at every turn I was foiled as she found ingenious ways to keep them apart, bring them back together, and then pry them apart again. I have to marvel at the narrative's overall ingenuity to keep all of its balls in the air, like an expert juggler. Also Roche's poetic interjections--also a habit of Ms. Radcliffe's--are on point and often beautiful. Whereas I find them mostly ill-timed and distracting in Radcliffe's Gothics, here they actually added to rather than detracted from the narrative and I mostly welcomed them.
Even so, this is still an out-dated and tiresome genre and I'm not at all surprised, reading this, maybe its finest example, that the realistic novel won out over the old-fashioned, episodic romance. The characters' goodness reads as mostly insipid today. Our poor heroine, Amanda, spends the entire 600+ pages either moping, crying, refusing food, or unable to sleep. Her only strength of character lies in surviving the narrative despite her radical self starvation and endless insomnia. I thought of a drinking game, taking a shot every time she weeps, but I'm sure it would kill even the most dedicated alcoholic to do so, even if they were a very slow reader. Also, what are there, like only 20 or so people in all of England that they would incessantly be running into each other at opportune moments? And is all sickness caused exclusively by heightened emotions, grief, and disappointment in love? Are there no viruses or infections? It's all very beyond the pale.
But, well, all of these criticisms really stem from a reader inured to the realistic novel, do they not? While I laughed out loud at so many fantastic and often ridiculous coincidences and beyond melodramatic demonstrations of emotion (also, hysterically, the pretend Welsh accent of the nurse made "In all my born days" become "In all my Porn days." Twice.), for the most part I was able to suspend my disbelief and enjoy the ride. Thus, despite only three stars, I actually recommend the book. But don't go into it with your critical faculties sharpened or your realistic assumptions intact.
Note: I didn't actually read this modern critical edition. I own an old hardcover, undated, but a U.S. printing. Interestingly, a former owner had written her name and address on the flyleaf. I Google street mapped the address and found a lovely Victorian home along the river in Lansing, Michigan. I live in Florence, Italy. So this book has come a long, long way in its life of at least a hundred years. I will take good care of it and hope it finds another reader before physical books become completely obsolete.
November 13, 2020
A book that is known only because there is a reference to it in a book by Jane Austen. It is a typical romantic novel of the time, with a few gothic elements at the climax of the story, which contains the expected elements, siblings separated, a love that encounters difficulties, inheritance disputes, insidious women and libertines and of course above all the victory of virtue represented by the pair of protagonists. Its way of writing is, as expected, emotional, to the extent that it certainly seems excessive to today's reading public, but for anyone who is accustomed to such a thing and has a strange tendency to see behind this literary beauty, it is an attractive element. I personally liked this combination of a moving story and a sensitive writing that emphasizes every romantic element we meet along the way and believe me there are a lot to fill our hours.
Ένα βιβλίο που είναι γνωστό μόνο και μόνο γιατί υπάρχει αναφορά σε αυτό σε ένα βιβλίο της Jane Austen. Πρόκειται για ένα συνηθισμένο ρομαντικό μυθιστόρημα της εποχής, με λίγα γοτθικά στοιχεία στην κορύφωση της ιστορίας, η οποία περιέχει τα αναμενόμενα στοιχεία, αδέρφια που χωρίζονται, έναν έρωτα που συναντά δυσκολίες, διαμάχες για κληρονομιές, δολοπλόκες γυναίκες και λιμπερτίνους και φυσικά πάνω από όλα την επικράτηση της αρετής που εκπροσωπείται από το ζευγάρι των πρωταγωνιστών. Η γραφή του είναι αναμενόμενα συναισθηματική, σε βαθμό που σίγουρα φαίνεται υπερβολική στο σημερινό αναγνωστικό κοινό, αλλά για όποιον είναι συνηθισμένος σε κάτι τέτοιο και έχει μία περίεργη τάση να βλέπει πίσω από αυτή λογοτεχνική ομορφιά είναι ένα ελκυστικό στοιχείο. Εμένα προσωπικά μου άρεσε αυτός ο συνδυασμός μίας συγκινητικής ιστορίας και μίας ευαίσθητης γραφής που τονίζει κάθε ρομαντικό στοιχείο συναντάμε στην πορεία και πιστέψτε με υπάρχουν πολλά για να γεμίσουμε τις ώρες μας.
