The Shingle of Southsea Holmesian Society
Monthly Meeting Minutes
Date of Meeting: 1st March 2021
Location of Meeting:
The Sherloft, My House, Portsmouth, UK
Attendees:
"The Entire Canon" (Paul Thomas Miller)
A photograph of Richard Krisciunas turned face down in the corner of the room.
Apologies:
"The Entire Canon" (Paul Thomas Miller) apologised for bringing a photograph of Richard Krisciunas to the meeting.
The Toasts:
"The Entire Canon" (Paul Thomas Miller) provided the following feeble toast to Butler Brunton:
Butler Brunton
Butler Brunton
Pulled a stunt on
Reg Musgrave.
What a knave.
Motions:
"The Entire Canon" (Paul Thomas Miller) tried to get a Mexican wave going but it didn't catch on.
Presentation:
"The Entire Canon" (Paul Thomas Miller) gave the following presentation on the topic of Mrs. Hudson:
What Do We Know About Mrs. Hudson?
By Paul Thomas Miller
A dear Holmesian friend of mine recently said that the only thing we know about Mrs. Hudson from the Canon is her last name. This made me want to investigate if this were true. He was wrong, of course, as he so often is. But he can’t be blamed for that. He is an American.
She is only mentioned by name in fourteen of the sixty Canonical stories. But she is also referred to as “the landlady” in The Five Orange Pips. (We may be sure that the landlady of FIVE is Mrs. Hudson, as the story takes place in the September between July 1887 and July 1888 when her name is given in NAVA and SIGN.)
Immediately, I can point out that we also know that she got married at some point, from the salutation commonly used for her: “Mrs.” In turn, this also indicates her age: between 1823 and 1929 a girl in Britain could not marry until she was at least 12 years old. Mrs. Hudson, then, was at least 12 when she was first referred to as “Mrs. Hudson”. By my reckoning this was in April 1883, in the case of The Speckled Band. Therefore, Mrs. Hudson was born sometime before April 1871.
Her first mention by Watson comes in the second story he wrote up – The Sign of the Four. In the first – A Study in Scarlet – she is not referred to by name at all. In fact, it would take some trouble to prove beyond doubt that “the landlady”, who gets four mentions in that story, is Mrs. Hudson. It is perfectly feasible that the building exchanged ownership between Holmes and Watson moving in in early 1881 and Mrs. Hudson getting a namecheck in April 1883. We cannot learn anything, then, from the stories which predate the events of The Speckled Band.
From the 1883 case of the Speckled Band, we learn that Mrs. Hudson is a live-in landlady. She answered the door to Helen Stoner at 7am on 5th April. So we know her address – 221 Baker Street. We also see that she acts as a housekeeper for her tenants as she lights their fire for them after answering the door.
It is evident from many of the stories that Mrs. Hudson provides food and refreshments for her tenants. In the Naval Treaty in 1887 she brings in tea and coffee and this continues through to the Mazarin Stone in 1903 when Holmes asks her to send up dinner for two. Her culinary ability is discussed here and there – most notably in the The Naval Treaty when Holmes claims “Her cuisine is a little limited, but she has as good an idea of breakfast as a Scotch-woman.” That her limited cuisine was good is confirmed in Black Peter when Watson says “…we sat down together to the excellent breakfast which Mrs. Hudson had prepared…”
Holmes was a master of weighing up the available evidence and identifying the most probable explanation. Therefore, when he said in The Five Orange Pips that a caller braving a storm was more likely “to be some crony of the landlady's” than a client for him, Holmes had good reason to believe this was the case. So, Mrs. Hudson must have received a decent number of visitors of her own. And they were visiting as friends (or “cronies” as Holmes colourfully put it). Thus we can deduce that Mrs. Hudson was a popular, outgoing sort of person.
In The Sign of the Four, Mrs. Hudson is dismayed when her house is invaded by the Baker Street Irregulars. I have always read this believing her concern is that they may make her house dirty. I was quite prepared to report here that Mrs. Hudson is house-proud. But this is by no means clear. In fact, given the mess Holmes reportedly created (see the opening paragraphs of The Musgrave Ritual), it seems Mrs. Hudson was quite able to tolerate mess… for a price. Perhaps she was merely shocked by the boys’ chaotic entrance. Or maybe she feared they had criminal intent. But all this is conjecture and of no use to the project in hand.
