What do you think?
Rate this book
Lady Elizabeth’s Unequal Marriage: A Pride and Prejudice variation
What if their fortunes were reversed, but their hearts the same?
Fitzwilliam Darcy, son of a gentleman’s steward, never aspired beyond the quiet dignity of his post. But one disastrous encounter with Lady Elizabeth Bennet, spirited daughter of the Earl of Hartford, alters the course of both their lives.
A misunderstanding, an assault in the garden, and a single act of rescue give rise to a scandal that no propriety can mend—save by marriage.
Thus a steward’s son becomes the reluctant husband of an earl’s daughter. Bound by duty and divided by pride, they must learn to dwell beneath one roof—he burdened by a secret he dare not reveal, she convinced that he betrayed her trust.
Yet in the fragile peace of their uneasy union, affection begins to blossom where resentment once grew.
When the truth of that night at last comes to light, will love prove strong enough to survive the deception that first united them?
A non-canonical Pride and Prejudice variation — where scandal, duty, and desire defy station and expectation.
278 pages, Kindle Edition
Published November 13, 2025
46 people are currently reading
6 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
December 28, 2025
Gosh! There is so much to unpack here.... this is not a well stuctured story, basically since the social and historical setting of the novel is flimsy and based on mistaken "facts".
1) Here Mr Bennet is an Earl, which is fine, but how this is framed is convoluted and it makes one question a million little things instad of settling the matter as a backdrop to the story.
Supposedly Mr Bennet was decorated officer who was rewarded with a title for saving a royal in war. Mysteriosly, nothing else in the story supports this happening, Mr Bennet is not described as a soldier anywhere, and in fact he is explicitly said to have been a local esquire (a generic country gentleman).
2) The Bennets acquired Netherfield after their ascension into Nobility, and rent out Longbourn which is their smaller but older property. Puzzlingly, Mr. Collins is inserted into the plot as both the heir of Longbourn (ok, believable) AND heir to the title (WHAT??). The second thing is a mistake, since Peerage titles can´t be inherited by anyone NOT descended from the Substantive Peer in his specific creation. In summary, Collins can only inherit a title from Mr Bennet IF the title originates from a specific common ancestor for which the title was created. If a title was created for Mr Bennet, it could be a Life Peerage (no heirs), or an Hereditary title, for which the Letters Patent need to specify the means of inheritance (heirs male of the body, heirs of the body, or even specify heirs allowed through daughters -- there are plenty of examples listed online!).
On this note, Longbourn is being rented out to Bingley, and he has an option to purchase the property... but if Mr Bennet CAN sell Longbourn, then there is no logical reason for Collins to inherit that property. If Bennet can sell Longbourn, then the property is unentailed and it can go to any of the girls, as it happens in the book as it goes to Elizabeth and Darcy.
3) The backstory for Darcy and Georgiana is also convoluted and ill-shaped. Some random nobles had old Mr Darcy as a steward, Fitzwilliam is his son, so WHY is he named after the family name of the aritocrat inlaws of the rightful owners of Pemberley and Mr Darcy´s employers?? It makes no sense to have young Mr Darcy named with such a pompous name such as Fitzwilliam.
Darcy is supposed to become orphaned, and is raised by Old Mr Wickham, who now becomes Pemberley steward. And this is when things become MORE weird. First the Pemberly owners take the orphans in as wards and charity cases, but then they both die and Lord Matlock takes charge of them and hires Wickham as his steward (so many stewards here!). Darcy becomes apprentice to Mr Wickham and Georgiana starts her training as a ladies´ maid (while also being raised as a daughter by Old Mr Wickham)... she starts her life in service, but somehow is also treated "like family" and allowed to learn piano (sure Jan!). It´s highly unlikely that a well earning steward would raise a girl as a daughter and also allow her to train as a maid at the same time. The nuance of social classes is totally slaughtered here...
As Darcy gets a job with the Noble Bennets, he doesn´t have any rush to rescue Georgiana from being Lady Matlock´s maid (not even a governess!).
4) Bingley is supposed to be renting Longbourn for months now, as Darcy arrived a new hire for Netherfield, but somehow he is still portrayed as showing local features to Bingley and "teaching him" about managing the property.
5) Young Mr Wickham appears on the scene as an ordained parson for Kympton, but he is said to have abandoned the position and is visiting Darcy just to make mischief and pondering about pursuing a different career in the Law... WHY???? If he is ordained and already got himself a living, he is set for life, there is absolutely ZERO need for him to seek different employment at this stage. The description of rogue Wickham looking for random opportunities and trying to snare an heiress is not compatible with the tale of an ordained parson at all.
Wickham is supposed to try to compromise Lady Elizabeth, at a key moment during a ball, on which a public scandal provoques Wickham to escape and Darcy to take responsibility, proceding to marry Lizzy. The whole thing makes no sense from the get-go, since Wickham arrived in Meryton to visit Darcy, but tenant Bingley invites this rogue parson to a Lord´s ball (as a guest), but meanwhile Darcy the steward is NOT invited to the ball, but he is there anyway, doing butler´s duties, overseeing the wine and the footmen (this author has no idea of the separation between land management staff and indoor house staff).