Ένα βιβλίο που είναι γνωστό μόνο και μόνο γιατί υπάρχει αναφορά σε αυτό σε ένα βιβλίο της Jane Austen. Πρόκειται για ένα συνηθισμένο ρομαντικό μυθιστόρημα της εποχής, με λίγα γοτθικά στοιχεία στην κορύφωση της ιστορίας, η οποία περιέχει τα αναμενόμενα στοιχεία, αδέρφια που χωρίζονται, έναν έρωτα που συναντά δυσκολίες, διαμάχες για κληρονομιές, δολοπλόκες γυναίκες και λιμπερτίνους και φυσικά πάνω από όλα την επικράτηση της αρετής που εκπροσωπείται από το ζευγάρι των πρωταγωνιστών. Η γραφή του είναι αναμενόμενα συναισθηματική, σε βαθμό που σίγουρα φαίνεται υπερβολική στο σημερινό αναγνωστικό κοινό, αλλά για όποιον είναι συνηθισμένος σε κάτι τέτοιο και έχει μία περίεργη τάση να βλέπει πίσω από αυτή λογοτεχνική ομορφιά είναι ένα ελκυστικό στοιχείο. Εμένα προσωπικά μου άρεσε αυτός ο συνδυασμός μίας συγκινητικής ιστορίας και μίας ευαίσθητης γραφής που τονίζει κάθε ρομαντικό στοιχείο συναντάμε στην πορεία και πιστέψτε με υπάρχουν πολλά για να γεμίσουμε τις ώρες μας.
January 3, 2015
Roche wrote one of the Gothic novels mentioned in Jane Austen's Northanger Abbey, I found this lovely 19th century edition of one of her books and bought it. It is just a romance rather than a gothic romance but it was still enjoyable. It took me ages to read as I kept putting it down as the plot kept repeating. The young couple met and fell in love, then something happened to keep them apart and soil the young girl's reputation. All told I think she got together with her would-be-husband and seperated about 5 times before the end of the novel. It reminded me a bit of a soap opera in that the drama was ongoing and continuous with waves, rather than leading to any kind of dramatic climax like you'd expect in a novel. As such it got a little tedious from time to time and was why I'd take a break and go back to it. I think I preferred the story of her brother and his would-be-wife much better. Though that may have been because it was only one time they were seperated. The best was a little short story told to the brother by the woman she was staying with about her falling in to vice. It was in the first person and very sad and beautifully written. The language and the way the book was written was what kept me returning to it. I don't think I will read any more normal romances by this author but I really want to find her gothic ones.
October 1, 2016
The book was published by Valancourt publisher, and is printed in a first ever scholarly edition.
Written in 1797,it tells the story of Amanda and Oscar, brother and sister. Their rightful inheritance stolen from them. Colonel Belgrave and his sinister cohorts will stop at nothing to destroy these unhappy siblings.
Will Amanda be able to marry her love will Oscar find his sister and clear his name?
To quote Professor William Brewer from his introduction readers of "late eighteen and early nineteenth century sentimental, gothic and Irish literature" and if you enjoy Fanny Burney, Radcliffe or Richardson, you would enjoy this novel.
Valancourt publisher has done an excellent job to bring this novel back into print for the reader. The introduction by Professor Brewer is well written, the notes are superb.
Written in 1797,it tells the story of Amanda and Oscar, brother and sister. Their rightful inheritance stolen from them. Colonel Belgrave and his sinister cohorts will stop at nothing to destroy these unhappy siblings.
Will Amanda be able to marry her love will Oscar find his sister and clear his name?
To quote Professor William Brewer from his introduction readers of "late eighteen and early nineteenth century sentimental, gothic and Irish literature" and if you enjoy Fanny Burney, Radcliffe or Richardson, you would enjoy this novel.
Valancourt publisher has done an excellent job to bring this novel back into print for the reader. The introduction by Professor Brewer is well written, the notes are superb.
June 13, 2015
This is the ur-text to all of Jane Austen. The archaic language is tough to get through. It's sort of like Pride and Prejudice, only Darcy is a bit of a cad who initially tries to get into Elizabeth's panties. Elizabeth is tossed about the British Isles and is almost raped a bunch of times. There are so-called friends who put redefine "mean girls". Basically, the novel is a hoot. If nothing else, it shows how much Austen protected her heroines. Except for Harriet Smith and the gypsies, they never are in any real danger. This isn't because Austen's novels were written in the early 19th century, but because Jane wanted it that way. It's interesting that so many modern readers choose to prefer the relative risk-free world of Austen.
August 24, 2022
3.5 stars
Woven through this gothic novel are themes of faithfulness versus fickleness, and riches well-used or abused. The vacillation of some characters contrasted by the uprightness of others, while obviously a theme, felt contrived at times, at least to this twenty-first century reader. A significant aspect worth tracing is the outworking of the theology of that time. Roche incorporates several pontifications of the workings of Providence that would make for an interesting study. Her writing style is grandiloquent in the extreme, which was an enjoyable change from my other recent readings, but can be tedious if not in the right frame of mind.
