I just don't think poorly written erotica is going to ruin literature anymore than bad acting in porn films has ruined cinema.
Reblogged
Welp Anthony Delaney is misgendering d'Eon...
going to need a source on this
Maybe I'm wrong and he's really done in depth brand new research on this but my guess is that he (like others before him) is not considering the context in which she uses masculine language for herself. In much of her writing d'Eon characterises herself as two people, a sister and a bother, the brother died so the sister could live. It's a metaphorical way of conceptualising her experience with gender.
Anonymous asked:
hello!! fairly new to your blog and i wanted to ask: are there any particular resources you’d recommend for further reading about margaret clap, her molly house, and molly houses/molly culture in general?
thanks so much, have a good one :-)
If you're looking for a secondary source Mother Clap's Molly House by Rictor Norton. Also check out Norton's website.
As for primary sources many of the trial records related to the molly house raids of the 1720s are online.
The following trials are either directly or indirectly (though Newton) related to Clap's molly house:
And the following are related to other molly houses:
I'd also recommend reading the trial of Thomas Gordon which is a theft case involving a molly who was known as Princess Seraphina.
Reblogged john-laurens
François Boucher (1703 – 1770) Study of a vallet with a tray of sweets
Anonymous asked:
Could you tell us a bit more about d'Eon's relationship with Beaumarchais? Love the insights you share on this blog!
I can but in exchange I will also tell you about Charles Théveneau de Morande.
In 1773 d'Eon was living in London. She had been exiled from France but was still working as a spy for Louis XV. Charles Théveneau de Morande was also living in London. He had fled France to escape arrest and was now threatening to publish an unfaltering biography on the King's mistress Madame du Barry titled Mémoires secrets d'une femme publique depuis son berceau jusqu'au lit d'honneur.
D'Eon was asked by Broglie to ingratiate herself with Morande and observe matters. The court tried but failed to kidnap or assassinate Morande. In January 1774 d'Eon reported that she had seen stacks of freshly printed sheets throughout Morande's house. In March the court charged Beaumarchais to travel to London and negotiate a pay-off with Morande. In exchange for 23,000 livres and a life annuity of 4,000 livres Morande agreed to deliver his entire print run to be burned and to swear to never again libel the French monarch, ministers, or court. (Blackmail, Scandal, and Revolution by Simon Burrows, p26-27 & p96-99)
On the 10th of May 1774 Louis XV died and Louis XVI became King of France.
The success Morande had in blackmailing Louis XV seems to have inspired Beaumarchais as within a week of Louis XVI's accession to the throne Beaumarchais had informed the court of another libel being prepared in London, Avis à la branche espagnole sur ses droits à la couronne de France, à défaut d'héritiers, which claimed that Louis XVI was impotent and that Marie Antoinette was taking lovers to produce an heir. Beaumarchais claimed that the libel was written by Guillaume Angelucci, alias William Hatkinson. However evidence suggests the pamphlet was actually created by Beaumarchais and Morande, Guillaume Angelucci likely never existed. If this is true Beaumarchais managed to successfully blackmail Louis XVI out of 36,600 livres (72,000 livres if you include expenses) while casting himself as the hero of the whole affair. (Burrows 99-103)
When Louis XV died in May 1774 the Secret du Roi and d'Eon's annual salary of 12,000 livres died with him. As a French exile, living in London, in possession of top secret documents, d'Eon was a problem for Louis XVI.
It's important to understand that while d'Eon was still publicly presenting as a man she had been telling people she was a woman since at least 1772, if not earlier. On the 30th of May 1774 Broglie had informed Louis XVI that "Sieur d'Eon is a woman". Broglie had received this information in 1772 from Jean Drouet who told him that "d'Eon was a girl and nothing but a girl", and Drouet had received this information from d'Eon herself. This is why in 1774 Louis XVI sent the Marquis de Pommereau to London to seduce and marry d'Eon. (Kates 216-219; Broglie to Louis XV around 12 July 1772 (translated by @your-disobedient-servant); Beaumarchais and d'Eon: What an Affair by Donald C. Spinelli 57-59)
Beaumarchais, who coveted the d'Eon job for himself, was displeased with Louis XVI's choice to entrust it with Pommereau:
My secret information tells me the Marquis de Pommereau continues assuring d’Eon that the king insists that he (or she) marry the Marquis de Pommereau (because one is now well aware that d’Eon is a woman). He assures her that the king does not want her to renew the court case against M. de Guerchy and others. [Pommereau] also assures d’Eon that His Majesty offers him more than 100,000 écus for her silence, her marriage, and her return to France. D’Eon has shown to the one who passes me this information letters from M. Vergennes to this effect. M. de Nivernais seems to take the greatest interest in this affair and many others are mixed up in it as well. It seems, by the importance being given to this, that one is afraid that d’Eon will reveal some great secret relative to those who concluded the last peace treaty. D’Eon said to him who writes me: the king of France has too much interest in seeing to my safety than to see me lose my life. Those are his own words. It appears that one would like to take out of d’Eon’s hands a number of letters. They are going about it in the wrong way, which makes him very proud and quite arrogant. If it is true that the king is quite interested in maintaining d’Eon’s silence, in her return and her marriage, warn His Majesty that the means they are using for this are not at all appropriate, and that the Marquis de Pommereau, far from succeeding, will only foul things up. (Spinelli 59)
Beaumarchais believed that he was the right person for the job:
D’Eon thinks Pommereau us a cheat and d’Eon’s secret is to trick those who think they are tricking him, to pocket the 100,000 écus and to remain in London. The trial that d’Eon wants to start up again is only a lure to attract money; and, if I believe the news that I hear, this trial is the least of things to be feared. If the king’s name is incorrectly mixed up in this intrigue, and if His Majesty wants to be completely informed, I already have a lot of information. If on the contrary the king wants a good job done in London, after having used up all other methods, His Majesty knows and you know where to find a zealous servant that obstacles do not scare away and to whom the king only has to give secret orders to be promptly served in all things. (Spinelli 59)
The informant Beaumarchais refers to here was likely Morande who had been friendly with both d'Eon and Beaumarchais since the du Barry libel.
Beaumarchais prediction was correct and Pommereau failed to seduce d'Eon. It was not until April 1775 that Beaumarchais and d'Eon finally met. D'Eon presented herself to Beaumarchais as an "unhappy woman" who needed his help and Beaumarchais was happy to play the role of gallant savior. (Spinelli 61-62; Kates 220) He writes to Louis XVI on the 27th of April:
I venture to assure you, Sire, that by treating this astonishing creature with tact and sweetness, although embittered by twelve years of suffering, one can easily lead d'Eon to return to the fold, and to have her return all the papers regarding the late king. (Spinelli 62)
In June Beaumarchais met with Vergennes, and on the 25th of August the Louis XVI gave Beaumarchais official authorization to obtain the secret papers form d'Eon. In October the negotiations between d'Eon and Beaumarchais seemed to be going along quite smoothly, Louis XVI writes to Vergennes:
Beaumarchais must have the devil in him for having succeeded in his negotiations with d'Eon.
The transaction between the Chevalière d’Eon and Pierre Beaumarchais (acting on behalf of Louis XVI) was signed on the 4th of November 1775*. In exchange for the secret papers in d'Eon's possession and a promise to let the whole Guerchy thing drop, Louis XVI agreed to pay d'Eon a yearly pension of 12,000 livres. Louis XVI also insisted that d'Eon wear women's clothing. D'Eon agreed to this on the condition that he pay for a whole new wardrobe of women's clothes for her. (for a translation of the full transaction see D'Eon de Beaumont by Octave Homberg & Fernand Jousselin translated by Alfred Rieu 174-182)
*The transaction was backdated to d'Eon's birthday (5th of October). Because it was the first legal document acknowledging her as a woman d'Eon felt it symbolised her rebirth as a woman. (Spinelli 63)
During the negotiations d'Eon and Beaumarchais had been flirting with each other. "Everybody tells me that this crazy woman is insanely in love with me..." Beaumarchais writes to Vergennes, "who the devil could have imagined that, to serve the king properly in this whole affair, I had to become the gallant knight to a captain of the dragoons?" (Spinelli 64)
While it's possible that there was genuine romantic feelings between the two it's also possible that they were simply trying to manipulate each other. Considering Louis XVI had apparently instructed Pommereau to marry d'Eon it's possible Beaumarchais had been given the same instructions. What's intriguing is that while Beaumarchais seems to have realised that d'Eon saw right through Pommereau and was manipulating him in the aim of getting money, he nonetheless seems to have believed that he had truly succeeded in seducing her.
Whatever the true nature of their feelings for each other their relationship took a turn for the worse shortly after the transaction had been signed.
In 1771 the people of London had entertained themselves by betting on d'Eon's sex. As people stood to win or lose a considerable amount of money this encouraged the public to harass d'Eon. Matters got so bad that in May d'Eon fled London without telling anyone. Her friends feared the worst and posted a missing persons notice in the London Evening Post. Upon seeing the worry she had caused her friends she returned to London to assure them she had not been kidnapped or murdered. (Kates 185-188; London Evening Post, 9-11 May 1771)
When d'Eon told both Beaumarchais and Morande that she was a woman the two, believing they had inside information, saw an opportunity to profit considerably off these bets. They tried to persuade d'Eon to enter into these bets with them but she refused.
