10 Facts about Hunting in the Regency Era
In my quest for authenticity in my Regency stories, I’ve been reading English Country Life, 1780-1830, by E. W. Bovill.
Wild game is a wonderful source of grass-fed, locally-sourced, organic food. Hunting in the United States is regulated for ecological and safety reasons, but it is open to anyone with the inclination and the funds to buy equipment and licenses, and the willingness to follow the rules.
Not so much in the Regency and expanded Georgian period. Here are 10 interesting facts about hunting in England during this era:
Grouse Shooting, John Ferneley
1. The right to hunt was limited to owners of land worth one hundred pounds a year, lessees of land worth one hundred-fifty pounds a year, the eldest sons of squires or persons of “higher degree”, and the “owners of franchises”.
2. Due to a loophole in the way the law was written, a squire might lack the necessary land to hunt legally, but his eldest son still had the right to hunt.
3. Owners of small plots could not shoot the game that nested in their hedgerows and came out to destroy their crops.
4. With some exceptions, game could not be sold. Rabbits, for example, could be sold, and as Bovill said could be killed by the “occupier of land, but not the more destructive hares”. Only those entitled few mentioned above could hunt hares. (Yes, there are differences!)
5. Those not qualified to hunt were not allowed to own sporting dogs.
6. The end of the Napoleonic Wars resulted in an economic depression with many farmworkers out of work and unable to feed their families. Poaching was widespread and very profitable, much like bootlegging during Prohibition. In 1817, the Ellenborough Act increased the penalty for poaching to transportation to Australia, and as in the Prohibition era, the violence surrounding poaching ramped up.
7. However, those legally qualified to hunt, the gentry and above, could hunt game on other people’s lands with virtual impunity.
8. The invention of the flint-lock made guns lighter and increased the popularity of shooting.
9. But firearms could still be very dangerous. The famous Whig politician, Charles James Fox, was injured when his double-barreled shotgun exploded.
Deer Stalking in Scotland
10. Sir Walter Scott’s novels popularized Scotland for touring and for hunting, especially grouse-shooting and deer-stalking.
I haven’t worked any of these facts into one of my stories, yet. I believe author Tessa Dare has a subplot about poaching in one of her Regency stories. Can you think of any others?
References: English Country Life, by E. W. Bovill
Illustrations and photos: Wikimedia
Fascinating information, Alina. It does give new meaning to the word “inequality” though. And we wonder why Americans are so intent on the right to keep and bear arms. I imagine the origins of that can be found in Georgian laws that said a poor man’s family should starve so the lord could have his hunting parties. Grrr. The kind of thing that happened during the Irish Potato Famine. Oh, don’t get me started!
I think I’ve read Regency romances with poaching subplots, but I can’t dredge up any titles at the moment. Great post, thanks.
Yes, this concept of only a certain class being allowed to hunt, in fact to own hunting tools down to the type of dog, is amazing. Bovill says that the lower classes had virtually no moral objections to poaching. “Better to be hanged for poaching than starve slowly” is one quote in the book.
Yes, poaching is a sore spot for me, too. I didn’t know about the loophole for squires. That’s kinda funny. I’m researching hunting during the Regency and in particular, am trying to find references about hunting lodges. If you can give me any information on that, or point me to a good souce. I’d very much appreciate it.
I took a quick look at Bovill’s book, and though he has a few pages on country house parties, there’s nothing on hunting lodges. I’ll see what I can find and contact you at your email. Thanks so much for stopping by.