I will not pretend that the numerous reversals of fate did not become obnoxious. The heroine was reminiscent of Elsie Dinsmore, which was a bit irritating, but I was still able to root for her. The characters and plot in general were engrossing, yet I felt like the book was 100 pages, and one tragedy, too long.
I have no doubt that few modern readers would appreciate this book. However, criticisms aside, the people likely to be drawn to it, via its association with Jane Austen, are bound to appreciate it in some way. It was fascinating to read Roche’s romance while considering that Austen read it and was influenced by it when writing Northanger Abbey. I couldn’t help but think that I would love to incorporate this novel in a literature class some day (should I ever teach). Even now, I’m almost tempted to re-read it to take notes through a more literary lens.
Almost. ;)
Woven through this gothic novel are themes of faithfulness versus fickleness, and riches well-used or abused. The vacillation of some characters contrasted by the uprightness of others, while obviously a theme, felt contrived at times, at least to this twenty-first century reader. A significant aspect worth tracing is the outworking of the theology of that time. Roche incorporates several pontifications of the workings of Providence that would make for an interesting study. Her writing style is grandiloquent in the extreme, which was an enjoyable change from my other recent readings, but can be tedious if not in the right frame of mind.
I will not pretend that the numerous reversals of fate did not become obnoxious. The heroine was reminiscent of Elsie Dinsmore, which was a bit irritating, but I was still able to root for her. The characters and plot in general were engrossing, yet I felt like the book was 100 pages, and one tragedy, too long.
I have no doubt that few modern readers would appreciate this book. However, criticisms aside, the people likely to be drawn to it, via its association with Jane Austen, are bound to appreciate it in some way. It was fascinating to read Roche’s romance while considering that Austen read it and was influenced by it when writing Northanger Abbey. I couldn’t help but think that I would love to incorporate this novel in a literature class some day (should I ever teach). Even now, I’m almost tempted to re-read it to take notes through a more literary lens.
Almost. ;)
October 1, 2017
I thought I'd never finish this book. Not necessarily because it's that tedious (though it is a bit at times with, as another reviewer points out, the protagonist and her lover being (re)united and separated more than I could count), but because with the start of the academic year procrastination ensued and it took me a while to get into it. Nevertheless, I quite enjoy the story and am interested in studying it further, especially since it was so popular at the time and moves from Wales, to Ireland, to Scotland, through England back to Ireland and Wales and Scotland. It's interesting to look at these portrayals I imagine!
September 18, 2014
If you can get used to the vernacular and the slooow pacing this is a fantastic story.
September 1, 2025
Like some of the other reviewers, I came to this book from a reference in another book. But it wasn’t Jane Austen’s Northanger Abbey (which I love), it was Children of the Old Park’s Tavern. The two children mention it several times as their favourite book. And, yes, I’m sure it was this book, as they refer to Malvina, the mother of the main character.
So I was expecting a children’s adventure story, but I got a melodramatic soap opera of star-crossed lovers instead. It’s not a book I would expect children to enjoy, even fictional children, and it’s not a book I’d let young children read, though the inappropriate parts would probably be over their heads.
The “children” in question, Amanda and Oscar, are both adults, except for a few paragraphs of back story early on. They’re the children of a poor Irish soldier and the disinherited daughter of an earl, and have grown up living hand to mouth. Despite that, Amanda has been brought up as a lady, and had drawing and music lessons.
Amanda is presented as a paragon of beauty (every man who sees her falls instantly in love) and purity. When we first meet her, she is sponging off her old nurse and her family in Wales, so her father’s landlord (the first of many villains), who wanted her for his mistress (he’s already married), can’t find her. Her nurse and her family are good, hard-working family, but, of course, Amanda can’t be expected to help out and she’s bored so the nurse gets her permission to use the library of the large house next door while the owner is away. You can see where that’s going to go, of course, and it does.
Most of the rest of the book, other than interludes where we hear other people’s unfortunate stories of love gone wrong, is about Amanda’s on-again, off-again relationship with said owner, who is apparently only too willing to believe trash talk about his beloved Amanda.
He, too, is presented as everything that is good and noble, but his actions seem anything but to me. Anyway…
There’s a lot of weeping and wailing and fainting and other emotional drama—not just by the women. Every time something goes wrong, Amanda raises her streaming eyes to heaven (pretty sure those were the words) and utters a soliloquy where she starts spouting off thees and thous and referring to herself in the third person. I doubt anyone talked like that even in the 1700s when the book was written. Other than in comic books, that is, where the heroes and villains often do spout off in that manner.
Anyway, if you enjoy romance, soap operas and the eventual triumph of good over evil, give it a try.