6) The scandal itself is a joke, Wickham tries to kiss Elizabeth but she didn´t really see him, but Darcy saw him, but he lies about seeing him for some old loyalty. Then Darcy pays Wickham to leave, and Wickham does leave instead of staying to marry the compromised heiress as he originally planned to & wanted. Mr Bennet wants to cover it up by marrying Lizzy to Darcy, and at the same time to expose the whole ordeal by launching a quest for Wickham and threatening to have a trial over the attack. Again, this makes no sense. The main plot is based on Elizabeth being mentally tortured about her inaccurate recollections, Darcy´s betrayal of her by lying to protect Wickham, and the search for Wickham in order to have a fantasy trial to clear Elizabeth´s honor. This is historically inaccurate, since Lizzy´s honor was already damaged by a public compromise + being forced to marry the steward; having a public trial would not "clear her name" at all, it would only highlight the scandal itself. Any Peer, or a gentleman with a brain, would try to avoid havibg his daughter named or involved in such a scandal !
7) Considering every point I have listed here, you can see why the "love story" itself if flimsy and non-existent, Darcy has too many problems in his life trying to survive and rise socially to actually develop any real feelings for Elizabeth. And Elizabeth is too busy focusing on her unreliable memories of the attack to even try to trust or get to know her new husband. Shockingly, Elizabeth doesn´t experience trauma or complex feelings after the attack (shame, feeling violated, fear of men or certain situations), but she is solely concerned about her incomplete recollections.
After the wedding, Elizabeth and Darcy travel to Matlock to visit Old Mr Wickham, who is Darcy´s surrogate father. From there they travel to Pemberley, because Darcy wants to show Lizzy where he grew up. This whole trip could be romantic, but it isn´t because it makes no sense having Lady Elizabeth staying in Wickham´s cottage, while her new sister in law is still Lady Matlock´s lady´s maid, and all this in good cheer and supposedly not awkward or troubling... Also, this version of Pemberly serves no purpose in this story, it´s not really Darcy´s childhood home, it was his father´s employers´ home, and the property is said to have been passed on and sold, neglected over time, yet Darcy is involved enough to want to visit, but not involved enough to learn more about what is to become of it (no side story about saving Pemberly here !)
8) This story doesn´t only need good editing, it needs a sound intervention. From learning the basics about titles and inheritance, to delving into social nuances between aristocrats, gentry, hired staff, and lower servants.
Details like these are no longer pesky things, they are the blocks on which the adaptation novel is structured, the overall result is predictably weak.
1) Here Mr Bennet is an Earl, which is fine, but how this is framed is convoluted and it makes one question a million little things instad of settling the matter as a backdrop to the story.
Supposedly Mr Bennet was decorated officer who was rewarded with a title for saving a royal in war. Mysteriosly, nothing else in the story supports this happening, Mr Bennet is not described as a soldier anywhere, and in fact he is explicitly said to have been a local esquire (a generic country gentleman).
2) The Bennets acquired Netherfield after their ascension into Nobility, and rent out Longbourn which is their smaller but older property. Puzzlingly, Mr. Collins is inserted into the plot as both the heir of Longbourn (ok, believable) AND heir to the title (WHAT??). The second thing is a mistake, since Peerage titles can´t be inherited by anyone NOT descended from the Substantive Peer in his specific creation. In summary, Collins can only inherit a title from Mr Bennet IF the title originates from a specific common ancestor for which the title was created. If a title was created for Mr Bennet, it could be a Life Peerage (no heirs), or an Hereditary title, for which the Letters Patent need to specify the means of inheritance (heirs male of the body, heirs of the body, or even specify heirs allowed through daughters -- there are plenty of examples listed online!).
On this note, Longbourn is being rented out to Bingley, and he has an option to purchase the property... but if Mr Bennet CAN sell Longbourn, then there is no logical reason for Collins to inherit that property. If Bennet can sell Longbourn, then the property is unentailed and it can go to any of the girls, as it happens in the book as it goes to Elizabeth and Darcy.
3) The backstory for Darcy and Georgiana is also convoluted and ill-shaped. Some random nobles had old Mr Darcy as a steward, Fitzwilliam is his son, so WHY is he named after the family name of the aritocrat inlaws of the rightful owners of Pemberley and Mr Darcy´s employers?? It makes no sense to have young Mr Darcy named with such a pompous name such as Fitzwilliam.
Darcy is supposed to become orphaned, and is raised by Old Mr Wickham, who now becomes Pemberley steward. And this is when things become MORE weird. First the Pemberly owners take the orphans in as wards and charity cases, but then they both die and Lord Matlock takes charge of them and hires Wickham as his steward (so many stewards here!). Darcy becomes apprentice to Mr Wickham and Georgiana starts her training as a ladies´ maid (while also being raised as a daughter by Old Mr Wickham)... she starts her life in service, but somehow is also treated "like family" and allowed to learn piano (sure Jan!). It´s highly unlikely that a well earning steward would raise a girl as a daughter and also allow her to train as a maid at the same time. The nuance of social classes is totally slaughtered here...
