- So, are you ever watching "Pride and Prejudice" (2005),
and Elizabeth goes to Mr. Darcy's house at Pemberley,
and it's so fancy and beautiful and it's just glorious.
But, is it real?
Is that really what Pemberley looked like?
Well, in today's video we're going to be going into
whether Jane Austen really based Mr. Darcy's house
at Pemberley on this house called Chatsworth.
It is owned by the Duke of Devonshire.
And it is a house that plays Pemberley
in both "Pride and Prejudice" (2005)
and also in "Death Comes to Pemberley".
So if you want to learn all about that,
then definitely stay tuned for today's video.
My name is Ellie Dashwood and this is my channel
where we talk about history and literature.
If you like either of those things, please subscribe.
So, why are we even talking about this at all?
I think a lot of people assume that
for Pemberley in 2005 "Pride and Prejudice,"
they just randomly picked a house.
They were like, "Hey, Chatsworth, you look fancy.
Come be Mr. Darcy's house."
Which admittedly I don't know,
maybe the house casting director did so.
But, the question of whether Chatsworth
is the inspiration for Pemberley
is a decades old debate in the Austen community.
This has been discussed long before
"Pride and Prejudice" (2005) ever was even dreamed of.
In fact, it's been so debated,
there're strong arguments for and against
whether Chatsworth House was the inspiration.
And that's what we're going to be delving in here today.
So first up, where is this conversation even coming from?
Why do people think this could possibly be a thing?
And the answer comes down
to physical resemblance and location.
So if you've seen my video
about my trip to Chatsworth House,
then you know that while I was there,
I was running around in
this horribly made bonnet and a maxi dress.
That is as close to Regency clothing as I get.
I don't know how to sew,
so there we go.
But, it was enough to make everyone who worked there
smile at me like I was a young child at Disneyland.
One of those workers told me very confidently
that, in fact, Chatsworth House
is the inspiration for Pemberley and you can tell,
because if you go and read the description
of driving up to Pemberley, that Elizabeth has
and compare it to driving up to Chatsworth today,
you'll notice that it's essentially the same.
And so I did,
I went and I read that scene in "Pride and Prejudice,"
and it shocked me because the guy was right.
It was the same.
It was people who lived around Chatsworth House
that first identified the fact that it matches
the description of Pemberley in many ways.
When an Austen scholar called Donald Greene
did an in-depth study comparing the geography and layout
of Chatsworth House to what it says in the book,
he found remarkable similarities.
We get in-depth details in the book
of Elizabeth's drive through Pemberley Park;
the carriage goes up, it goes down, it goes around corners.
We see Pemberley with a stream running in front of it
and a wooded hill behind it,
which is the exact same thing you see
upon approaching Chatsworth House today.
On top of it all, Chatsworth House is the only house
in Derbyshire with a large enough park to even come close
to the 10-mile park around Pemberley,
and it is the correct distance
from surrounding towns mentioned in the book.
Now, when talking about the geography of Pemberley,
one of the arguments against it
possibly being based upon Chatsworth House
is the fact that the book mentions Chatsworth House.
When planning their trip into Derbyshire,
Lizzie's aunt wants to see Chatsworth,
but also her hometown.
But the fact that it mentions Chatsworth,
some people say, "Well, it can't possibly be
the inspiration for Pemberley then,
because you can't have essentially
two Chatsworth in the same book."
And I've heard some people say,
"It's like how you can't have New York city in Batman,
because Gotham is based on New York city,"
which is true.
Gotham is based on New York city, I've read.
I'm not a Batman expert guys,
but this is the other thing that Batman Wiki told me,
which is that New York City does exist in Batman.
While Batman lives in Gotham,
he has visited New York.
So I guess New York and Gotham
can exist in the same universe.
Likewise, I feel like personally,
I think Chatsworth and Pemberley based-on-Chatsworth
can exist in the same universe, too.
But again, I think this is
one of those personal preference things.
And of course, one of the best parts of Chatsworth House
is it's beautiful gardens.
I really loved its hedge maze.
I thought that was awesome.
And apparently that is one of Elizabeth Bennet's
favorite parts of Pemberley.
It was "the beautiful grounds at Pemberley"
that really caught her heart.
Which that just makes me think about
this video's sponsor, June's Journey.
June's Journey is a hidden object mystery game
set in the 1920s,
where basically you get to be the main character.
Her name is June,
and she travels around the world, solving murders.
You do this by looking at really beautiful
and colorful illustrations that are super cool
in their vintage-ness, too, guys.
And in them you find hidden objects that lead you
to clues that help you figure out the mystery.
June also lives in a beautiful mansion on an estate
that you get to decorate it's garden.
In my garden, I have horses and a train,
also a hedge maze that is inspired
by the one at Chatsworth House.
Because I need to make this house
my own special virtual Pemberley.
I really do love winding down with June's Journey
and I find its plot super interesting.
I'm always curious to know
where the next twist and turn will take me.
So you can download June's Journey for free
by clicking the link in the description.
It is available for Android and iOS mobile devices,
also on PC through Facebook Games.
So, definitely download June's Journey for free
and solve some 1920's mysteries today.
So, with all of these similarities many people have thought
that this could in fact be the inspiration.
Now, one of the first issues discovered with this theory
is the fact that Chatsworth House matches Pemberley so well
that Jane Austen would have had to visit there herself
in order to describe it in this level of detail.
These are not the type of details you can get
from simply looking at pictures of Chatsworth House,
perhaps in a book of the great things to see in Derbyshire.
And why is that a problem?
Because there's no record of Jane Austen
ever visiting Chatsworth, or is there?
So, while there is a lot known about Jane Austen's life,
not every second of it is recorded.
Basically, scholars are trying
to piece together information from her letters,
information from letters written by her relatives,
to get an overall picture
of what happened throughout her life.
But of course, this leads to large gaps in the story.
But, for a very long time,
what people did know about Jane Austen's life
did not include a trip to Derbyshire
until an Austen discovery was made.
And this discovery was the fact that she went in 1806
to stay with some of her cousins.
And they lived only 37 miles away from Chatsworth House,
which during this era would have made the Peak District
and the lovely sites around that area
only a sort of a weekend trip.
And her cousins did keep a carriage,
so they could have very easily went to Chatsworth House.
Now, is there a record of her doing so? No.
However, she was also very close
and it's recorded when she has visited other relatives
that they would go sightseeing
to the places around those locations.
So all of these factors would point to that
is something Jane Austen could very conceivably have done.
So now we have the facts that Chatsworth,
in many respects, matches the description of Pemberley,
and also that Jane Austen would have had an opportunity
to go there if she had seized upon it.
But had Jane Austen visited there in 1806,
what would she have seen?
The answer is something kind of similar
to the same Chatsworth House we have today,
but also significantly different
because obviously over the past 200 years
things at Chatsworth have changed.
One, is that it has been greatly built onto.
In 1806, the house would have been
that classic box shaped building
that we see in "Pride and Prejudice."
The side of the building that Elizabeth Bennett
climbs out of the carriage in front of is that old building
that would have been there in Jane Austen's day.
Something else to keep in mind
about the original Chatsworth House structure
is the fact that it's built around a courtyard,
so it is hollow in the center,
meaning it makes Chatsworth look bigger
square footage wise than it actually is.
However, after Jane Austen died,
the 6th Duke went in and put this huge addition
off of the back of it,
which would have not been there when she visited.
Also, he completely rearranged rooms in the building.
He also had that fountain in the lake
in front of Chatsworth installed,
which would not have been there.
And it was actually a great feat of engineering
when it was installed though.
Another sad thing that would not have been there
is the Veiled Vestal Virgin statue
that Elizabeth finds herself face-to-face with.
First of all, it was not even created yet.
And then when it was
and the Duke of Devonshire brought it back to England,
well he kept it in a different house.
