3.8 Article

An Unpublished Mary Shelley Letter

Journal

KEATS-SHELLEY REVIEW
Volume 37, Issue 1, Pages 4-11

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/09524142.2023.2215056

Keywords

Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley; Percy Florence Shelley; Julian Robinson; Dina Williams; Laura Galloni d'Istria; Abinger papers; Rambles in Germany and Italy

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The article presents a newly acquired letter from Mary Shelley and Percy Florence. The letter provides insights into their daily life in Florence during their continental tour and discusses topics such as Percy's attendance at carnival balls, Mary's financial difficulties, her strained relationship with Laura Galloni d'Istria, and the opposition to Dina's marriage to Henry Hunt.
The article contains a transcription of a new letter recently acquired by Keats-Shelley House, Rome. The letter, written partly by Mary Shelley and partly by her son, Percy Florence, is dated 11 February 1843 from Florence and addressed to Julian Robinson, Percy's Cambridge friend. The Shelleys spent the winter of 1842-3 in Florence in the course of their second continental tour, recounted in Parts II and III of Mary Shelley's Rambles in Germany and Italy, in 1840, 1842, and 1843 (1844). The letter complements the travelogue by offering a glimpse of their daily life abroad as members of the local foreign community. We thus learn of Percy's regular but unenthusiastic attendance at the carnival balls and his lack of interest in female society, to his mother's chagrin. Her portion of the letter further reveals her financial difficulties and strained relationship with Laura Galloni d'Istria, Mrs Mason's daughter, with whom Mary Shelley had been reunited after twenty years. Both mother and son also comment on the much-opposed marriage to Henry Hunt of the daughter of Jane Hogg (formerly Jane Williams), Dina.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available