Appanage: The Custom for Royal Male Child Inheritance

Posted on July 7, 2014 by Regina Jeffers

An appanage or apanage is the grant of an estate, titles, offices, or other things of value to the younger male children of a sovereign, who would otherwise have no inheritance under the system of primogeniture. It was common in much of Europe.

The system of appanage has greatly influenced the territorial construction of France and the German states and explains the structure of the flags of many provinces of France.

Appanage also describes the funds given by the state to certain royal families — the annual income, for instance, given to the Swedish and Danish Royal Families. For the Mongols, khubi (share) refers to appanage in the Middle Ages.

Etymology
Late Latin *appanaticum, from appanare or adpanare ‘to give bread’ (panis), a pars pro toto for food and other necessities, hence for a “subsistence” income, notably in kind, as from assigned land.

History of the French Appanage
An appanage was a concession of a fief by the sovereign to his younger sons, while the eldest son became king on the death of his father. Appanages were considered as part of the inheritance transmitted to the puisne (French puis, “later”, + né, “born [masc.]”) sons; the word Juveigneur (from the Latin comparative iuvenior, ‘younger [masc.]’; in Brittany’s customary law only the youngest brother) was specifically used for the royal princes holding an appanage. These lands could not be sold, neither hypothetically nor as a dowry, and returned to the royal domain on the extinction of the princely line. Daughters were excluded from the system: a now-archaic interpretation of Salic law generally prohibited daughters from inheriting land and also from acceding to the throne.

The appanage system was used to sweeten the pill of the primogeniture. It has traditionally been used to prevent the revolt of younger sons who would otherwise have no inheritance, while avoiding the weakening of the kingdom. Indeed, according to Frankish custom, the inheritance was to be divided among the surviving sons. The kingdom was considered family property, and so many divisions occurred under the Merovingians (the first following the death of Clovis I in 511), and later under the rule of the Carolingians in which the Treaty of Verdun of 843 gave birth to independent territories.

The consequences of equal division (dismemberment of the kingdom, civil wars, conflicts between heirs, etc.) led to the adoption of the appanage system, which has the advantage of diverting the claim of younger sons to the crown, which was the inheritance of the eldest. In addition, over time, the system guarantees the unity of the royal domain to the senior heir.

HugoKapet_kronika Hugh Capet was elected King of the Franks on the death of Louis V in 987. The Capetian dynasty broke away from the Frankish custom of dividing the kingdom among all the sons. The eldest son alone became King and received the royal domain except for the appanages. Unlike their predecessors, their hold on the crown was initially tenuous. They could not afford to divide the kingdom among all their sons, and the royal domain (the territory directly controlled by the king) was very small. Most of the Capetians endeavored to add to the royal domain by the incorporation of additional fiefs, large or small, and thus gradually obtained the direct lordship over almost all of France.

220px-Karel_V_van_Frankrijk King Charles V tried to remove the appanage system, but in vain. Provinces conceded in appanage tended to become de facto independent and the authority of the king was recognized there reluctantly. In particular the line of Valois Dukes of Burgundy caused considerable trouble to the French crown, with which they were often at war, often in open alliance with the English. Theoretically appanages could be reincorporated into the royal domain, but only if the last lord had no male heirs. Kings tried as much as possible to rid themselves of the most powerful appanages. Louis XI retook the Duchy of Burgundy at the death of its last male duke. Francis I confiscated the Bourbonnais, after the treason in 1523 of his commander in chief, Charles III, Duke of Bourbon, the ‘constable of Bourbon’ (died 1527 in the service of Emperor Charles V).

The first article of the Edict of Moulins (1566) declared that the royal domain (defined in the second article as all the land controlled by the crown for more than ten years) could not be alienated, except in two cases: by interlocking, in the case of financial emergency, with a perpetual option to repurchase the land; and to form an appanage, which must return to the crown in its original state on the extinction of the male line. The apanagist (incumbent) therefore could not separate himself from his appanage in any way.

After Charles V of France, a clear distinction had to be made between titles given as names to children in France, and true appanages. At their birth the French princes received a title independent of an appanage. Thus, the Duke of Anjou, grandson of Louis XIV, never possessed Anjou and never received any revenue from this province. The king waited until the prince had reached adulthood and was about to marry before endowing him with an appanage. The goal of the appanage was to provide him with a sufficient income to maintain his noble rank. The fief given in appanage could be the same as the title given to the prince, but this was not necessarily the case. Only seven appanages were given from 1515 to 1789.

Appanages were abolished in 1792 before the proclamation of the Republic. The youngest princes from then on were to receive a grant of money but no territory.

Appanages were reestablished under the first French empire by Napoleon Bonaparte and confirmed by the Bourbon restoration-king Louis XVIII. The last of the appanages, the Orléanais, was reincorporated to the French crown when the Duke of Orléans, Louis-Philippe, became king of the French in 1830.

The word apanage is still used in French figuratively, in a non-historic sense: “to have appanage over something” is used, often in an ironic and negative sense, to claim exclusive possession over something. For example, “cows have appanage over prions.”

List of Major French Appanages
Louis VI
**The County of Dreux for the king’s third son Robert.

Philip II
**The Counties of Domfront and Mortain for the king’s younger son Philippe Hurepel.

Louis VIII, by his 1225 will, granted
**The County of Artois to his second son Robert. Artois was lost by Robert’s male heirs, passing through a female line, and eventually was inherited by the Dukes of Burgundy. Louis XI seized it upon the death of Charles the Bold in 1477, but his son returned it to Charles’s heirs in preparation for his invasion of Italy in 1493.
**The Counties of Anjou and Maine to his third son John. This title returned to the crown when John died without heirs in 1232.
**The Counties of Poitou and Auvergne to his fourth son Alphonse. This title returned to the crown when Alphonse died without heirs in 1271.

Louis IX endowed
**1246 – The Counties of Anjou and Maine to his youngest brother, Charles. These titles passed to Charles’s granddaughter, who married Charles, Count of Valois, the younger son of Philip III, and thence to their son, Philip. When Philip inherited the throne as Philip VI, the titles merged into the crown.
**The County of Orléans to his eldest son, Philip. This title returned to the crown when he succeeded his father in 1270 as Philip III.
**ca. 1268 – The County of Valois to his second son, Jean Tristan. This title became extinct upon Jean Tristan’s death in 1270.
**1268 – The Counties of Alençon and Perche to his third son, Pierre. This title became extinct on Pierre’s death in 1284.
**1269 – The County of Clermont-en-Beauvaisis to his fourth son, Robert. Robert’s son, Louis, was later given the Duchy of Bourbon, which was treated as an apanage, although it was not technically one. Louis later traded Clermont for La Marche with his cousin Charles, Count of Angoulême, younger brother of King Philip V. These titles remained in the Bourbon family until they were confiscated due to the treason of Charles III, Duke of Bourbon in 1527.

Philip III
**The County of Valois to his second son Charles. Charles was later given the Counties of Alençon, Perche, and Chartres by his brother, Philip IV of France. Valois passed to Charles’s eldest son, Philip upon his death in 1325, and returned to the crown when Philip became King Philip VI in 1328. Alençon and Perche passed to Charles’s younger son, Charles. A descendant was raised to the dignity of Duke of Alençon. These titles returned to the crown upon the extinction of the Alençon line in 1525.
**The County of Beaumont-sur-Oise to his third son Louis. Louis was later given the County of Évreux by his brother Philip IV. These titles returned to the throne upon the death of Queen Blanche of Navarre in 1441.

Philip IV endowed
**the County of Poitou for his second son, Philip. This title returned to the throne when Philip became king in 1316.
**the Counties of La Marche and Angoulême for his third son, Charles IV. Charles later traded La Marche for the County of Clermont-en-Beauvaisis with the Duke of Bourbon. These titles returned to the throne when Charles became king in 1322.

Philip VI endowed the
**the Duchy of Normandy for his elder son John. This title returned to the throne when John succeeded his father in 1350.
**the Duchy of Orléans for his younger son Philip. This title returned to the throne when Philip died without issue in 1375.