Later in The Sign of the Four we find that Mrs. Hudson displays some concern about the well-being of Holmes. In chapter nine, when Watson enquires after Holmes, Hudson expresses her concern for his health as he has spent the day pacing up and down, talking to himself. And there are other such displays of concern for him elsewhere in the Canon. In the Dying Detective, for example, she is upset at Holmes’s apparent serious illness, which reduces her to trembling and weeping outside his room. In the same story Watson says he knew “how genuine was her regard for him”. Then we are told in The Empty House how she kept his rooms for him while he was on The Great Hiatus, taking the rent from brother Mycroft. Personally, I believe she knew Holmes was alive – but this is conjecture and has no place here. But such pains represent her regard for Holmes, either way. And later in the same story she beams at Holmes and Watson when they return together to 221b. So we know something of her relationship with Holmes – she was fond of him.
The opening paragraphs of the Dying Detective, set in 1889, provide us with the most vivid image we get of Mrs. Hudson. We see more of her personality and speech in these few hundred words that all through the rest of the Canon. It is Watson’s opinion that she is a “long-suffering woman”, as she has had to tolerate Holmes’s unusual habits for so long. But that is just Watson’s opinion – it is not necessarily a true reflection of her feelings. What is more interesting is that Watson states “...his payments were princely. I have no doubt that the house might have been purchased at the price which Holmes paid for his rooms during the years that I was with him.” Watson was “with him” from 1881 to 1903, barring the Great Hiatus. So, we can also say that, at latest, Mrs. Hudson was probably comfortably off by 1903. Sadly, without an insight into how she spent her money, we cannot know this.
In The Empty House we get a great indication of her personality. She is willing, at Holmes’s request, to crawl about the sitting room of 221b moving an effigy of Holmes which was serving as a target for bullets. Make no mistake, Mrs. Hudson is a courageous, active and hardy woman.
Finally, I feel I should mention two myths that have popped up over the years about Mrs. Hudson.
First, “Mrs. Hudson’s Christian name is Martha”. This comes from His Last Bow, in which Holmes has placed an agent called Martha in Von Bork’s house. She acts as Von Bork’s housekeeper. It has been suggested that this is Mrs. Hudson. While there is no proof that she is not Mrs. Hudson, the fact that Watson does not seem to recognise her is suggestive. Certainly there is no proof that she is Mrs. Hudson. It is all surmise.
Secondly, “Mrs. Hudson is Scottish.” This conclusion is drawn from a comment in The Naval Treaty. Holmes says of her: “Her cuisine is a little limited, but she has as good an idea of breakfast as a Scotch-woman.” Over the history of Holmesiana several people have extrapolated a Scottish heritage from Holmes’s statement. But this is unjustified. Holmes is making a comparison to a “Scotch-woman”. This would make little sense if Hudson actually was a “Scotch-woman”. If anything, this statement is more indicative that she is not a “Scotch-woman”. And this is backed up by the few instances of her speech that we find in the Canon. She is never reported as having an unusual accent. Her vocabulary is always standard English, too. Again, none of this is conclusive either way, but the weight of evidence seems to be on the side of an English heritage.
In summary then, here is what we do know about Mrs. Hudson:
1. She was born prior to April 1871.
2. By April 1883, she went by the name of Mrs. Hudson. (First name unknown)
3. She married a man named Mr. Hudson prior to April 1883.
4. From April 1883 to Summer 1903 she resided at 221 Baker Street, and was occupied as a landlady and housekeeper.
5. Her culinary ability was limited but good.
6. She was popular and outgoing.
7. She was fond of Sherlock Holmes.
8. She could have been financially comfortable by 1903.
9. She was courageous.
So, while it may be nit-picking of the highest order to suggest any of this is useful information, it does at least prove an American wrong: we do know more from the Canon about Mrs. Hudson than just her surname.
