Mrs. Mitford was the daughter of Dr. Russell, Rector of Ashe, a parish adjoining Steventon, so that the families of Austen and Russell must at that time have been known to each other.  But the date assigned by Miss Mitford for the termination of the acquaintance is the time of her mother’s marriage.  This took place in October 1785, when Jane, who had been born in December 1775, was not quite ten years old.  In point of fact, however, Miss Russell’s opportunities of observing Jane Austen must have come to an end still earlier:  for upon Dr. Russell’s death, in January 1783, his widow and daughter removed from the neighbourhood, so that all intercourse between the families ceased when Jane was little more than seven years old.

All persons who undertake to narrate from hearsay things which are supposed to have taken place before they were born are liable to error, and are apt to call in imagination to the aid of memory:  and hence it arises that many a fancy piece has been substituted for genuine history.

I do not care to correct the inaccurate account of Jane Austen’s manners in after life:  because Miss Mitford candidly expresses a doubt whether she had not been misinformed on that point.

Nov. 17, 1869.

NOTES.

{0a} The Watsons and Lady Susan are not included in this reprint.

{1} I went to represent my father, who was too unwell to attend himself, and thus I was the only one of my generation present.

{3} My chief assistants have been my sisters, Mrs. B. Lefroy and Miss Austen, whose recollections of our aunt are, on some points, more vivid than my own.  I have not only been indebted to their memory for facts, but have sometimes used their words.  Indeed some passages towards the end of the work were entirely written by the latter.

I have also to thank some of my cousins, and especially the daughters of Admiral Charles Austen, for the use of letters and papers which had passed into their hands, without which this Memoir, scanty as it is, could not have been written.

{5} There seems to have been some doubt as to the validity of this election; for Hearne says that it was referred to the Visitor, who confirmed it. (Hearne’s Diaries, v.2.)

{6} Mrs. Thrale writes Dr. Lee, but there can be no doubt of the identity of person.

{31} The celebrated Beau Brummel, who was so intimate with George IV. as to be able to quarrel with him, was born in 1771.  It is reported that when he was questioned about his parents, he replied that it was long since he had heard of them, but that he imagined the worthy couple must have cut their own throats by that time, because when he last saw them they were eating peas with their knives.  Yet Brummel’s father had probably lived in good society; and was certainly able to put his son into a fashionable regiment, and to leave him 30,000 pounds. {31a} Raikes believes that he had been Secretary to Lord North.  Thackeray’s idea that he had been a footman cannot stand against the authority of Raikes, who was intimate with the son.