The Financial Implications of Marriage During the Regency, by Eliza Shearer

The Financial Implications of Marriage During the Regency, by Eliza Shearer

Much has been said about the importance of finding a husband for Jane Austen’s female characters. During the Regency, marriage was more about personal finances than romantic love, and although Austen’s novels give the latter a starring role, the former is always in the background.

A Choice for a Few

For a minority of heroines, marriage is a matter of personal preference. Emma’s “handsome, clever, and rich” protagonist falls squarely in this category. At the start of the novel, Emma Woodhouse is determined not to marry. She is wealthy in her own right, and her fortune gives the option to remain single, even if her friends believe that her intention is a passing fancy. Other rich women in Jane Austen’s novels marry, but do so on their terms. Miss Gray picks Willoughby, just because she can. Lady Susan does as she pleases, of course she does.

But even females with handsome settlements have the temptation to marry the richest man around, just to enjoy a life of luxury. In Mansfield Park, Maria Bertram doesn’t love or even respect Mr Rushworth, but his 12,000 pounds a year (2,000 more than wealthy Mr Darcy) make him a very desirable match. And then, there are wealthy ladies who do not have a say about their future, like poor Anne de Bourgh, whose overbearing mother and poor health take away the agency that her fortune may have given her.

The Need to Marry

For many of Austen’s leading ladies, marriage is mostly driven by necessity, because their fortune entirely depends on making a good match. In Pride and Prejudice, the five Bennet sisters have little in the way of settlement. They do have a loving uncle who is reasonably well-off, but Mr Gardiner has his own young family to provide for. The sisters must marry well to escape poverty, but only Mrs Bennet seems to worry about her daughters’ future prospects.

Mansfield Park’s Fanny Price is another heroine forced to contemplate marriage as a financial transaction. When she refuses to marry Mr Crawford, her uncle sends her back to Portsmouth with her family. Fanny comes face to face with the practical consequences of her decision: if she is to return to her family as a spinster, a lifetime of cramped, stuffy dwellings, ill manners and misery await.

Financial Security or a Trap for Life?

In Persuasion, the admiration of eligible Mr Elliot puts heroine Anne Elliot in a similar position. Marrying Mr Elliot would make her the mistress of her beloved Kellynch Hall. Anne is too much in love with the Captain to seriously contemplate marrying another man, but she is perceptive enough to understand the desirability of the match. She also instinctively understands that marrying Mr Elliot would provide her with many practical and financial advantages, but it would make her miserable.

Charlotte Lucas, Elizabeth’s best friend in Pride and Prejudice, has the opposite view. A pragmatist, Charlotte knows that if she remains unmarried, she will have to depend on the charity of her family, so she chooses to put herself in the way of spurned Mr Collins, who finds in her an understanding and amiable life companion. Elizabeth can’t help but feel that her friend has compromised her future happiness, but at 19, her perspective is undoubtedly different than Charlotte’s, who is 27.

Spinsterhood and Destitution

Even if everyone (bar Mrs Bennet) politely ignores the issue, the fact is that the Bennet sisters face the real possibility of ending up as a bunch of destitute old maids. Let us not forget that for much of the Regency, England was at war, and therefore many young men were in active service, facing death and the possibility of never returning to their homeland. There were fewer men able to marry, and therefore more competition amongst ladies to attract male attention.


The consequences of not being able to secure a husband are best represented in Emma by one of Austen’s most poignant characters, Miss Bates. A parson’s daughter, Miss Bates had a very respectable upbringing, frequenting the best social circles of the county. However, with her father dead and no husband or brothers to support her and her mother, she finds herself in tough financial circumstances. She is the very picture of genteel poverty, the fate that awaited impoverished spinsters.

Jane Austen herself experienced hard times when she was just a few pounds away from destitution. She fought hard to have a degree of financial independence, but things were very hard for unwed women in the Regency, particularly if they were of a certain age. Thankfully, things have come a long way, and today many more women have the choice to decide whether marriage is for them. I am sure Austen herself would approve.


What other Austen ladies compromise their future happiness for financial security? Who chooses to marry for love, even if it means a more modest income? What do you make of their decisions, and what do you think would have been your choice, had you lived during the Regency? 


Sharing is Caring!
Follow by Email
0 0 votes
SUBSCRIBE (optional)
Email alert of:

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

[…] But why did Austen so despise Elizabeth I, a monarch who succeeded in turning England into a naval power? Surely, young Jane should have been impressed by a single woman who yielded so much influence at a time when females were thought inferior and had to marry to avoid destitution?  […]


[…] Anne Elliot, at 27, is Austen’s oldest heroine. Not unlike Charlotte Lucas in Price and Prejudice, Anne is considered well past her best, practically a spinster. […]


[…] parents and brothers. Jane Austen and her sister Cassandra experienced this in their own skin: as unmarried women, they were dependent on their father, and later, their […]


[…] brothers. Jane Austen and her sister Cassandra experienced this in their own skin: as unmarried women, they were dependent on their father, and later, their […]

September 15, 2020 12:15 AM

[…] Such windows also provided better light levels and improved ventilation and were much easier to use. As a result, sash windows became very fashionable and replaced the older casement windows in most buildings. And therein lies the tiny detail that speaks of the Bates’ precarious financial situation. […]

May 19, 2019 10:24 AM

I probably would have been like Charlotte and been looking for security.

April 3, 2019 10:38 AM

I would have married, and not for love, and been miserable, so I’m happy that we now have choices 🙂

J. W. Garrett
J. W. Garrett
April 3, 2019 8:32 AM

I suppose you could say I am a Jack of all trades and master of none. I can do a little bit of this and that but not to the point of being called accomplished. I can teach but not what a young lady would require or need for her ‘come out’ in society. I am of the wrong social circle. My lack of propriety would get me in trouble. My comportment or lack of would offend and I would probably be shunned if not out right ‘cut’ by the ton. I would be a social pariah.Man, that hurts to admit that. Thank goodness I was born in the era that will tolerate me. LOL!! This was a fascinating post. Thanks for sharing.

April 2, 2019 11:57 PM

I am a very practical person and I would say a contented one. It doesn’t take a lot to make me happy/contented. If old and not talented (or accomplished) I might be like Charlotte, so I won’t be a burden to my family as well as possibly help financially if they are in need. But if I am intelligent or talented I might apply for a governess or companion position. I know how to sew a little, I might even apply in a dress-making shop.

April 2, 2019 9:51 PM

Wonderful post!

Linda A.
Linda A.
April 2, 2019 4:24 PM

Good question! There are too many variables that would have to be determined before I would say if I married in the Regency period, or not. But, if I go by this life, the answer would probably be: not. I think I would rather have my own space with a limited income than possibly share with someone who has completely different values than my own.

Teresa Broderick
Teresa Broderick
April 2, 2019 3:27 PM

Elinor Dashwood marries for love with a modest income. I was going to say Lucy Steele marries for money rather than love but she’s so sly and conniving I don’t think it matters to her one way or another!! I can’t say what I’d do. It’s hard to imagine how desperate someone must be to marry without love. Surely it brings as much misery as being a spinster? I think I’d probably try to manage on my own.

cindie snyder
cindie snyder
April 2, 2019 8:49 AM

If I lived in those times I probably would have married if I found the right person although sometimes it seemed that etiquette dictated that a marriage take place. I don’t know that I would have liked that depending on who I had to I agree I think Jane would agree with our way of having a choice in marrying or not.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x