As Darcy gets a job with the Noble Bennets, he doesn´t have any rush to rescue Georgiana from being Lady Matlock´s maid (not even a governess!).
4) Bingley is supposed to be renting Longbourn for months now, as Darcy arrived a new hire for Netherfield, but somehow he is still portrayed as showing local features to Bingley and "teaching him" about managing the property.
5) Young Mr Wickham appears on the scene as an ordained parson for Kympton, but he is said to have abandoned the position and is visiting Darcy just to make mischief and pondering about pursuing a different career in the Law... WHY???? If he is ordained and already got himself a living, he is set for life, there is absolutely ZERO need for him to seek different employment at this stage. The description of rogue Wickham looking for random opportunities and trying to snare an heiress is not compatible with the tale of an ordained parson at all.
Wickham is supposed to try to compromise Lady Elizabeth, at a key moment during a ball, on which a public scandal provoques Wickham to escape and Darcy to take responsibility, proceding to marry Lizzy. The whole thing makes no sense from the get-go, since Wickham arrived in Meryton to visit Darcy, but tenant Bingley invites this rogue parson to a Lord´s ball (as a guest), but meanwhile Darcy the steward is NOT invited to the ball, but he is there anyway, doing butler´s duties, overseeing the wine and the footmen (this author has no idea of the separation between land management staff and indoor house staff).
6) The scandal itself is a joke, Wickham tries to kiss Elizabeth but she didn´t really see him, but Darcy saw him, but he lies about seeing him for some old loyalty. Then Darcy pays Wickham to leave, and Wickham does leave instead of staying to marry the compromised heiress as he originally planned to & wanted. Mr Bennet wants to cover it up by marrying Lizzy to Darcy, and at the same time to expose the whole ordeal by launching a quest for Wickham and threatening to have a trial over the attack. Again, this makes no sense. The main plot is based on Elizabeth being mentally tortured about her inaccurate recollections, Darcy´s betrayal of her by lying to protect Wickham, and the search for Wickham in order to have a fantasy trial to clear Elizabeth´s honor. This is historically inaccurate, since Lizzy´s honor was already damaged by a public compromise + being forced to marry the steward; having a public trial would not "clear her name" at all, it would only highlight the scandal itself. Any Peer, or a gentleman with a brain, would try to avoid havibg his daughter named or involved in such a scandal !
7) Considering every point I have listed here, you can see why the "love story" itself if flimsy and non-existent, Darcy has too many problems in his life trying to survive and rise socially to actually develop any real feelings for Elizabeth. And Elizabeth is too busy focusing on her unreliable memories of the attack to even try to trust or get to know her new husband. Shockingly, Elizabeth doesn´t experience trauma or complex feelings after the attack (shame, feeling violated, fear of men or certain situations), but she is solely concerned about her incomplete recollections.
After the wedding, Elizabeth and Darcy travel to Matlock to visit Old Mr Wickham, who is Darcy´s surrogate father. From there they travel to Pemberley, because Darcy wants to show Lizzy where he grew up. This whole trip could be romantic, but it isn´t because it makes no sense having Lady Elizabeth staying in Wickham´s cottage, while her new sister in law is still Lady Matlock´s lady´s maid, and all this in good cheer and supposedly not awkward or troubling... Also, this version of Pemberly serves no purpose in this story, it´s not really Darcy´s childhood home, it was his father´s employers´ home, and the property is said to have been passed on and sold, neglected over time, yet Darcy is involved enough to want to visit, but not involved enough to learn more about what is to become of it (no side story about saving Pemberly here !)
8) This story doesn´t only need good editing, it needs a sound intervention. From learning the basics about titles and inheritance, to delving into social nuances between aristocrats, gentry, hired staff, and lower servants.
Details like these are no longer pesky things, they are the blocks on which the adaptation novel is structured, the overall result is predictably weak.
November 14, 2025
Another addition to our jaff.
Really well writen despite the odd word thrown such as quilt intsead of quill never mind you get the drift.
I really enjoy this story . Love triumps over all.
Really well writen despite the odd word thrown such as quilt intsead of quill never mind you get the drift.
I really enjoy this story . Love triumps over all.
November 22, 2025
Not believable
I wish the author had edited for continuity and logic. One scene, set in a boat, ends with them standing face to face and almost kissing. Standing in a boat? Later the almost keep as is referred to as their first kiss. There were many misused and missing words also that marred this sweet but farfetched fairy tale.
I wish the author had edited for continuity and logic. One scene, set in a boat, ends with them standing face to face and almost kissing. Standing in a boat? Later the almost keep as is referred to as their first kiss. There were many misused and missing words also that marred this sweet but farfetched fairy tale.
December 1, 2025
a different take but enjoyable
This was a difficult take on ODC. Lady Elizabeth was a bit headstrong, it considering her mother’s influence it could have been worse. Mr Darcy’s story was more than tragic and sad, it was hard to read. The out come was great but the epilogue too short for my tastes.
This was a difficult take on ODC. Lady Elizabeth was a bit headstrong, it considering her mother’s influence it could have been worse. Mr Darcy’s story was more than tragic and sad, it was hard to read. The out come was great but the epilogue too short for my tastes.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews