What do you think?
Rate this book
The Scandalous Lady W
It was the divorce that scandalised Georgian England... She was a spirited young heiress. He was a handsome baronet with a promising career in government. Their marriage had the makings of a fairy tale but ended as one of the most salacious and highly publicised divorces in history.
For over two hundred years the story of Lady Worsley, her vengeful husband, and her lover, George Maurice Bisset, lay forgotten. Now Hallie Rubenhold, in her impeccably researched book, throws open a window to a rarely seen view of Georgian England, one coloured by passion, adventure and the defiance of social convention. The Worsley's story, their struggles and outrageous lifestyle, promises to shock even the modern reader.
First published with the title Lady Worsley's Whim
For over two hundred years the story of Lady Worsley, her vengeful husband, and her lover, George Maurice Bisset, lay forgotten. Now Hallie Rubenhold, in her impeccably researched book, throws open a window to a rarely seen view of Georgian England, one coloured by passion, adventure and the defiance of social convention. The Worsley's story, their struggles and outrageous lifestyle, promises to shock even the modern reader.
First published with the title Lady Worsley's Whim
Paperback
First published July 7, 2008
114 people are currently reading
3774 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 - 30 of 163 reviews
November 13, 2015
This book is hilarious and based on truth which makes it better. Lady W screws everyone in sight. In the sight of her husband that is. He can only get his rocks off by peeping at his wife through the keyhole.
It's a marriage made in heaven until she falls in love and wants out. And she wants the money she brought as an heiress that, under the laws at that time, became his on marriage. His revenge is to sue his best friend, her lover, for stealing the affections of his wife. He wants to leave her destitute and ruined but cannot do it without his little secret getting out. But it is she who, having nothing left to lose, exposes him with a trail of all those who joined him behind the keyhole. Those court scenes are wonderful to read. Great fun. historical fiction, but hardly a romance.
There is a moral to this story. People who like peeping should make sure that they aren't living in a glass house and aren't going to let the world look in at them (and laugh).
It's a marriage made in heaven until she falls in love and wants out. And she wants the money she brought as an heiress that, under the laws at that time, became his on marriage. His revenge is to sue his best friend, her lover, for stealing the affections of his wife. He wants to leave her destitute and ruined but cannot do it without his little secret getting out. But it is she who, having nothing left to lose, exposes him with a trail of all those who joined him behind the keyhole. Those court scenes are wonderful to read. Great fun. historical fiction, but hardly a romance.
There is a moral to this story. People who like peeping should make sure that they aren't living in a glass house and aren't going to let the world look in at them (and laugh).
September 23, 2020
Crim. Con. was an expression used in at least one of Georgette Heyer's novels.
I've now found out more than I ever thought I would have wanted to know about what that slightly odd expression means. (it is an abbreviation of Criminal Conversations.)
Look at these sumptuous Sir Joshua Reynolds portraits.
Lady Worsley
Her portrait had her dressed to match her husband, Sir Richard Worsley. His likeness was taken a few years earlier.
Unfortunately, the Worsleys weren't married long enough for the portraits to ever hang together.
Worsley, monied himself, wanted a wealthy wife. Seymour (yes, that was Lady Worsley's christian name) was very young, frivolous, fun loving and wanted a normal sex life. That was never going to happen with her hubby. To put it mildly, he was a very strange lad indeed.
Not withstanding this, the couple rubbed along quite happily in a ménage à trois with their mutual friend George Bisset. Seymour's second child was fathered by Bisset, but Worsley acknowledged the little girl as his own. But George & Seymour fell in love, circumstances changed where they could no longer live together and they decided to elope.
And that is where the happy part of the story ended, as it turned out that in spite of his unconventional life style, Richard Worsley put a very high value on the proprieties being observed and showed his true colours as a miserly, vindictive man. To modern eyes, George Bisset was no prize either. But just as I was preparing to be thoroughly depressed by another story on how unfair history was to women
I'd say that Seymour was ahead of her time, but Ms Rubenhold mentions quite a few of Seymour's friends that were also very wild. Georgette Heyer's world this is not!
I wouldn't describe Seymour's life story as a totally happy one, (Sir Richard was determined to have her live in poverty, she was separated from her children & possibly was imprisioned during the French Revolution) but it was certainly more exciting than her mean spirited ex! Sir Richard ended up a recluse.
Ms Rubenhold does a great job with this story, even though almost no correspondence from Seymour survives. She rarely resorts to speculation. There were a couple of minor editing errors, but overall this story was a riot and I am glad to have read it.
I've now found out more than I ever thought I would have wanted to know about what that slightly odd expression means. (it is an abbreviation of Criminal Conversations.)
Look at these sumptuous Sir Joshua Reynolds portraits.
Lady Worsley
Her portrait had her dressed to match her husband, Sir Richard Worsley. His likeness was taken a few years earlier.
Unfortunately, the Worsleys weren't married long enough for the portraits to ever hang together.
Worsley, monied himself, wanted a wealthy wife. Seymour (yes, that was Lady Worsley's christian name) was very young, frivolous, fun loving and wanted a normal sex life. That was never going to happen with her hubby. To put it mildly, he was a very strange lad indeed.
Not withstanding this, the couple rubbed along quite happily in a ménage à trois with their mutual friend George Bisset. Seymour's second child was fathered by Bisset, but Worsley acknowledged the little girl as his own. But George & Seymour fell in love, circumstances changed where they could no longer live together and they decided to elope.
And that is where the happy part of the story ended, as it turned out that in spite of his unconventional life style, Richard Worsley put a very high value on the proprieties being observed and showed his true colours as a miserly, vindictive man. To modern eyes, George Bisset was no prize either. But just as I was preparing to be thoroughly depressed by another story on how unfair history was to women
I'd say that Seymour was ahead of her time, but Ms Rubenhold mentions quite a few of Seymour's friends that were also very wild. Georgette Heyer's world this is not!
I wouldn't describe Seymour's life story as a totally happy one, (Sir Richard was determined to have her live in poverty, she was separated from her children & possibly was imprisioned during the French Revolution) but it was certainly more exciting than her mean spirited ex! Sir Richard ended up a recluse.
Ms Rubenhold does a great job with this story, even though almost no correspondence from Seymour survives. She rarely resorts to speculation. There were a couple of minor editing errors, but overall this story was a riot and I am glad to have read it.
https://wordpress.com/view/carolshess...
September 7, 2017
Interesting, fascinating, engrossing, thoroughly researched read that left me alternatively fuming at the treatment that women endured and grateful for all these courageous women and enlighten men of the past who fought for the rights of women to be equal to men.
At the heart of the story is disintegration of marriage between two Georgian aristocrats, Sir Richard Worsley and his wife Lady Seymour Worsley. Their marriage ended in one of the most scandalous and highly publicized divorces in history. Neither of them behaved honorably, both of them were vengeful and miserable but the difference –he had a choice how to end the marriage and she, as a woman of the 18th century, did not have that choice. She had to abide by her husband’s decision.
The book is much more than a story of the divorce. It offers an amazing insight into the attitudes and morals of eighteenth century society and in depth research of the social and political background of the era.
At the heart of the story is disintegration of marriage between two Georgian aristocrats, Sir Richard Worsley and his wife Lady Seymour Worsley. Their marriage ended in one of the most scandalous and highly publicized divorces in history. Neither of them behaved honorably, both of them were vengeful and miserable but the difference –he had a choice how to end the marriage and she, as a woman of the 18th century, did not have that choice. She had to abide by her husband’s decision.
She was not permitted so much as a word in her own defense. As the law regarded her as property, her voice was rendered superfluous to proceedings. No one asked a horse how it felt to be stolen or inquired of a statue why it was broken.
I came to admire Lady Worsley for her sheer presence of mind and determination not to back down and to fight back with all the weapons at her disposal.The book is much more than a story of the divorce. It offers an amazing insight into the attitudes and morals of eighteenth century society and in depth research of the social and political background of the era.
August 9, 2022
I've been trying to get my hands on a copy of Hallie Rubenhold's Covent Garden Ladies, her nonfiction account of sex workers in 18th century London that was also the inspiration for the show Harlots. For whatever reason, my library doesn't have a copy in stock, so I've been exploring Rubenhold's other works in the meantime.
Lady in Red takes us through a very specific and very unusual legal case in 18th century England. The whole debacle started one night after a party when Lady Seymour Worsley left a party around 1am with another guest, George Bisset. Another guest offered to walk with them down the road to Seymour's home, and the couple were weirdly insistent that they go alone. In the morning, the reason became clear: Seymour had abandoned her husband and eloped with Bisset, and, after a few weeks of tracking them all over England, the couple was discovered living in a London hotel. Lord Worsley sued for divorce, and Rubenhold explains that at the time, divorce proceedings basically involved the husband trying to recoup the losses from his stolen property, ie his wife.
But in the middle of the trial, things took a turn. Bisset claimed that not only had Seymour's husband known she was having an affair, this wasn't even the first time she'd had a lover. And not only did her husband know, he actually encouraged the affairs. Bisset's evidence hinged on a trip to a public baths that the three took, when Seymour was in the changing rooms and her husband lifted her lover up on his shoulders so he could look at his wife.
After that information came out, the trial became a public spectacle and Seymour's reputation was dragged through the mud as the couple's private life became gossip fodder for everyone in England. Hallie Rubenhold takes us through the trial, the secrets that came to light, and the fallout.
Let's get the obvious stuff out of the way: you have to be really interested in this specific period of history to find this book as fascinating as some people will find it. Ultimately, this is the story of the petty, bitter divorce proceedings between two spoiled rich brats (and the trial eventually devolved into Worsley literally assigning a monetary value to his wife so he could recoup his losses). And honestly, most of the wind goes out of the story once the trial ends and Rubenhold is taking us through the rest of these people's miserable lives and explaining why they remained miserable. Worsley sucks pretty much from beginning to end - he started life as the spoiled son of a rich landowner, and he ended it by spending his post-divorce years traveling around the Middle East trying to purchase a slave girl like he's one of the guys on 90 Day Fiance. Seymour's post-divorce years are also frustrating (and I imagine they were frustrating for Rubenhold, too) because she's a lot harder to track. There's a huge chunk of time where Seymour is basically off the map, so Rubenhold has to resort to guesswork to fill in the blanks. She's pretty sure that Seymour was briefly imprisoned during the French Revolution, but again, this is just guesswork.
The research is thorough and well done, but ultimately this is a very close, very detailed look at a small little blip in history. Your personal mileage may vary.
Lady in Red takes us through a very specific and very unusual legal case in 18th century England. The whole debacle started one night after a party when Lady Seymour Worsley left a party around 1am with another guest, George Bisset. Another guest offered to walk with them down the road to Seymour's home, and the couple were weirdly insistent that they go alone. In the morning, the reason became clear: Seymour had abandoned her husband and eloped with Bisset, and, after a few weeks of tracking them all over England, the couple was discovered living in a London hotel. Lord Worsley sued for divorce, and Rubenhold explains that at the time, divorce proceedings basically involved the husband trying to recoup the losses from his stolen property, ie his wife.
But in the middle of the trial, things took a turn. Bisset claimed that not only had Seymour's husband known she was having an affair, this wasn't even the first time she'd had a lover. And not only did her husband know, he actually encouraged the affairs. Bisset's evidence hinged on a trip to a public baths that the three took, when Seymour was in the changing rooms and her husband lifted her lover up on his shoulders so he could look at his wife.
After that information came out, the trial became a public spectacle and Seymour's reputation was dragged through the mud as the couple's private life became gossip fodder for everyone in England. Hallie Rubenhold takes us through the trial, the secrets that came to light, and the fallout.
Let's get the obvious stuff out of the way: you have to be really interested in this specific period of history to find this book as fascinating as some people will find it. Ultimately, this is the story of the petty, bitter divorce proceedings between two spoiled rich brats (and the trial eventually devolved into Worsley literally assigning a monetary value to his wife so he could recoup his losses). And honestly, most of the wind goes out of the story once the trial ends and Rubenhold is taking us through the rest of these people's miserable lives and explaining why they remained miserable. Worsley sucks pretty much from beginning to end - he started life as the spoiled son of a rich landowner, and he ended it by spending his post-divorce years traveling around the Middle East trying to purchase a slave girl like he's one of the guys on 90 Day Fiance. Seymour's post-divorce years are also frustrating (and I imagine they were frustrating for Rubenhold, too) because she's a lot harder to track. There's a huge chunk of time where Seymour is basically off the map, so Rubenhold has to resort to guesswork to fill in the blanks. She's pretty sure that Seymour was briefly imprisoned during the French Revolution, but again, this is just guesswork.
The research is thorough and well done, but ultimately this is a very close, very detailed look at a small little blip in history. Your personal mileage may vary.
June 4, 2011
In 1775, a shallow young baronet married an eighteen year old lady with far more money than looks or learning. They lived tolerably well together for a few years, until at last Lady Seymour Dorothy Fleming Worsley ran away with their mutual friend, Maurice Bisset. The lovers hoped Sir Richard Worsley would initiate divorce proceedings against Lady Worsley so they could marry each other, but Sir Worsley was far too angry to do so. Instead, he sued for separation and further, sued Bisset for a prodigious sum of 20,000 pounds for committing criminal conversation with his wife. Criminal conversation, or "crim con," was basically showing, not that sex necessarily took place, but that there was a possibility of it. The man who "damaged" the husband's "property" by having sex with the wife could be sued for whatever the union--and the wife--was considered an appropriate number. Unfortunately for Sir Worsley, his wife refused to let him financially ruin her lover. She gave the defense a list of her former lovers and flirtations, and had each testify on the stand that she had numerous affairs before she ever ran off with Bisset, and had even been treated for an STI. She ruined her own reputation to such an extent that although the jury found in Sir Worsley's favor, the settlement was placed not at the ruinous 20,000 pounds Sir Worsley demanded, but at a single shilling.
A single shilling!
Sir Worsley was understandably wrathful that he'd dragged his private life into the public eye just to get a single shilling, so he refused to let Lady Worsley have her clothing and jewels (worth nearly 10,000 pounds themselves). Her linen and adornments were her only form of wealth, as women weren't allowed to have property, so this was a serious blow to Lady Worsley. In revenge, she published a sixteen page poem attacking his honor and masculinity, claiming that she'd been forced to take lovers because he was too impotent to perform his marital duties. The pamphlet spread throughout England, was repeatedly reprinted, and caused such a scandalous outcry that Sir Worsley gave in and returned her clothes to her.