So when in the fall of 1775 the bets started to gain traction again d'Eon blamed Beaumarchais and Morande. Morande admitted that, in spite of d'Eon's wishes to the contrary, he had intended to place bets on her sex. However he claimed that after seeking the advice of legal council, he decided not to make any bets, as he believed it was a poor investment. (Spinelli 63-64; also see the declaration of Duppé, Vignolles, La Chèvre and d'Eon, 8 May 1776, printed in Mémoires sur la Chevalière d'Eon by Frédéric Gaillardet)
In an attempt to quash the bets d'Eon published a statement in the Morning Post declaring that she would "never manifest" her sex until "such time as all policies shall be at an end." (Kates 232) The article upset Beaumarchais he believed it went against the transaction:
You now pretend to believe that the criticism concerned the revelation of your sex! Would I have repeated to you (using the terms of your letter) that you had been unfaithful to your word of honor in the Transaction, if it had been a question of your sex, when one of the articles of the Transaction is precisely to terminate a cross-dressing that has become so scandalous because of the publicity it has received, and all the foolishness that has been written about it and what it has done to others and perhaps to you yourself? (Kates 235)
D'Eon had written a 38 page letter to Beaumarchais on the 7th of January in which she complains that King still owes her money, that Beaumarchais had not given her enough for a new wardrobe (as was promised), suggests she might reopen the Guerchy litigation and explains her decision to publish the statement in the Morning Post:
I know that it is my public notice, in French and English, dated November 11th last, inserted in the Morning-Post of November 13th and 14th, which may have principally displeased some of your friends. This notice is signed by me, and I would still have it put in all the papers, even if it should displease all of France. But, thank God, I have respectable testimonies, in writing, to the contrary. It is enough for me that it is in accordance with the truth and my honor in the eyes of the public of England, who, like France and all of Europe, must have nothing to lose or to gain on my sex. If I were a donkey, a horse, or a minister, I would let all of Europe make bets on my race; But, I pray you, tell me, in honor and in conscience, if you were in my sad position, if you were to enter a convent or the world in the eyes of Europe as a wise and virtuous girl, would you want it to be said in this world that you have made your fortune by your sex exposed to the eyes of the public? I would never have put my notice in the Gazette of November 13 if, two days before, there had not appeared in the same Gazette a notice tending to rekindle the fire of the polices. You have too much wit and penetration to be totally ignorant of its author. It was my honor and my duty to throw a barrel of water on the fire: I did it, and I extinguished it.
In spite her anger at Beaumarchais she ends the letter on an affectionate note:
My heart, which has until now so carefully closed itself to the rest of mankind, opens naturally in your presence, like a flower blooming in the light of the sun, from which it only awaits a gentle influence. I am and always will be your tender and faithful friend: expressions never render more than half the feelings of the heart.
(D'Eon to Beaumarchais, 7 Jan 1776, translated with google translate)
Around this time rumours began to spread around Paris that Beaumarchais and d'Eon were engaged to be married. D'Eon was absolutely furious writing to Beaumarchais on the 30th January 1776:
Why, during your last trip to London, did you contract a venereal disease, which was probably given to everyone in Paris; while, in order to amuse yourself certainly at my expense, or to make me look ridiculous, you let it be known in circles of your elegant women that you were supposed to marry me after I spent several months in the Abbaye de Dames de Sainte-Antoine? I admit, Monsieur, that a woman sometimes finds herself in awkward situations in which necessity forces her ... but she accepts it because she understands the fundamental purpose. The more adept and sensitive is the man who wants to do her a favor, the greater the danger is for her. But these reflections remind me of considerable torment! This only tells me that, through a blind trust in you and in your promises, I have found in you the master of my sex; that though gratitude, I gave you my portrait; and that through esteem you promised me yours. There were never any other commitments between us. Everything that you have promoted beyond that, according to what has been sent to me from Paris, can only be understood by me to be some sort of mockery on your part. If you have taken more seriously this token of remembrance and gratitude, your conduct is as pitiful as is your disease. (Kates 238-239)
D'Eon was not just upset with Beaumarchais but also Morande who she believed was also responsible for reinvigorating the policies about her sex. Things came to a head in July/August 1776 when Morande threatened to publish a letter about the whole affair. Furious d'Eon challenged Morande to duel. He refused stating that because d'Eon was a woman it was "impossible for him to meet d'Eon anywhere but in a bed". (Kates 242)
On the 3rd of August d'Eon restates her challenge to Morande telling him that her 'brother' (herself in men's clothes) will duel him:
Mademoiselle D’Eon as she has already told to Mr de Morande himself in King Street Covent Garden the 9th of the last month cannot grant him audience but in Hyde Park; the day that will suit him, she will repair there with her brother the Chevalier D’Eon who since long ago and in all counties either in a time of war or peace has always taken upon him to vindicate his sister’s honour,
~ The Chevalière d'Eon to Charles Théveneau de Morande, 3 August 1776, translation from The libellous letters of the Chevalier d’Eon by Dr Daniel Gosling
Morande refused again and on on the 8th d'Eon writes:
Send me no more paper, smeared with your cloven hoof: keep it for stuffing your pistols, if you have any guts. What does it matter to you whether I have a cock or not? You are not being asked to fight against a cock. Fight against my pistol, my sword or my sabre, that should be enough for you if you have any pluck. But you inform me you have to consult your lawyers and patrons in Paris and London before making up your mind to be courageous and honest! Coward!
~ The Chevalière d'Eon to Charles Théveneau de Morande, 8 August 1776, translation by Antonia White from Memoirs of the Chevalier D'Eon by Frédéric Gaillardet
On the 12th d'Eon's brother-in-law Thomas O'Gorman challenged Morande on her behalf:
I hope that you will make no objection to my sex and will not allege that I am neither husband nor father, since it is as a husband and father that I wish to avenge the honor of my Family.
~ Thomas O'Gorman to Charles Théveneau de Morande, 12 August 1776, translation from Kates 242
Morande refused to dual O'Gorman and sought an injunction from the English courts as dueling was illegal. (Kates 242)
On the 10th of September Morande published a statement in the Public Ledger in which he "declared on oath that Miss D’Eon was a woman", "declared that she never could prove her having been poisoned by M. de Guerchy" and declared that:
Miss D’Eon was privy to the policies opened on her sex, and I am able to prove it. I declare, that she, for some time withdrew herself into the country, in order to raise the price of the policies, and thus add vigor to the spirit of gambling; that she was to receive ten thousand pounds as her share.
D'Eon was furious, using English law against Morande she sued him for libel. Morande submitted three documents to the court. The first was a certificate of safe conduct that Louis XVI had granted to d’Eon in August 1775, this was used to show that d'Eon was a woman and thus Morande's claims in this regard were not libellous. The other two documents were d'Eon's letters to Morande of the 3rd and 8th of August. These letters went to Morande's main defense that was that d'Eon had also written libellous letters. This augment proved successful as on the 27th of November Lord Mansfield dismissed the case. (The libellous letters of the Chevalier d’Eon by Dr Daniel Gosling)
While Morande may or may not have made any money directly of the bets on d'Eon's sex I have to wonder if he was paid for his testimony in Hayes v. Jacques (1777). The case was between two men who had made bets over d'Eon's sex. Morande testified that d'Eon was female and that he knew this because d'Eon had let him finger her.
The newspapers all worded this story slightly differently. The London Evening Post reported that d’Eon had asked Morande to “approche ici & donne moi ta main (come here and give me thy hand) which she instantly drew into the bed leaving him in the utmost astonishment at such levity”. The Gazetteer and New Daily Advertiser writes that d'Eon had bid Morande to “satisfy myself of what we had so often been jocular about”. The Public Advertiser reported that d’Eon “permitted him to have MANUAL PROOF of her being in Truth a VERY WOMAN.” Regardless the the phasing the implication is the same. (London Evening Post, 1-3 July 1777; The Gazetteer and New Daily Advertiser, 2 July 1777; Public Advertiser 3 July 1777)
D'Eon was upset that the judge, Lord Mansfield, would allow Morande to pollute the court with lies. “I took to bed in my depression and isolation,” she wrote “begging the heavens for relief from my anxiety and confusion.” (Kates 249)
Surprisingly it seems d'Eon did eventually forgive Morande as in 1786 she was considering hiring him to edit her memoirs. (Kates 276)
The same can not be said for Beaumarchais. Whether or not d'Eon's purported romantic feelings for him were real or not her hatred of him certainly seems to have been genuine. She continued to criticise him both publicly and privately. In a pamphlet published in 1778 she writes of "a certain theatrical boaster":
He tried by an ignoble trick to rob me of the esteem which is the consolation of my existence. I oppose him and make mock of his futile anger. He is Thersites who should be whipped for his insolence in attacking people who are of far greater worth than himself and whom he should respect. I denounce him and deliver him up to the women of my century for having conspired to acquire credit at the expense of a woman, to get rich on her honour, and to avenge his frustrations by crushing one whose dearest wish is to see the triumph of her sisters.
(Appel à mes contemporaines (1778), there are two versions one published in Pieces rélatives aux démêlés entre Mademoiselle d'Eon de Beaumont and one in Réponse de Mademoiselle d'Eon à Monsieur de Beaumarchais; translation from Royal Spy by Edna Nixon p207)