The Hamilton Letters and more...

[PMarione]

An important new source:
The Hamilton Letters: The Naples Dispatches of William Hamilton edited by John A. Davis and Giovanni Capuano, Tauris & Co, 2008, ISBN: 9781845116118

The Hamilton Letters is the first collection of his complete correspondence with the English court between 1797 and 1799.

Another interesting piece of info on WH is at http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/nelson/gallery5/hamiltons.htm.

[alexlitandem]

Patrick,

Who is suggesting WH didn't `know all'? Or, further, endorse all?

What bit of the English aristocracy's attitude to trivial stuff like menages do you not understand?

What are you accusing WH of doing that he would have denied doing - to EH and / or HN - ?

b

[PMarione]

I will have to check some books to answer that one.
Otherwise you'll accuse me of not quoting the sources!

[alexlitandem]

Patrick, whilst I was first, flippantly, referring to the mores or lack of them among the `aristos' of England in matters of affairs of the heart or even Ugandan discussions, I must admit that I had genuinely always assumed that WH was more or less fully aware of - if not actively complicit in - the relationship between EH and HN, more or less from day one.

I confess, I can't instantly offer a source to support my long-standing assumption

If, however, as seems to be the case from the NA reference at the least, WH was indeed `requesting' HN's letters to Emma to be opened,surely he was doing so in his role as diplomat rather than as cuckolded husband?

Sure, he was `spying' on HN if you like, but more, could it not be argued, in the interests of his country? We're told there was concern in political circles about Nelson's personal life - and letters to Nelson himself make that abundantly clear - and it was WH's duty to assess whether Nelson was indeed becoming a danger not only to himself but potentially to his country, through taking his eye off the ball as it were.

[Being able to distinguish between matters of state and matters of the heart may well make him appear `a cold fish' to many, but I have never encountered one iota of evidence anywhere to suggest WH ever did or said anything to frustrate or discourage EH's relationship with HN, whatever he may or may not have been reading at the time. On the contrary.]

Maybe WH should be considered less as a cold fish and more as a laissez-faire, volcano-loving, latter-day James Bond

Thanks for the alert on the Davis and Capuano source by the way. Have you actually had a look at it yet? If so, is it `exciting', revealing, surprising etc., or is it dry diplomacy in the main?

[p.s. Whilst I would still much value & enjoy your own observations as always, I've 'amazonned' D&C today for my library's benefit at least ]

[PMarione]

I haven't read the book so I can't say more just that it seems promising.
If anybody has read it, here is the place to comment.

About WH, my post wasn't probably clear enough. I don't think he spied on HN and his wife for sentimental reasons: he had no sentiments.
My opinion his that he bought EH like some living "virtue" (a piece of art) and became a kind of Pygmalion, polishing her with music, language, dance masters.
She was a great artist and under his supervision she became famous.
It's difficult to imagine even today the British ambassador in Italy (I don't know his name) or any ambassador or diplomat organizing parties with his wife performing a striptease (the attitudes clearly had a soft porn component) but why not.
He also used her shamelessly as a Mata Hari or to use Bond terminology, a "honey trap". He first tried to put her in the bed of the king but Maria Carolina was on the look out. Then she became the best friend (some people say the lover, I don't) of Maria Carolina. I believe that MC was a far better Bond than WH and used her to "desinform" WH.
Then came the HN episode and as you say, he used her to spy him.

My conclusion is that EH was "used". She certainly was an intelligent person but not a cunning person. WH was. Not the least sentiment here. A "cold fish". I respect him as one of the great "illuminati" of the 18th c. but not as a human being.

@+P