Their battle was not yet done. Instead of hiding away in shame that her adultery had been discovered, Lady Worsley became even more of a social butterfly, hanging with the Prince of Wales and his fast, fashionable set. She had a brass plate affixed to the inn she'd hidden in with her lover, proclaiming that it was the place she'd gotten her freedom. She wore breeches(!) to ride horseback astride (!) and got drunk in public. She ran up large debts which, as he was technically still her husband, Sir Worsley was obliged to pay.
First Sir Worsley, then Lady Worsley left England for other, more liberal climes. Sir Worsley toured the Ottoman Empire, amassing an amazing collection of art that he acquired only semi-legally. He tried to buy a pleasure slave but was thwarted by the high prices--he did manage to buy a small black boy, who he beat mercilessly (even by the standards of his contemporaries) and eventually discarded or sold. He became the ambassador to Italy, but lost his position and a fortune in artwork when Napoleon conquered the area. Meanwhile, Lady Worsley lived in France for several years, falling in with the Chevalier de Saint Georges and then barely surviving the revolution. She was perpetually in debt, but eventually Sir Worsley died of a stroke and she got back the fortune she'd brought to their unhappy marriage. Only in her 40s at this point, she immediately married her current paramour, a man in his 20s, and lived happily with him for thirteen years before expiring and leaving her fortune and estate to him and her illegitimate daughter Charlotte (born sometime after her sojourn in France).
It's a fascinating tale, and Rubenhold tells it well. She provides a great deal of legal and historical context, without ever getting bogged down into pedantry. Because I never understand all the allusions and jokes in satirical cartoons of the era, I really appreciated her style of explaining and describing them without losing the humor. Overall, a readable tale that skates that delicate line between gossip and history.
A single shilling!
Sir Worsley was understandably wrathful that he'd dragged his private life into the public eye just to get a single shilling, so he refused to let Lady Worsley have her clothing and jewels (worth nearly 10,000 pounds themselves). Her linen and adornments were her only form of wealth, as women weren't allowed to have property, so this was a serious blow to Lady Worsley. In revenge, she published a sixteen page poem attacking his honor and masculinity, claiming that she'd been forced to take lovers because he was too impotent to perform his marital duties. The pamphlet spread throughout England, was repeatedly reprinted, and caused such a scandalous outcry that Sir Worsley gave in and returned her clothes to her.
Their battle was not yet done. Instead of hiding away in shame that her adultery had been discovered, Lady Worsley became even more of a social butterfly, hanging with the Prince of Wales and his fast, fashionable set. She had a brass plate affixed to the inn she'd hidden in with her lover, proclaiming that it was the place she'd gotten her freedom. She wore breeches(!) to ride horseback astride (!) and got drunk in public. She ran up large debts which, as he was technically still her husband, Sir Worsley was obliged to pay.
First Sir Worsley, then Lady Worsley left England for other, more liberal climes. Sir Worsley toured the Ottoman Empire, amassing an amazing collection of art that he acquired only semi-legally. He tried to buy a pleasure slave but was thwarted by the high prices--he did manage to buy a small black boy, who he beat mercilessly (even by the standards of his contemporaries) and eventually discarded or sold. He became the ambassador to Italy, but lost his position and a fortune in artwork when Napoleon conquered the area. Meanwhile, Lady Worsley lived in France for several years, falling in with the Chevalier de Saint Georges and then barely surviving the revolution. She was perpetually in debt, but eventually Sir Worsley died of a stroke and she got back the fortune she'd brought to their unhappy marriage. Only in her 40s at this point, she immediately married her current paramour, a man in his 20s, and lived happily with him for thirteen years before expiring and leaving her fortune and estate to him and her illegitimate daughter Charlotte (born sometime after her sojourn in France).
It's a fascinating tale, and Rubenhold tells it well. She provides a great deal of legal and historical context, without ever getting bogged down into pedantry. Because I never understand all the allusions and jokes in satirical cartoons of the era, I really appreciated her style of explaining and describing them without losing the humor. Overall, a readable tale that skates that delicate line between gossip and history.
March 26, 2015
Research, how I love research - even when it turns out not to be what I was expecting!
The treatment that history has doled out to women never fails to astound me - and to get me bristling with both anger and ideas. Not two hundered years yet since the Married Women's Property Act finally allowed us to own heritable property in our own names, and considerably less than that since the law decided that women could divorce their husbands on the same grounds. In Lady Worsley's time, there was no such thing as divorce without an Act of Parliament - and that wasn't open to her to pursue. So when she finally decided to leave her husband for her current lover (one of a long string, it must be said), she had to leave it up to her deserted spouse to sort out the mess. Thwarted, mortified and vengeful, hubby decided not to grant her a divorce, and sued her lover for 'criminal conversation' effectively trespass - and damages of the enormous sum of £20,000.
Lady Worsley is not a likable character, but then neither is her husband nor her lover - and all of that is irrelevant. She's a woman who ran from a loveless and probably pretty horrible marriage, in the hopes of setting up in a new life with a man she did love, and the child of that relationship - the other child remained the 'property' of her husband. But then the law and her husband start to take their revenge, and Lady Worsley has to defend her corner. She does so in an admirably unconventional way, but in protecting her lover, basically puts herself up to be vilified, and her character forever stained - she is, by society's standers, nothing more than a whore.
Does she lie down and roll over? No, she does not. She takes up with a load of other similarly placed women and uses the press to attack her husband. You can't blame her, it's all she could do, but you can't help but judge her too. She becomes a nasty piece of work, she lowers herself to her husband's level (and I'm not forgetting here, that she's been lowered way beneath that already) and she makes everyone involved thoroughly miserable - not least, I imagine, herself. But the thing I keep coming back to is that she had little choice. And so while I wouldn't have liked her much, I really, really admire her. WTG Lady W, I just wish you'd had more success.
Imprisoned in revolutionary France, reunited with her family, married to a man young enough to be her son when her husband finally pops his clogs, Lady Worsley led an adventurous but very unhappy life - and it wasn't her fault! That's it. that's what I keep coming back to. The law and society condemned her far more than her own lack of judgement and profligacy. When I wrote Rumours that Ruined a Lady, with a heroine stuck in a cruel marriage and no means of escape, I hadn't read this book. I knew how biased the law was, I knew a little of how much my heroine (and by association her hero) had to lose - but I severely under-estimated it. Lady Worsley's story has made me want to write another, much stronger heroine, to expose the sheer horror of what women in this situation had to endure - and most of them did not react as Lady Worsley did, most of them rolled over into celibate obscurity.
Lady Worlsey's story is a reminder of just how far we've come. We shouldn't take it for granted. Now I'm off to do some plotting.
The treatment that history has doled out to women never fails to astound me - and to get me bristling with both anger and ideas. Not two hundered years yet since the Married Women's Property Act finally allowed us to own heritable property in our own names, and considerably less than that since the law decided that women could divorce their husbands on the same grounds. In Lady Worsley's time, there was no such thing as divorce without an Act of Parliament - and that wasn't open to her to pursue. So when she finally decided to leave her husband for her current lover (one of a long string, it must be said), she had to leave it up to her deserted spouse to sort out the mess. Thwarted, mortified and vengeful, hubby decided not to grant her a divorce, and sued her lover for 'criminal conversation' effectively trespass - and damages of the enormous sum of £20,000.
Lady Worsley is not a likable character, but then neither is her husband nor her lover - and all of that is irrelevant. She's a woman who ran from a loveless and probably pretty horrible marriage, in the hopes of setting up in a new life with a man she did love, and the child of that relationship - the other child remained the 'property' of her husband. But then the law and her husband start to take their revenge, and Lady Worsley has to defend her corner. She does so in an admirably unconventional way, but in protecting her lover, basically puts herself up to be vilified, and her character forever stained - she is, by society's standers, nothing more than a whore.
Does she lie down and roll over? No, she does not. She takes up with a load of other similarly placed women and uses the press to attack her husband. You can't blame her, it's all she could do, but you can't help but judge her too. She becomes a nasty piece of work, she lowers herself to her husband's level (and I'm not forgetting here, that she's been lowered way beneath that already) and she makes everyone involved thoroughly miserable - not least, I imagine, herself. But the thing I keep coming back to is that she had little choice. And so while I wouldn't have liked her much, I really, really admire her. WTG Lady W, I just wish you'd had more success.
Imprisoned in revolutionary France, reunited with her family, married to a man young enough to be her son when her husband finally pops his clogs, Lady Worsley led an adventurous but very unhappy life - and it wasn't her fault! That's it. that's what I keep coming back to. The law and society condemned her far more than her own lack of judgement and profligacy. When I wrote Rumours that Ruined a Lady, with a heroine stuck in a cruel marriage and no means of escape, I hadn't read this book. I knew how biased the law was, I knew a little of how much my heroine (and by association her hero) had to lose - but I severely under-estimated it. Lady Worsley's story has made me want to write another, much stronger heroine, to expose the sheer horror of what women in this situation had to endure - and most of them did not react as Lady Worsley did, most of them rolled over into celibate obscurity.
Lady Worlsey's story is a reminder of just how far we've come. We shouldn't take it for granted. Now I'm off to do some plotting.
Currently reading
August 29, 2020A rather slow read for me. It's fascinating because I know very little of late Georgian or Recency England except Austen. There's not a lot of overlap.
July 7, 2020
Being both in the grip of a current obsession for consuming everything I can about England in the 18th century and also being a huge gossip, The Scandalous Lady W seemed almost tailor made for me. I found this book after inhaling the first two seasons of the Harlots TV series and noticing it was written by Rubenhold – I’ve since bought just a few more from her based on how much I enjoyed this.
The Scandalous Lady W deals with the headline making divorce in Georgian England of Lady Worsley. Having brought a sizable dowry in the tens of thousands (apparently equivalent to millions today) marrying her helped her ambitious husband up the ladder of society and government. Having his own penchant for voyeurism, throughout their marriage he’d encouraged her to not just flirt but to engage in affairs with his friends but when Lady W decided to actually leave her husband for his friend and subordinate, George Bisset, the shit really hit the fan.
With women in Georgian society being the property of their husbands, Mr W decided to sue Bisset for ‘damages’ to his property, the value of his wife apparently deprecating through Bisset’s ‘use’ of her. Unable in law to even speak for herself in court, Lady W hit upon a rather marvellous and badass plan – to absolutely trash her own name by parading as many of her lovers as she could through court, spilling as many secrets about Mr W’s encouragement of her ‘lowering’ of character along the way in order to ensure that her lover wasn’t bankrupted by her husband’s case.
As well as giving us the details of the Worsley’s marriage as seen through court testimony, Rubenfold also goes into their lives after the case and I found the whole concept of the demimonde that she now moved through, peopled by those to whom scandal had also been attached, absolutely fascinating. Mr W’s travels simply highlighted what an awful git he already was.
As a glimpse into 18th century English society and its hypocrisies as well as into the marriage of some interesting characters, this was both funny and fascinating and I couldn’t recommend it highly enough.
**Also posted at Cannonball Read **
The Scandalous Lady W deals with the headline making divorce in Georgian England of Lady Worsley. Having brought a sizable dowry in the tens of thousands (apparently equivalent to millions today) marrying her helped her ambitious husband up the ladder of society and government. Having his own penchant for voyeurism, throughout their marriage he’d encouraged her to not just flirt but to engage in affairs with his friends but when Lady W decided to actually leave her husband for his friend and subordinate, George Bisset, the shit really hit the fan.
With women in Georgian society being the property of their husbands, Mr W decided to sue Bisset for ‘damages’ to his property, the value of his wife apparently deprecating through Bisset’s ‘use’ of her. Unable in law to even speak for herself in court, Lady W hit upon a rather marvellous and badass plan – to absolutely trash her own name by parading as many of her lovers as she could through court, spilling as many secrets about Mr W’s encouragement of her ‘lowering’ of character along the way in order to ensure that her lover wasn’t bankrupted by her husband’s case.
As well as giving us the details of the Worsley’s marriage as seen through court testimony, Rubenfold also goes into their lives after the case and I found the whole concept of the demimonde that she now moved through, peopled by those to whom scandal had also been attached, absolutely fascinating. Mr W’s travels simply highlighted what an awful git he already was.
As a glimpse into 18th century English society and its hypocrisies as well as into the marriage of some interesting characters, this was both funny and fascinating and I couldn’t recommend it highly enough.
**Also posted at Cannonball Read **
April 26, 2016
I really enjoyed this book. I was inspired to read it solely because I had recorded the BBC programme centred on the events of the biography starring the ever amazing Natalie Dormer. As a long time fan of Natalie Dormer I was interested in the programme and through that in the actual history behind the programme.
The basis of the book is a Georgian scandal whereby Lady Worsley ran off with her husband's friend and all kinds of mud slinging ensued. It transpires that back in Georgian times a poor cuckolded husband could issue criminal proceedings against a man who made off with his wife. This was known as a criminal conversation trial. A wife was seen as property at this period in history and therefore if you made off with a man's wife you were causing him financial losses or some such. Seems rather archaic to me but I suppose if we put ourselves in the shoes of someone in that time period it makes a sort of sense.
But all is not quite as it seems in this tale and Baronet Worsley is not quite the injured party he appears to be at first glance. If anything this is a cautionary tale about airing one's dirty laundry in public. Only do it if you are whiter than white yourself. Needless to say the Baronet came to regret his somewhat vindictive decision to sue his wife and her lover.
In terms of narrative this is a good book - although it does drag at times. Quite simply some of the ins and outs of Georgian court hearings are rather boring - even to one in the legal profession. And to be frank Baronet Worsley is quite the wet blanket so I can easily see why his wife decided to trade him in for a more exciting model! I came to admire Lady Worsley for her sheer presence of mind and determination not to back down and let her husband win. I like strong female characters and whilst she may have been rather loose with her morals - at least she had a bit of spunkiness about her.
Worth a read but be warned it is a very limited subject matter - a very close character study of the disintegration of a marriage. You won;t get any great insight into the politics and history of the time. Just a bit of salacious history at its best!