It wasn't even at Chatsworth until the 90's, I believe.
In "Pride and Prejudice," Jane Austen describes
the furniture of Chatsworth House
as being obviously suitable to the wealth of the homeowner,
but they were not overly gaudy or expensive or showy.
And that is what Jane Austen probably saw
when she visited Chatsworth House.
The 5th Duke would have still been
the owner of the house at that time,
and he and his family enjoyed spending time
at their other houses more than at Chatsworth.
And, in fact, visitors to Chatsworth in this era
said that it even looked a little bit shabby
because it hadn't been kept up to the height of fashion.
When the 5th Duke died,
there was an inventory of both Chatsworth
and the contents of their London townhouse
called Devonshire House,
and it was found that the contents of their London house
were worth more than the contents of Chatsworth.
So that was the state the house was in
when Jane Austen would have visited it.
Since that time,
the 6th Duke went on a spending spree,
buying so much stuff for Chatsworth House.
Also, Devonshire House got destroyed in London
because it had to be sold off to developers,
and a lot of the contents of Devonshire House
obviously got put into Chatsworth House,
so there have been huge influxes
of furniture and art and things into the house
that Jane Austen would not have seen there.
And, of course, one of the things
that would have been at Chatsworth
during this time is a giant sign that says,
"If you're enjoying this video, please like it."
Right?
That was definitely something at Chatsworth.
Okay. No, it really wasn't.
But if you are enjoying this video,
please give it a like.
Thank you.
Of course, Chatsworth is still a great house.
In fact, that's exactly what Elizabeth Bennett
calls Pemberley in "Pride and Prejudice," too.
When asked if she wants to see Pemberley,
she says that she's "tired of seeing great houses,"
which does tell us something
very interesting about Pemberley.
It qualifies as a "great house."
It's not simply just a small, average gentleman's estate.
It is worth being a tourist destination,
which leads us into one of the biggest parts of the argument
and debate over whether Chatsworth House could be Pemberley.
Which is, could Mr. Darcy afford Chatsworth House?
Editing Ellie here, just popping into explain this
because I don't think I did a very good job the first time.
Basically, one of the biggest arguments
against Chatsworth House being Pemberley
is this concept that Mr. Darcy could not afford it.
Now, the question becomes, well, why?
Why do people think he can't afford this house?
And the answer is because people
are comparing him income-wise to the owner of the house,
the Duke of Devonshire.
If you've seen my video about how rich is Mr. Darcy,
then you're probably familiar with the fact
that the Duke of Devonshire
had 70,000 pounds a year at this time.
Now, people look at this and they say,
"But Mr. Darcy only had 10,000,
he couldn't afford this guy's house.
It's way too rich and fancy for him."
And I can definitely see
where people are coming from with this
because, at first glance, it really does look
like it's way too rich and fancy for Mr. Darcy.
And I have seen this on YouTube comments,
but also on full on published books on Jane Austen.
And I don't mean to offend anybody
who has ever said this before,
but the more I personally think about this argument,
the less sense it makes on so many different levels.
And, in fact, I can only include a few of them here.
So I think the first one is pretty obvious,
which is the fact that the Duke of Devonshire
definitely had more money,
but he also had more stuff to spend money on.
So, as I've already mentioned
the Devonshires owned a townhouse,
and that was actually a town mansion.
And they spent most of their time there in London.
Now, when they weren't there,
their preferred other place to be at was Chiswick House,
which was their grand house right outside of London.
Now, when they really had to in the summer months,
they would go to Chatsworth
and then they'd also go and visit
their nearby great house at Hardwick Hall.
So basically, if you've noticed here,
Chatsworth was just one of many great houses
that the Duke of Devonshire owned.
And on top of having to spend money on all of these houses,
the Devonshires were trying to live
the most fashionable lifestyle in London,
which required a lot of money in and of itself.
