Jane Austen’s Naming Conventions
It is well-known that Jane Austen based many of her character’s names on real people. It wasn’t because she couldn’t think of names for herself, though. Rather, it was to convey undertones and impressions to the reader about who these people are behind the scenes.
Colonel Fitzwilliam is a prime example. It is speculated that Jane Austen chose the name based on Earl Fitzwilliam, who was well-known at the time for being extraordinarily upright for a member of his class. Earl Fitzwilliam only had one son, so Colonel Fitzwilliam is entirely fictional. Yet by naming him as she did, she conveyed a great deal of information about the kind of family Mr. Darcy came from.
She did this with the Bingleys as well. Bingley was the name of the industrialist who built the Five Rise Locks on the Leeds Liverpool Canal. Built in 1774, it was a marvel of engineering and incredibly useful for the more efficient movement of trade goods. By using this name for Mr. and Miss Bingley, Jane Austen gave the distinct impression that their money came from industrialism, though she never said so outright.
In the process of writing The Duke of Derby, I did quite a bit of research on dukes of the regency era, trying to discern what kind of behaviors were common and acceptable. I came across a rather interesting entry. Charles Lennox, Third Duke of Richmond, had a mistress by the name of Mary Bennett (notice the use of two T’s rather than the one in Pride and Prejudice). By her, he had three daughters: Elizabeth, Caroline, and Mary.
When all four of these names, Bennett, Mary, Elizabeth, and Caroline, all appear in the same book, I have to believe Miss Austen was trying to tell the reader something about the family. People who had enough money to be her regular readers would most definitely have heard of this family, and they would likely recognize that particular collection of names.
It is entirely possible that, as she was creating the beginnings of Pride and Prejudice, she just happened to be reading about the Duke of Richmond. He died in 1806, and his mistress and three daughters were all mentioned in his will and given a great deal of wealth. Such news must have been talked about a great deal at the time.
Perhaps, the names somehow slipped into her subconscious only to come out onto paper later, or perhaps it was a deliberate decision. I do have a few ideas about her possible reasoning if it was deliberate, but I do not have enough evidence or reasoning to back them up. Perhaps you, my reader, might find enjoyment in coming up with possible explanations.
Until next time, farewell.