The basis of the book is a Georgian scandal whereby Lady Worsley ran off with her husband's friend and all kinds of mud slinging ensued. It transpires that back in Georgian times a poor cuckolded husband could issue criminal proceedings against a man who made off with his wife. This was known as a criminal conversation trial. A wife was seen as property at this period in history and therefore if you made off with a man's wife you were causing him financial losses or some such. Seems rather archaic to me but I suppose if we put ourselves in the shoes of someone in that time period it makes a sort of sense.
But all is not quite as it seems in this tale and Baronet Worsley is not quite the injured party he appears to be at first glance. If anything this is a cautionary tale about airing one's dirty laundry in public. Only do it if you are whiter than white yourself. Needless to say the Baronet came to regret his somewhat vindictive decision to sue his wife and her lover.
In terms of narrative this is a good book - although it does drag at times. Quite simply some of the ins and outs of Georgian court hearings are rather boring - even to one in the legal profession. And to be frank Baronet Worsley is quite the wet blanket so I can easily see why his wife decided to trade him in for a more exciting model! I came to admire Lady Worsley for her sheer presence of mind and determination not to back down and let her husband win. I like strong female characters and whilst she may have been rather loose with her morals - at least she had a bit of spunkiness about her.
Worth a read but be warned it is a very limited subject matter - a very close character study of the disintegration of a marriage. You won;t get any great insight into the politics and history of the time. Just a bit of salacious history at its best!
March 8, 2022
3.5 stars rounded down.
We lost the thread toward the end. The exciting and interesting part of this book was the affairs, the politics and gossip and reputation. Seymour was a fascinating character, and the relationship between her, her husband, and her lover hooked me.
After 70% or so, the court case and separation are settled. The gossip has died down. The rest of the book recounts decades of these people’s lives — visiting turkey and desperately wanting to own a slave (him), living through the French Revolution (her), collecting and recounting endless pieces of art (him). The momentum of the story was gone.
To tell the story of their divorce (and of what that illuminates about Georgian society), we don’t need to hear every detail about the rest of their lives.
Overall, the first chunk makes up for the second chunk. But I much preferred this author’s Covent Garden Ladies.
We lost the thread toward the end. The exciting and interesting part of this book was the affairs, the politics and gossip and reputation. Seymour was a fascinating character, and the relationship between her, her husband, and her lover hooked me.
After 70% or so, the court case and separation are settled. The gossip has died down. The rest of the book recounts decades of these people’s lives — visiting turkey and desperately wanting to own a slave (him), living through the French Revolution (her), collecting and recounting endless pieces of art (him). The momentum of the story was gone.
To tell the story of their divorce (and of what that illuminates about Georgian society), we don’t need to hear every detail about the rest of their lives.
Overall, the first chunk makes up for the second chunk. But I much preferred this author’s Covent Garden Ladies.
July 11, 2023
So thoroughly researched! A fascinating look at the plight of wives at a time when they were considered the property of their husbands and how they might seek freedom.
September 25, 2020
Entertaining scandal, pleasing intrigue, great hypocrisy.
I’m really glad I bought this book which continued to delight right to the end. Just when you thought nothing else could come out of the cupboard, it did!
There is something very mundane at the heart of this book. A unhappily married woman falls in love with someone else and runs off with her lover. But those events alone, however painful or heart-warming, could never have left me intrigued, shocked, angry, surprised, gasping in disbelief, and laughing in the way that this book did. Before and after that simple act multiple events make the ordinary very unusual.
I particularly liked three things about the book.
First, the author is a great historian. Not only does she provide very rich source detail in a very readable style, she also paints the important Georgian moral context that provides the backcloth for the events. The hypocrisy is stunning.
Secondly, although this isn’t a ‘who dunnit?’ there are many elements of ‘how on earth are they going to get out of that?’ For example, if you admit adultery and your lover faces financial ruin as a result, what piece of legal wizardry will your defence barrister come up with? On more than one occasion, the tactics are surprising and entertaining.
Thirdly, the book entertains right to the end. After the initial scandal and court case, you might think it’s all over. But it isn’t. There are more battles, lovers, imprisonments, reconciliations, travels, and surprising revelations.
There’s enough material here for a TV series. It is a great read, and a true story well worth telling.
I’m really glad I bought this book which continued to delight right to the end. Just when you thought nothing else could come out of the cupboard, it did!
There is something very mundane at the heart of this book. A unhappily married woman falls in love with someone else and runs off with her lover. But those events alone, however painful or heart-warming, could never have left me intrigued, shocked, angry, surprised, gasping in disbelief, and laughing in the way that this book did. Before and after that simple act multiple events make the ordinary very unusual.
I particularly liked three things about the book.
First, the author is a great historian. Not only does she provide very rich source detail in a very readable style, she also paints the important Georgian moral context that provides the backcloth for the events. The hypocrisy is stunning.
Secondly, although this isn’t a ‘who dunnit?’ there are many elements of ‘how on earth are they going to get out of that?’ For example, if you admit adultery and your lover faces financial ruin as a result, what piece of legal wizardry will your defence barrister come up with? On more than one occasion, the tactics are surprising and entertaining.
Thirdly, the book entertains right to the end. After the initial scandal and court case, you might think it’s all over. But it isn’t. There are more battles, lovers, imprisonments, reconciliations, travels, and surprising revelations.
There’s enough material here for a TV series. It is a great read, and a true story well worth telling.
September 13, 2014
The Georgian law courts have furnished history with a number of high-profile 'criminal conversation' (adultery) and divorce cases, but few could have been as scandalous and titillating as the case of Worsley v. Bisset. Brought by a minor baronet after his independent-minded and spirited young wife had eloped with her lover, determined to drag both through the courts and ruin his rival, the case engrossed all of England for months, even years. Indeed the interest and gossip spread further afield - even George Washington during the Revolutionary War is known to have purchased a pamphlet on the case.
Of course there is more to the tale than mentioned here, but the full details of the case are best served in the pages of this book, and the final verdict is definitely best left to be discovered! It's a truly enthralling tale, the plot fit for a modern soap opera, and Hallie Rubenhold tells it supremely. I could hardly put this book down.
As a modern woman of course I was entirely on Seymour Worsley's side! I certainly admired her determination to fight back against her neglectful and vengeful husband with all the weapons at her disposal, and one gets the sense Rubenhold does too.
Of course there is more to the tale than mentioned here, but the full details of the case are best served in the pages of this book, and the final verdict is definitely best left to be discovered! It's a truly enthralling tale, the plot fit for a modern soap opera, and Hallie Rubenhold tells it supremely. I could hardly put this book down.
As a modern woman of course I was entirely on Seymour Worsley's side! I certainly admired her determination to fight back against her neglectful and vengeful husband with all the weapons at her disposal, and one gets the sense Rubenhold does too.
March 26, 2019
Mesmerizing account of societal shenanigans in eighteenth century England. I don't know how many earls and dukes and lords and such there were, but according to Ms. Rubenhold (and her research sure seems meticulous), a whole bunch of them and their wives played spin the bottle to a ferocious degree. Must have been sport for the wealthy; the lower classes just wouldn't have had time. Love was portable, fierce (at least for Lady Worsley), and pretty extravagant; not a bad way to live. Lady Worsley certainly was no saint. But unrepentant for not settling, uncowed by her husband's vengeance, she deserves some respect and admiration. I have a theory, though (don't we all). With all the buttons and stays and laces and whale bone and such, once you got your clothes off you had to fool around. Hooking up was not an option for the wealthy. Once I finished this book, I put Jenny Lewis' "Red Bull and Hennessy" on repeat. Hallelu!
August 1, 2017
After watching the BBC mini drama of the same title and seeing a blog about the Scandalous Lady W on the Huffington Post website I knew I had to read this book.
I found it really easy to read and thoroughly enjoyable. I was intrigued to learn that the BBC programme left some of the most interesting points of both Lord and Lady Worsley's lives out.
Both were undeniably selfish in their own way. It was interesting to see that the British publics addiction to scandal hasn't changed much in 300 years with the latest relationship trials of celebrities still being very popular fodder now as it was then.
I found this book a thoroughly educational and enjoyable addition to the BBC programme of the same name and I'm glad that I took the time to read it.
I found it really easy to read and thoroughly enjoyable. I was intrigued to learn that the BBC programme left some of the most interesting points of both Lord and Lady Worsley's lives out.
Both were undeniably selfish in their own way. It was interesting to see that the British publics addiction to scandal hasn't changed much in 300 years with the latest relationship trials of celebrities still being very popular fodder now as it was then.
I found this book a thoroughly educational and enjoyable addition to the BBC programme of the same name and I'm glad that I took the time to read it.
April 22, 2018
It's a dry read, and it really takes a lot of time to get through, but overall it's a really well written and informative biography about one of the most scandalous women in history. It's also interesting to see how taboo's on women's sexuality have changed over time, and also it's very informative about societal dynamics/financial standings in this time period.
I'd give this book a 3.5.
I'd give this book a 3.5.
January 31, 2019
This was really interesting. The Worsleys were fascinating and kind of horrible people. At the beginning, I sort of felt for them, these difficult situations they’re born into (for rich people, of course). As the book went on they just got worse and worse, though still fascinating. Richard especially got a bit hard to read about at times; Seymour was mostly just frivolous. Fascinating stuff!
September 8, 2023
literally so juicy but lost me in the last couple of hours of the book. maybe one day I’ll pick it back up again. would deffo recommend but if I were Hallie Rubenhold I’d shave off the last few chapters and end it on the bang that happens 85% of the way through. sorry not sorry. also frankly i wanna get a wriggle on and read Harry Potter 2 again so
November 13, 2024
A scandal rattles 18th century high society in this seldom explored story of divorce, passion, and wealth. Lady Worsley defies the standards of the time, sacrificing her reputation for a better outcome.
Well researched and engrossig, Rubenhold provides a lot of detailed information about the time and setting. This book is also an interesting examination of how women were treated during this time. While the majority of the book covers the trial, the story does lose some momentum after this point.
Regardless of one's feelings on the matter, Lady Worsley, will forever live in infamy, but hopefully she will mostly be remembered for her defiance and being anything but ordinary.
Well researched and engrossig, Rubenhold provides a lot of detailed information about the time and setting. This book is also an interesting examination of how women were treated during this time. While the majority of the book covers the trial, the story does lose some momentum after this point.
Regardless of one's feelings on the matter, Lady Worsley, will forever live in infamy, but hopefully she will mostly be remembered for her defiance and being anything but ordinary.
January 8, 2019
As both history and law nerd, this read was an absolute treat for me.
August 29, 2023
The desire to travel back in time just to tell Seymour Fleming that she is indeed 100% that bitch.
September 28, 2025
I’ve never read anything like this book before and I loved it!
April 6, 2024
THAT WAS WILD. Go into this with no prior knowledge or expectations and you’ll get blown away by the twists and turns of this craziness.
July 23, 2020
*No spoiler disclaimer this time - instead, a direct request that you research or at least do a simple Google search on Seymour Fleming, Lady Worsley, because boy was she a feminist ICON!!!*
First of all, let's get it out of the way - I was lead to this book due to the phenomenal TV film adaptation way back (it feels like!) in the more innocent care-free times of 2015, starring none other then the queen herself Natalie Dormer (you should watch The Tudors just for her playing Anne Boleyn, because we have chosen to stan whole-heartedly).
Second of all, after reading The Five fairly recently by Hallie Rubenhold, I was thus eager to read more of her work, which led to this sadly neglected dusty book on my bookshelf finally being read. And, just like The Five, it did not disappoint AT. ALL.
Rubenhold truly has such a remarkable way of making history come to life: some authors, try as they must, convey the bare facts but with such a boring tone that you find yourself drifting off halfway through a sentence. Rubenhold, thank God, is not one of those authors. You can feel the passion she has for the subject she is writing about, which is so infectious that you could speed through this book easily.....which I would have done, if I wasn't reading this at work.
However, aside from her remarkable writing, it was her chosen subject that really made this book enjoyable. It honestly sounds like something out of EastEnders - well, if EastEnders was set in the 1700s. All the twists and turns, all the stabs in the back, all the drama, scandal and gossip, it's just BRILLIANT! Plus I've always been fascinated with the evolution of feminism, in particular pre-suffragettes, such as Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire, a friend of the said infamous Lady Worsley.
Basically, in short, READ THIS BOOK! It will truly make your blood boil at how women were treated back then, whilst also make you appreciate how far we have come in some instances, but not all of them sadly (welcome to the "Men Deserve No Rights" campaign 2020).
P.S. Caitlin, if you happen to be reading this review, I am so lending you this book ASAP.
First of all, let's get it out of the way - I was lead to this book due to the phenomenal TV film adaptation way back (it feels like!) in the more innocent care-free times of 2015, starring none other then the queen herself Natalie Dormer (you should watch The Tudors just for her playing Anne Boleyn, because we have chosen to stan whole-heartedly).
Second of all, after reading The Five fairly recently by Hallie Rubenhold, I was thus eager to read more of her work, which led to this sadly neglected dusty book on my bookshelf finally being read. And, just like The Five, it did not disappoint AT. ALL.
Rubenhold truly has such a remarkable way of making history come to life: some authors, try as they must, convey the bare facts but with such a boring tone that you find yourself drifting off halfway through a sentence. Rubenhold, thank God, is not one of those authors. You can feel the passion she has for the subject she is writing about, which is so infectious that you could speed through this book easily.....which I would have done, if I wasn't reading this at work.
However, aside from her remarkable writing, it was her chosen subject that really made this book enjoyable. It honestly sounds like something out of EastEnders - well, if EastEnders was set in the 1700s. All the twists and turns, all the stabs in the back, all the drama, scandal and gossip, it's just BRILLIANT! Plus I've always been fascinated with the evolution of feminism, in particular pre-suffragettes, such as Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire, a friend of the said infamous Lady Worsley.
Basically, in short, READ THIS BOOK! It will truly make your blood boil at how women were treated back then, whilst also make you appreciate how far we have come in some instances, but not all of them sadly (welcome to the "Men Deserve No Rights" campaign 2020).
P.S. Caitlin, if you happen to be reading this review, I am so lending you this book ASAP.
January 31, 2013
I found this an easy read but it left me somewhat underfilled.. The challenge the author faced is the lack of primary source material that might have added greater dimension to the lady and her husband. That said, the outlines of Lady Worsley's behavior were certainly eccentric and her public, self-inflicted, sought-after nose-snubbing of Society were really quite astonishing. This woman would have been a hit on reality TV. Today's housewives have nothing on her.
More important and enlightening is the complete absence of rights of 18th and early19th century women. As property and dependence they were denied the civil rights we take for granted today. Other books such as "Wedlock" and "Mrs Robinson's Disgrace" provide more deeply researched and insightful discussion of marriage and divorce during the Georgian and early Victorian periods.
Despite the chattel status of women, it was hard to love this woman as after a life of wealth and privilege she left no marks for charity or good works and was (seemingly) a selfish and hedonistic bit of a fool. Unlike Lady Jane Digby who lived, loved and divorced several times 50 years after Lady Worsley, our heroine (?) passed thought life wantonly rather than meaningfully.
More important and enlightening is the complete absence of rights of 18th and early19th century women. As property and dependence they were denied the civil rights we take for granted today. Other books such as "Wedlock" and "Mrs Robinson's Disgrace" provide more deeply researched and insightful discussion of marriage and divorce during the Georgian and early Victorian periods.
Despite the chattel status of women, it was hard to love this woman as after a life of wealth and privilege she left no marks for charity or good works and was (seemingly) a selfish and hedonistic bit of a fool. Unlike Lady Jane Digby who lived, loved and divorced several times 50 years after Lady Worsley, our heroine (?) passed thought life wantonly rather than meaningfully.
February 5, 2017
The Lady in Red is a non-fiction book which tells the story of Lord and Lady Worsley's divorce, one of the most scandalous court cases of Georgian England.
This story is the perfect example of how sometimes reality is stranger than fiction. This divorce outraged the Worsleys's contemporaries, but it is quite shocking for modern readers too. Some parts are almost too incredible to believe, and overall I think this story would work great as a novel. Hallie Rubenhold tells it well: her research is solid and readable, her style easy to follow, and there are many peculiar anecdotes about the time period as well. However, while I found the beginning and the part about the court case especially engrossing, I found my attention wandering in the last part, especially where Lord Worsley was concerned.
All in all, however, this is a good account of a strange and scandalous story, and I recommend it to readers interested in Georgian England.
This story is the perfect example of how sometimes reality is stranger than fiction. This divorce outraged the Worsleys's contemporaries, but it is quite shocking for modern readers too. Some parts are almost too incredible to believe, and overall I think this story would work great as a novel. Hallie Rubenhold tells it well: her research is solid and readable, her style easy to follow, and there are many peculiar anecdotes about the time period as well. However, while I found the beginning and the part about the court case especially engrossing, I found my attention wandering in the last part, especially where Lord Worsley was concerned.
All in all, however, this is a good account of a strange and scandalous story, and I recommend it to readers interested in Georgian England.
January 4, 2016
Yes; Thou Shalt be Obeyed
I enjoyed this historic tale and remain fascinated by the repetition of human behaviour: Scandal, Gossip, Addiction, Power and Money are of prevalence today just as much as they were back in the 18th Century it would seem. I hold some sympathy for Seymour - She clearly had a strong mind and an open heart and was victim to the sexist laws of the time. I do question her maternal instincts somewhat compared to the lengths she went too to secure the affections of a man - although I accept that the law and society shaped her judgement and choices. I cared little about the chapters relating to Richard Worsley's excursions overseas and his art expenditure; however I appreciate the contrast it gave against Lady F's living situation and his complete control over her own wealth despite separation. I'm content in the knowledge that she met J L Hummel and appears happier in her later years.
I enjoyed this historic tale and remain fascinated by the repetition of human behaviour: Scandal, Gossip, Addiction, Power and Money are of prevalence today just as much as they were back in the 18th Century it would seem. I hold some sympathy for Seymour - She clearly had a strong mind and an open heart and was victim to the sexist laws of the time. I do question her maternal instincts somewhat compared to the lengths she went too to secure the affections of a man - although I accept that the law and society shaped her judgement and choices. I cared little about the chapters relating to Richard Worsley's excursions overseas and his art expenditure; however I appreciate the contrast it gave against Lady F's living situation and his complete control over her own wealth despite separation. I'm content in the knowledge that she met J L Hummel and appears happier in her later years.
September 9, 2010
The Georgian and Regency periods had some pretty juicy goings-on within the aristocracy. This tale of adultery and divorce in the Worsley family is an interesting read as it contains a plethora of social commentary on the mores and morals of the time. The Lady of the book's title turns the tables on her husband in the ensuing divorce trial at the expense of her own reputation and the results are surprising for a time when women were chattel and had very little control of their own lives. The Lady was no lady but she was clever and the scandal caused quite a stir.
I agree with another reviewer who noted that the book seemed to drag in the last few chapters.....but for the most part the story was quite fascinating. A good book for lovers of English society in the 18th century.
I agree with another reviewer who noted that the book seemed to drag in the last few chapters.....but for the most part the story was quite fascinating. A good book for lovers of English society in the 18th century.
September 9, 2018
Much much more than just than just sex, the book provides a detailed insight into Georgian high society: the norms, the behaviour codes (of honour or gentlemen's code, loyalties), justice's intricate workings, women as properties and their fight, relationship between The Lady and Her Maid, the why and the how of sexual deviation, the grand tour, first travels to Ottoman empire, the difference of British and French morale, the rise of Bonaparte, and much more. This biography goes well beyond Lady W; it is a broach and detailed social study of the epoch! The very appropriate delicate writing style provides us an easy reading; the use of exquisite language and powerful understatements gives the rough core of the story an aristocratic scent that lingers after having finished the book.
November 30, 2022
The famous Joshua Reynolds created the portrait of Lady Worsley on the cover of this book. The riding habit is adapted from her husband’s regiment. Seymour Fleming married Sir Richard Worsley when she was 17, and the marriage fell apart quickly. Once Richard got an heir, he lost interest in his wife. Because his wife brought a great deal of money to the marriage (~ 52,000 pounds), Richard could concentrate on things that interested him, including his seat in the House of Commons, his military pursuits for protecting his lands from French invasion, and belonging to two famous groups — the Society of Antiquaries of London and the Royal Society. Unfortunately, they did not include Lady Seymour. To retaliate, Lady Seymour had many lovers.
The couple had one son, Robert Edwin (1776 – 1795), and Richard claimed paternity of Seymour’s daughter, Jane Seymour Worsley, to avoid scandal. However, George M Bissett was the child’s father. Wanting to be together, Bissett and Lady Seymour ran away together late in 1781. Richard begged his wife to return home, but she refused. The following year, Richard brought a ‘Criminal Conversation’ case against Bissett for 20,000 pounds, an incredible amount of money at the time.
This court case raised eyebrows and fed the rumor mills for a long time. ‘Criminal Conversation’ was the court’s title for the husband suing the man at fault for stealing his wife’s affections. Richard refused to get a divorce; he wanted to make the couple suffer. So he sued Bissett for a ruinous amount of money and washed his hands of his wife by refusing to give Lady Seymour her clothing or pay her bills (which eventually led her to become a kept woman by rich and powerful men). Lady Seymour turned the tables on Richard by asking some of her previous lovers to come to court and explain that Richard never contested her behavior — and, in some instances, aided and abetted it. She also encouraged her physician to go to court and explain Lady Seymour got the venereal disease from one of her paramours.
I will leave you to read the book to find out how the court case ended. However, in 1788, the couple entered into ‘Articles of Separation,’ which did not allow Lady Seymour to marry Bissett (until after her husband’s death). By the end of the court case, all the parties were socially ruined. Their story continued in the newspapers for months in rhyme, illustration, and prose. Finally, Seymour realized that humiliating her husband was her only recourse (to retrieve her clothing, etc.), and the public ate it up. Richard went into hiding, and Seymour paraded herself to humiliate him further. Incredibly, before it was all over, the couple wrote about their problems for all to read in the newspapers. Eventually, Lady Worsley and Captain Bissett separated. Bissett’s brother was entering religious orders, and he pressured his brother to cease the scandalous liaison. Captain Bissett married another, inherited property, and became a highly-regarded gentleman by the time of his death.
Lady Worsley was forced to become a professional mistress to survive. The book points out that a substantial group of upper-class women were in the same position. Women could not divorce their husbands because English law saw them as mere possessions of their husbands. Richard was so humiliated that he escaped on a world tour, and to redeem his reputation as an antiquarian scholar.
Lady Seymour had two more children. There was a second child with Bissett. Nothing more is known of the child. Seymour escaped to France, where infidelity was well-tolerated. She returned to England to have her fourth child, a girl, who was given to a farm family to raise (a common way to shed unwanted children amongst the aristocracy).
Part of her final separation decree stated that she must reside outside England for four years. If she returned before that time, she would forfeit the money her husband had settled on her. Unfortunately, the French Revolution occurred, and Lady Seymour was probably imprisoned during some of that time. She begged her husband’s solicitors to allow her to return to England because of the danger. However, they warned her of the consequences if she did so. Thus, she was in France when her son Robert died unexpectedly in England.
After Seymour returned to England, she was gravely ill for two months. Her mother, sister, and husband came to visit her. Seymour was relieved when her family forgave her and people saw them in her company. Meanwhile, Richard returned to Europe and invested in many antiquities. Unfortunately, Bonaparte commandeered them, causing a total loss to Richard. Richard was in financial straits with this loss and the tremendous expenses of court cases, and Seymour’s expensive lifestyle.
Richard retired to the Isle of Wight and had a relationship with a person listed as Richard’s housekeeper — Mrs. Sarah Smith. She stayed with him until his death. With Richard’s death, Seymour’s wealth reverted to her. One month after Richard’s death, forty-seven-year-old Seymour marched down the aisle with twenty-six-year-old John Lewis Cuchet. By royal license, Seymour took back her maiden name ‘Fleming’ and John took it as his surname too.
Eventually, Seymour and John moved back to Passy (France), where she died in 1818 (~ 61 years of age). Despite their age differences, the author claims that John Lewis was the only man to understand Seymour. He married again (1 and a half years later) but asked to be buried next to his first wife.
After starting this book, I learned that the BBC made a film based on this book in 2015. The author may have included too much detail, but there is no doubt that this is a fascinating story of infidelity in the 1700s.
The couple had one son, Robert Edwin (1776 – 1795), and Richard claimed paternity of Seymour’s daughter, Jane Seymour Worsley, to avoid scandal. However, George M Bissett was the child’s father. Wanting to be together, Bissett and Lady Seymour ran away together late in 1781. Richard begged his wife to return home, but she refused. The following year, Richard brought a ‘Criminal Conversation’ case against Bissett for 20,000 pounds, an incredible amount of money at the time.
This court case raised eyebrows and fed the rumor mills for a long time. ‘Criminal Conversation’ was the court’s title for the husband suing the man at fault for stealing his wife’s affections. Richard refused to get a divorce; he wanted to make the couple suffer. So he sued Bissett for a ruinous amount of money and washed his hands of his wife by refusing to give Lady Seymour her clothing or pay her bills (which eventually led her to become a kept woman by rich and powerful men). Lady Seymour turned the tables on Richard by asking some of her previous lovers to come to court and explain that Richard never contested her behavior — and, in some instances, aided and abetted it. She also encouraged her physician to go to court and explain Lady Seymour got the venereal disease from one of her paramours.
I will leave you to read the book to find out how the court case ended. However, in 1788, the couple entered into ‘Articles of Separation,’ which did not allow Lady Seymour to marry Bissett (until after her husband’s death). By the end of the court case, all the parties were socially ruined. Their story continued in the newspapers for months in rhyme, illustration, and prose. Finally, Seymour realized that humiliating her husband was her only recourse (to retrieve her clothing, etc.), and the public ate it up. Richard went into hiding, and Seymour paraded herself to humiliate him further. Incredibly, before it was all over, the couple wrote about their problems for all to read in the newspapers. Eventually, Lady Worsley and Captain Bissett separated. Bissett’s brother was entering religious orders, and he pressured his brother to cease the scandalous liaison. Captain Bissett married another, inherited property, and became a highly-regarded gentleman by the time of his death.
Lady Worsley was forced to become a professional mistress to survive. The book points out that a substantial group of upper-class women were in the same position. Women could not divorce their husbands because English law saw them as mere possessions of their husbands. Richard was so humiliated that he escaped on a world tour, and to redeem his reputation as an antiquarian scholar.
Lady Seymour had two more children. There was a second child with Bissett. Nothing more is known of the child. Seymour escaped to France, where infidelity was well-tolerated. She returned to England to have her fourth child, a girl, who was given to a farm family to raise (a common way to shed unwanted children amongst the aristocracy).
Part of her final separation decree stated that she must reside outside England for four years. If she returned before that time, she would forfeit the money her husband had settled on her. Unfortunately, the French Revolution occurred, and Lady Seymour was probably imprisoned during some of that time. She begged her husband’s solicitors to allow her to return to England because of the danger. However, they warned her of the consequences if she did so. Thus, she was in France when her son Robert died unexpectedly in England.
After Seymour returned to England, she was gravely ill for two months. Her mother, sister, and husband came to visit her. Seymour was relieved when her family forgave her and people saw them in her company. Meanwhile, Richard returned to Europe and invested in many antiquities. Unfortunately, Bonaparte commandeered them, causing a total loss to Richard. Richard was in financial straits with this loss and the tremendous expenses of court cases, and Seymour’s expensive lifestyle.
Richard retired to the Isle of Wight and had a relationship with a person listed as Richard’s housekeeper — Mrs. Sarah Smith. She stayed with him until his death. With Richard’s death, Seymour’s wealth reverted to her. One month after Richard’s death, forty-seven-year-old Seymour marched down the aisle with twenty-six-year-old John Lewis Cuchet. By royal license, Seymour took back her maiden name ‘Fleming’ and John took it as his surname too.
Eventually, Seymour and John moved back to Passy (France), where she died in 1818 (~ 61 years of age). Despite their age differences, the author claims that John Lewis was the only man to understand Seymour. He married again (1 and a half years later) but asked to be buried next to his first wife.
After starting this book, I learned that the BBC made a film based on this book in 2015. The author may have included too much detail, but there is no doubt that this is a fascinating story of infidelity in the 1700s.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 163 reviews