And all of this tells us one very important thing:
it does not require 70,000 pounds
to run and own Chatsworth House
because if it did that is all the Duke could have.
There would be no Chiswick;
there'd be no Devonshire House;
there'd be no Hardwick Hall;
there'd be no the other houses the Duke owned
because that's not even a complete list of them.
And there would definitely be no
extravagant parties in London.
It would be all about Chatsworth, but it's not.
Instead, it's just one piece of his financial puzzle.
And again, it wasn't even their favorite piece.
Meanwhile, if we compare this
to Darcy's lifestyle in "Pride and Prejudice,"
Darcy probably owns some sort of townhouse in London.
It's probably not a town mansion.
And then he owns Pemberley,
which if that was based on Chatsworth,
that would be his main house.
And if you look at that,
that is about 1/7 of the lifestyle
that the Duke of Devonshire is living.
The Duke of Devonshire is living the multiple great estates,
giant town mansion lifestyle,
and Darcy's living the one great estate,
one normal average London house lifestyle.
And so they're both relative to their income.
And I think people forget that
the Duke of Devonshire had other stuff going on.
The next thing I think people get focused on
is the fact that Chatsworth is a great house
and it would require a lot of servants to run.
So I looked at a few other great houses in this era
to get an idea of how much it would cost to run them,
and I came up with this number that it would take Mr. Darcy
about 5,200 pounds a year to run Chatsworth at its size
and at about 60 servants.
Now what's interesting is the Duke of Devonshire
at the time was actually staffing only
between 11 and 20 servants at Chatsworth,
because again they weren't there much
and they just needed it to keep functioning.
But, if Darcy is making it his main house,
he's staffing 60 servants,
and he's heating the house,
and he's paying for newspapers and toothpicks.
It would cost him about 5,200 pounds a year
to run Chatsworth,
which again is within his income.
And that is right around the 5,800 pounds
that the guide "The Complete Servant" suggests Darcy
should spend on his household and servant expenses.
Now, of course, this will require Mr. Darcy
to be financially moderate,
not to go out and throw crazy parties
and try to be at the top of fashionable society
like the Devonshires always were.
But, basically, if Darcy was financially moderate,
he could afford to run Chatsworth House.
And even though Duke of Devonshire had more money,
he had a lot of other stuff to spend it on.
I think most importantly, too, in this argument
is that concept that if Jane Austen decided
to base Pemberley off of Chatsworth House
and she thought Darcy could afford it,
and she is like the premier social historian of her own era,
then why are we questioning Jane Austen?
Of anybody, she would be the one who knows
whether Darcy can afford Chatsworth House or not.
And if she decided yes,
then I guess the answer is yes.
And of course, something else to remember
about Pemberley/Chatsworth House,
if it is inspired by that,
is the fact that it is the work of generations,
and we've seen this pointed out
in "Pride and Prejudice" itself
when it says that the library is "the work of generations."
Clearly, that art gallery is the work of generations.
Basically, Mr. Darcy did not buy everything
in Pemberley/Chatsworth House himself.
Generations of wealth and acquisition has built up
that impressive state it is in by the time Elizabeth visits.
So this has been a super quick run down
on the arguments for and against Chatsworth House
being the secret inspiration for Pemberley.
So again, Jane Austen may have visited Chatsworth House
and it sure matches a lot of the description.
It looked different during the era,
and Mr. Darcy could have afforded it
if he had been financially moderate.
Also, New York City exists in Batman's reality.
That is the more important lesson we all learned today,
and that I learned from Batman Wiki,
because, again, not a Batman expert here.
So let me know in the comments below,
do you think that Jane Austen visited Chatsworth House
and was just over-awed by its beauty,
and was like, "You know what?
This is going down in my book as Mr. Darcy's house.
It's too awesome to leave out?"
Or, did she just completely make up
an imaginary house of awesomeness in her head?
These are the deep questions of "Pride and Prejudice."
Anyway, thank you so much for being awesome
and keep having an awesome day.
Bye.
(bright classical music)