So I was expecting a children’s adventure story, but I got a melodramatic soap opera of star-crossed lovers instead. It’s not a book I would expect children to enjoy, even fictional children, and it’s not a book I’d let young children read, though the inappropriate parts would probably be over their heads.
The “children” in question, Amanda and Oscar, are both adults, except for a few paragraphs of back story early on. They’re the children of a poor Irish soldier and the disinherited daughter of an earl, and have grown up living hand to mouth. Despite that, Amanda has been brought up as a lady, and had drawing and music lessons.
Amanda is presented as a paragon of beauty (every man who sees her falls instantly in love) and purity. When we first meet her, she is sponging off her old nurse and her family in Wales, so her father’s landlord (the first of many villains), who wanted her for his mistress (he’s already married), can’t find her. Her nurse and her family are good, hard-working family, but, of course, Amanda can’t be expected to help out and she’s bored so the nurse gets her permission to use the library of the large house next door while the owner is away. You can see where that’s going to go, of course, and it does.
Most of the rest of the book, other than interludes where we hear other people’s unfortunate stories of love gone wrong, is about Amanda’s on-again, off-again relationship with said owner, who is apparently only too willing to believe trash talk about his beloved Amanda.
He, too, is presented as everything that is good and noble, but his actions seem anything but to me. Anyway…
There’s a lot of weeping and wailing and fainting and other emotional drama—not just by the women. Every time something goes wrong, Amanda raises her streaming eyes to heaven (pretty sure those were the words) and utters a soliloquy where she starts spouting off thees and thous and referring to herself in the third person. I doubt anyone talked like that even in the 1700s when the book was written. Other than in comic books, that is, where the heroes and villains often do spout off in that manner.
Anyway, if you enjoy romance, soap operas and the eventual triumph of good over evil, give it a try.
March 13, 2024
I have been dreaming about this moment. Finally finishing 700 pages of this deserves a medal.
Regina Maria Roche is masterful at totally engrossing you in the story, making you invested in the fate of the characters, and then killing you very, very slowly. I would really like to know how she came up with this intricate and, quite honestly, at times unbearably torturous plotline. Did she just wake up one morning, and decide to choose violence? Because there is ALWAYS something worse around the corner.
I was angry. I was revolted. I felt murderous feelings rise within me. I held a 15-minute disquisition to my best friend about my grievances over this book. All this with having already read sentimentalist and Gothic fiction, and knowing full well what to expect. Or not, as my reaction shows...? At least, the sentimentalist theories about emotional response could totally have been observed in my case - as far as rage goes. At some point I wasn't even that angry at the villains - their job is to be bad, as the main character's is to be pure, angelic and all that. What really had me fuming is that the author was purposefully torturing me.
Also, I'm not the type to judge old books (which I LOVE) by modern standards, but there are things which are just plain wrong, regardless of when you read it. Glamourizing as the epitome of virtue when Amanda submits to the emotional blackmail of Lord Cherbury and clearly implying that it would have been her fault if he committed suicide had my blood boiling. Just NO.
Anyways. I'm glad that it ended well, with all the threads tied up, somewhat foreseeably, but nonetheless satisfactorily. It's over now and I'm glad it is, so that now I can go on and choose another torturous reading.
Regina Maria Roche is masterful at totally engrossing you in the story, making you invested in the fate of the characters, and then killing you very, very slowly. I would really like to know how she came up with this intricate and, quite honestly, at times unbearably torturous plotline. Did she just wake up one morning, and decide to choose violence? Because there is ALWAYS something worse around the corner.
I was angry. I was revolted. I felt murderous feelings rise within me. I held a 15-minute disquisition to my best friend about my grievances over this book. All this with having already read sentimentalist and Gothic fiction, and knowing full well what to expect. Or not, as my reaction shows...? At least, the sentimentalist theories about emotional response could totally have been observed in my case - as far as rage goes. At some point I wasn't even that angry at the villains - their job is to be bad, as the main character's is to be pure, angelic and all that. What really had me fuming is that the author was purposefully torturing me.
Also, I'm not the type to judge old books (which I LOVE) by modern standards, but there are things which are just plain wrong, regardless of when you read it. Glamourizing as the epitome of virtue when Amanda submits to the emotional blackmail of Lord Cherbury and clearly implying that it would have been her fault if he committed suicide had my blood boiling. Just NO.
Anyways. I'm glad that it ended well, with all the threads tied up, somewhat foreseeably, but nonetheless satisfactorily. It's over now and I'm glad it is, so that now I can go on and choose another torturous reading.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
September 11, 2022
The best reading.
Want to read
July 3, 2011This appears to be an original edition - there are no dates anywhere; it was published in New York by "John Burtele Lovell, No. 24 Bong Street."
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews