The Parallel Literacy of the Less Educated: Susannah Harden writing from Bradhurst Kent in 1826

 

For a long time, a  key measure for historical literacy rates in England has been provided by church marriage registers and court witness statements: you begin by simply counting who signs their name in full and who signs their name with just an X; then aggregate the results to work out changing percentages over time. It has generally been assumed that those who could write their name also had some ability to read.

It is a feature of English - and an obstacle to the acquisition of literacy - that standard spellings score low on being phonetically based in contrast to at least some other languages. All attempts to change this and make more use of phonetic spellings have been thwarted by those who have mastered the glass bead games (“i before e except after c” and so on, until you ascend to the seventh circle of rules for apostrophes).

However, a parallel form of literacy did once exist though predictive text  software which spells for you has probably eliminated it. But it is evidenced in letters like the one I have laboriously transcribed below. Those who had been taught their alphabet and some minimal writing skills could guess at or create spellings guided by how the words sounded in their own dialect plus whatever general rules they knew or imagined to exist; you would not use a dictionary which would be an expensive piece of equipment to possess. It would be of little use anyway in spelling everyday words which aren't nouns. But the use of precise dates in the letter suggests that the writer, Susannah Harden, has a calendar in her home 

Letters using intuitive  methods are reasonably common and more than  probably achieved their purpose. In her book The Pen and the People,  Susan Whyman  writes of what she calls "epistolary literacy" which avoids an only-one-route approach which yields concepts like "semi-literate". And Mark Hailwood has used the concept of "letteracy" as a rooute into understanding what is going on. 

I think I understand most of this letter written exactly two hundred years ago from Bradhurst just outside Chatham in Kent to London. Look at the opening lines of the letter from Deer Jane down to Runs a bout anny wares

Microsoft counts 116 words and I count 79 words - a surprising two-thirds - with indisputably standard spellings though I include a before split in two (be fore) and likewise an under stand. I have also included the cant which lacks what would now be a required apostrophe. There are then words which though in very common use are spelt phonetically in ways which reflect Kentish pronunciations: wat for wet, thrad for thread, sens for since, goen for going, hus for us. The problem here for the writer is perhaps that the standard spellings are at variance with intuitive spellings and the latter are allowed to win out. I think a stronger claim is justified: many standard spellings of words are implausible in most or even all English dialects: how many of us pronounce I was surprised as I waz surprised? I am sure my readers are comfortable with wuz and wz or, most often the entirely acceptable woz. (I am not Wikipedia and spare my readers the international phonetic alphabet).

But there are puzzling features in the extract, notably the phonetic spellings for two proper names: Chattem for Chatham (which is never pronounced Chat Ham but always Chatm) and hanner for Hannah. In the first case, the writer who lives on the outskirts of Chatham may well have seen mile stones or road signs naming it; the address panel of the letter received a CHATHAM postmark. So I am genuinely puzzled by that spelling. In the second instance, spellings of the names of family members will often be known from those used on baptismal certificates, tombstone inscriptions from previous bearers of the name, and so on.  In consequence, I find the use of phonetic hanner puzzling. That said, I have found undoubtedly literate writers who spell the first names and surnames of themselves and family members in different ways even within the same letter – sister Harriet may turn into Harriette and so on. 

So I cannot resolve all the questions which occur to me but want to persuade the reader that “semi-literate” probably obstructs a proper understanding of what is going on in letters like this one. What we read evidences some distinctive cognitive activity which strikes out independently from whatever limited instruction in reading and writing has occurred in the past.

The  address panel of  the letter appears to refer to a son , but opens with “Dear Jane” who I assume is the son's wife and perhaps the (more) literate partner. Though signed off by “your Father and mother”, the letter itself refers to “your mother” – that is, Jane’s mother. The families involved are probably closely inter-related. Mr Dobson the Chemist in the address line was well-established in Coleman Street – the “Back Bank” refers to an area literally at the back of the Bank of England. The couple may have been employed by him or simply renting lodgings.

Click to Enlarge

This letter can be compared with another letter on this site also written in Kent and just eighteen miles away in 1801:

https://www.otherpeoplesletters.com/2026/07/now-all-my-famley-is-goan-to-bed-i-am.html

 

Transcription

Addressed to: … [ unclear looks like E^d] Harden at   Mr dobson Chimest  and drugest  Coleman Street 30 at the Back Bank  London

Datelined: Bradhurst 22^th  Janry 1826

Postmarked at the local post town CHATHAM  31 [= 31 miles from London]; London receiver mark 25 JA 1826

Deer Jane this fue Lins coms to Let you now how I got home But so wat be fore I got to Chattem that I had not a dry thrad In me and have had shuch a Cold ever sens and I hant dun no work sens but ham goen to trye a gane a Monday a gane and I hope that these few Lins Will find you much better then Leeves hus at present for John has got such a Cold and horsnes that We cant hardle under stand him and Thomas has had a cold but he better a gane and your mother do but porley and hanner Runs a bout anny wares and Richard says you must send a Lather jacket and a cape and a cyt [?] and I had a Lettr and a passel on Sunday Last from totrig [? Totteridge, north of London] From your ant Hannah Harden and she sent me word that your aunt Wilkens is ded and that she did on the 9^th Jany and your mother wants to now hoe washes for you now and send word how you Lick your plase now and all The perticklers and I hant sene Nor heard maidston [Maidstone, Kent] sens I with you & your hant & uncil [?] Barns sense thare Love to you and thare ….[?] Quite well your Granmother was at Bradhurst on the 19^th of this mont and she Wos very Bad and wos trubbel To wock home I have not herd From them sens and your aunt mary Hammond Is as yousel [usual?] I got Mr Russel Bill on tusday Night after I got hom a muday [?] and your Brother and Sisters sends …[word faded] & thre Love to you

So no more at present From your Father and mother

John & Susannah Harden 

Reference  

Susan E. Whyman, The Pen and the People: English Letter Writers 1660-1800 ( 2009)

Mark Hailwood, "Rethinking Literacy in Rual England", Past and Present, v 260, n 1, pp 38-70 (2023)