John II the Good, on his departure to England in 1360, granted
**the Duchies of Anjou and of Maine to his second son Louis. This title returned to the throne upon the death of duke Charles IV, Louis I’s great-grandson, in 1481.
**the Duchies of Berry and of Auvergne to his third son John. These titles returned to the throne upon John’s death without male issue in 1416.
**In 1363, John II granted the Duchy of Burgundy to his fourth son Philip. Upon the death of Philip’s great-grandson Charles the Bold in 1477, King Louis XI claimed the reversion of Burgundy and seized the territory. It continued to be claimed, however, by Charles’s daughter Mary and her heirs. When Mary’s grandson Emperor Charles V defeated and captured Francis I at the Battle of Pavia in 1525, he forced Francis to sign a treaty recognizing him as Duke of Burgundy, but Francis disavowed the treaty when he was released, and the cession was revoked by the Treaty of Cambrai four years later. Charles and his heirs reserved their claims, however, and this reservation was repeated as late as the Treaty of the Pyrenees in 1659, when Philip IV of Spain continued to reserve his rights to the Duchy.

Charles VI granted
**the Duchy of Orléans and the County of Angoulême to his brother Louis in 1392. The Duchy of Orléans returned to the crown when Louis I’s grandson became Louis XII of France in 1498. The County of Angoulême returned to the crown when Louis I’s great-grandon became Francis I of France in 1515.

Louis XI granted
**the Duchies of Normandy, Berry, and Guyenne to his younger brother Charles. These titles returned to the crown when Charles died in 1472.

**Francis I granted
the Duchies of Orléans, Angoulême, and Châtellerault and the Counties of Clermont-en-Beauvaisis and La Marche to his second surviving son, Charles in 1540. To this was added the Duchy of Bourbon in 1544. These titles returned to the crown when Charles died without issue in 1545.

Charles IX granted
**the Duchies of Anjou and Bourbonnais and the County of Forez to the older of his two brothers, Henry, in 1566. He added the Duchy of Auvergne to these holdings in 1569. The titles returned to the crown when Henry succeeded his brother in 1574.
the Duchies of Alençon and Château-Thierry and the Counties of Perche, Mantes, and Meulan to his youngest brother, Francis in 1566. To this he later added the Duchy of Évreux and the County of Dreux in 1569. Francis’s other brother, Henry III, increased his holdings still further in 1576, granting him the Duchies of Anjou, Touraine, and Berry and the County of Maine. All these titles returned to the crown upon Francis’s death without issue in 1584.

Louis XIII granted
**The Duchies of Orléans and Chartres and the County of Blois to his younger brother Gaston in 1626. To this was added the Duchy of Valois in 1630. These titles returned to the crown on Gaston’s death without male issue in 1660.

Louis XIV granted
**The Duchies of Orléans, Chartres, and Valois to his brother, Philippe in 1661. To this was added the Duchy of Nemours in 1672. These titles passed to his descendants and were abolished during the Revolution in 1790. They were restored to the heir at the time of the Restoration in 1814. The heir, Louis Philippe III, duc d’Orléans, took the throne (usurping it in Legitimist theory, legitimately ascending by popular will under Orléanist theory) in 1830 following the July Revolution, and the titles may at this point be considered to have merged in the crown; given the extinction of the line of Louis XV with the death of Henri, comte de Chambord (Henri IV by Legitimist reckoning) and the forfeiture of the junior line of Louis XIV, most Legitimists would accept the merger of the duchy into the (defunct) crown in 1883.
**The Duchies of Alençon and Angoulême and the County of Ponthieu to his third grandson, Charles, duc de Berry in 1710. These titles returned to the crown upon his death without surviving issue in 1714

Louis XV granted
**The Duchy of Anjou and the Counties of Maine, Perche, and Senonches to his second surviving grandson, Louis Stanislas, comte de Provence in 1771. Louis was further given the Duchy of Alençon by his brother Louis XVI in 1774. These titles were abolished during the Revolution in 1790. When the monarchy and apanages were restored in 1814, Louis had inherited the throne as Louis XVIII, and his titles merged into the crown.
**The Duchies of Auvergne, Angoulême and Mercœur and the Viscounty of Limoges to his youngest grandson Charles, comte d’Artois in 1773. To this was added in 1774 by his brother, Louis XVI the Marquisate of Pompadour and the Viscounty of Turenne. In 1776, Louis XVI deprived Charles of Limoges, Pompadour, and Turenne, and gave him in exchange the Duchies of Berry and Châteauroux, the Counties of Argenton and Ponthieu, and the Lordship of Henrichemont. In 1778, the apanage was further reshaped, with Auvergne and Mercœur removed and replaced with the County of Poitou, leaving Charles with a final apanage consisting of the Duchies of Angoulême, Berry, and Châteauroux, the Counties of Argenton, Ponthieu, and Poitou, and the Lordship of Henrichemont. These titles were abolished during the Revolution in 1790, but were restored at the time of the Restoration in 1814. They merged into the crown when Charles became king in 1824.

Although Napoleon restored the idea of apanage in 1810 for his sons, none were ever granted, nor were any new apanages created by the restoration monarchs.

Western fFeudal Appanages Outside France
Appanages Within the British Isles
English and British monarchs frequently granted appanages to younger sons of the monarch. Most famously, the Houses of York and Lancaster, whose feuding over the succession to the English throne after the end of the main line of the House of Plantagenet caused the Wars of the Roses, were both established when the Duchies of York and Lancaster were given as appanages for Edmund of Langley and John of Gaunt, the younger sons of King Edward III.220px-Edward_III_of_England_(Order_of_the_Garter)

In modern times, the Duchy of Cornwall is the permanent statutory appanage of the monarch’s eldest son. Other titles have continued to be granted to junior members of the royal family, but without associated grants of land directly connected with those titles, or any territorial rights over the places named in the titles.

Scotland
DavidIofScotlandThe defunct Kingdom of Strathclyde was granted as an appanage to the future David I of Scotland by his brother William the Lion. Remnants of this can be found within the patrimony of the Prince of Scotland, currently Charles, Duke of Rothesay.

Kingdom of Jerusalem
In the only crusader state of equal rank in protocol to the states of Western Europe, the Kingdom of Jerusalem, the County of Jaffa and Ascalon was often granted as an appanage.

Brigantine Portugal
With the installation of the House of Braganza on the Portuguese throne, in 1640, an official appanage was created for the second eldest son of the monarch, the House of the Infantado. The Infantado included several land grants and palaces, along with a heightened royal pension.

Posted in British history, customs and tradiitons, Great Britain, Living in the UK, real life tales, royalty, Scotland | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

The Great Thunderstorm of Widecombe-in-the-Moor, an Early Incident of Ball Lightning

Posted on July 3, 2014 by Regina Jeffers

Wood carving representing the Great Storm

Wood carving representing the Great Storm

The Great Thunderstorm of Widecombe-in-the-Moor in Dartmoor, Kingdom of England, took place on Sunday, 21 October 1638, when the church of St Pancras was apparently struck by ball lightning during a severe thunderstorm. An afternoon service was taking place at the time, and the building was packed with approximately 300 worshippers. Four of them were killed, around 60 injured, and the building severely damaged.

Eyewitness Accounts

The tower of Widecombe church today

The tower of Widecombe church today

Written accounts by eyewitnesses, apparently published within months of the catastrophe, tell of a strange darkness, powerful thunder, and “a great ball of fire” ripping through a window and tearing part of the roof open. It is said to have rebounded through the church, killing some members of the congregation and burning many others. This is considered by some to be one of the earliest recorded instances of ball lightning.

The priest, George Lyde, was unhurt, but his wife “had her ruff and the linen next her body, and her body, burnt in a very pitiful manner.” The head of local warrener Robert Mead struck a pillar so hard the blow left an indentation; his skull was shattered, and his brain hurled to the ground. A “one Master Hill a Gentleman of good account in the Parish” was thrown violently against a wall and died “that night.” His son, sitting next to him, was unhurt.

Some are said to have suffered burns to their bodies, but not their clothes. A dog is reported to have run from the door, been hurled around as if by a small tornado, and fallen dead to the ground.

The village schoolmaster of the time, a gentleman called Roger Hill, and brother of the deceased “Master Hill,” recorded the incident in a rhyming testament which is still displayed on boards (originals replaced in 1786) in the church.

The Legend
According to local legend, the thunderstorm was the result of a visit by the devil who had made a pact with a local card player and gambler called Jan Reynolds (or Bobby Read, according to the tale recorded at the Tavistock Inn, Poundsgate). The deal was if the devil ever found him asleep in church, the Devil could have Reynolds’ soul. Jan was said to have nodded off during the service that particular day, with his pack of cards in his hand. Another version of the legend states the Devil arrived to collect the souls of four people playing cards during the church service.

The Devil headed for Widecombe via the Tavistock Inn, in nearby Poundsgate, where he stopped for directions and refreshment. The landlady reported a visit by a man in black with cloven feet riding a jet black horse. The stranger ordered a mug of ale, and it hissed as it went down his throat. He finished his drink, put the mug down on the bar where it left a scorch mark, and left some money. After the stranger had ridden away, the landlady found the coins had turned to dried leaves.

The Devil tethered his horse to one of the pinnacles at Widecombe Church, captured the sleeping Jan Reynolds, and rode away into the storm. As they flew over nearby Birch Tor, the four aces from Jan’s pack of cards fell to the ground, and today, if you stand at Warren House Inn, you can still see four ancient field enclosures, each shaped like the symbols from a pack of cards.

Posted in British history, gothic and paranormal, Great Britain, Living in the UK, mystery | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

Love Vanquishes Everything ~ ~ Meet and Greet: Author, Anna Belfrage + Excerpt from “Revenge and Retribution”

Posted on July 2, 2014 by Regina Jeffers

R&R webstampIt is with great pleasure I welcome author Anna Belfrage to “Every Woman Dreams.” Anna is releasing the sixth book in her highly acclaimed The Graham Saga. Today,  Anna brings us a short reflection on love and how it assists us in facing life’s many trials. She has also included an excerpt from “Revenge and Retribution.”

Love is king!
I am a sucker for love. As a consequence, I cannot imagine writing a book that does not contain a sizeable portion of love – albeit I generally avoid the mandatory complications of a romance as it drives me CRAZY when he and she are torn apart, both of them believing the other no longer cares for them. (This is when I will peek at the ending, needing reassurance. Idiotic, I know, as a romance also should have a happy ending, but just in case, I check) My characters are often torn away from each other, but at least they have the comfort of knowing somewhere their man/woman still loves them, will do anything to see them safe.

When I began writing The Graham Saga – years ago – I had in my head a laughing young woman named Alex Lind, a woman with short curly hair and deep blue eyes. She was wearing jeans and red Converse – which was a major problem, as my novel was set in the 17th century.  Hmm. Maybe I should save this apparition for another book.  The shadowy man who was to be the protagonist of the series, Matthew Graham, shook his head. His eyes were glued to the laughing woman, at present dancing on the spot to “It’s Raining Men.”

“I want her,” he said.

“But she’s not from your time,” I protested, looking at him. 
Matthew was leaning against the wall, arms crossed over his chest. His hitherto so vague form was suddenly fleshing out, bright hazel eyes meeting mine as he jerked his dark head in the direction of the woman.

“It’s her or no one.”

He went back to staring at her, a smile tugging at his long mouth.  No matter his linen shirt was worn and dirty, his breeches had seen far better days, and he was in serious need of a bath and a shave, he looked quite mouth-watering – but unfortunately (or not: after all, I am happily married, and Matthew Graham doesn’t exist except in my VERY active imagination) his attention was riveted on her, this as yet unknown Alex.

“But…”

“You heard me,” he said, beginning to fade away, all six feet and plus of him.

“Stop!” I yelled. “I’ll think of something.”

“You do that.” He gave me an encouraging smile.
Obviously, Matthew was smitten. A serious case of what the French call a coup de foudre, love at first sight. Some people scoff at the idea of something as ridiculous as immediate love, but personally I am not that certain. I believe some of us are lucky enough to meet the one and only, and the moment our eyes connect, we are done for.

As all of us know, there’s a major difference between saying “I’m in love with you” and saying “I love you.” The first statement describes a heady phase, no more, but if we’re lucky it morphs into the permanence exuded by the last statement, a commitment that extends – potentially – over a lifetime.  It requires guts to love with all your heart. It leaves you very vulnerable, which is why wounds to the heart take such a long time to heal.  But there is nothing as wonderful, as empowering and as liberating as to love someone unconditionally. It gives us strength when we need it the most, it gives us wings and allows us to soar. No wonder I’m a sucker for love…

One day, Alex-in-my-head caught sight of Matthew. At the time, he was fleeing for his life, scrambling up a dilapidated ladder to hide behind a crumbling chimney.  Dogs bayed, horses snorted, and the loud voice of the officer called his men to order, instructing them to find the fugitive and apprehend him.

“Fugitive?” Alex whispered, leaning forward.

“He’s just escaped from prison,” I explained, throwing a worried look at one of the soldiers who was studying the ladder.

“Is he a criminal?” She didn’t seem too bothered by the notion, incapable of tearing her eyes away from Matthew’s crouched body.

“No. But I’ll let him explain it to you in person.”

“You will?” She gave me a brilliant smile. “Now?”

“He’s sort of busy at present,” I pointed out. To my horror, the roof gave way, and a surprised Matthew was sucked into the house.

“Fix it,” Alex told me. “Make sure he makes it out okay.” Blue eyes hovered uncomfortably close to mine. “It’s him or no one.”

“He’s in the 17th century!” I protested.

“Well then put me there as well. He needs me!” Her face softened. “And I need him,” she added in an undertone, “I’ve needed him since well before I was born.”
Turns out Matthew and Alex were right. They were born three centuries apart, they should never have met, and yet they are each other’s missing half. Without her, he would be diminished. Without him, she wouldn’t quite know how to breathe. And no matter that by now they are well past their youth, the fire between them still burns, still scorches their hearts – as can be proved by the excerpt below from Revenge and Retribution, the recently released sixth book in The Graham Saga.

EXCERPT:

“And you are surprised?” Matthew blew into her nape, tickling her.

“She was pretty harsh,” Alex said, “and Betty generally isn’t.”

“Except when it comes to Ian. Surely you’ve noticed how protective she is of him?”

“Protective? She was flamingly jealous!”

“And you wouldn’t be?”

“You know I would,” she grumbled. She still was, a wave of puce green washing over her whenever she thought of Matthew and his first wife, Ian’s mother.  “Are you?” she asked, pummeling at her pillow. Occasionally, she wanted to claw Kate Jones’ eyes out as well, she reflected, in particular when Matthew was too attentive to her.

“Am I what?”

“Jealous.” She could feel him laughing behind her.

“Is it William Hancock that has caught your eye?”

“William?” Alex twisted round to see him. “What would I see in William?”

“I don’t know,” Matthew said, “but he, I think, is overly fond of you.”

“He is? Oh, don’t be silly. He looks at me with mild disapproval most of the time.”

“I know, aye? I see it in how his eyes follow you around, and how he lets his gaze linger a wee bit too long on your bosom and your arse.” It came out in a very dark voice, and Alex smiled.

“So you are jealous.”

“Not as such,” he replied with a yawn. “Not of him.” He sounded very dismissive.

“So who?” she said, now very wide awake.

Matthew groaned and pulled her down to lie against his chest. “Sleep, aye?”

“Who?” she repeated.

“Of John,” Matthew admitted sulkily. “I don’t like it that I wasn’t your first.”

Alex rubbed her face against his chest. “Idiot. I was twenty-six when we met.”

“Aye, and I still don’t like it. I would that no one but me had ever touched you, taken you, loved you.”

Alex struggled up to sit, making the whole bed sway.

“I’m glad that you weren’t.” She smiled at the way his eyes narrowed. “Otherwise, how would I have known just how lucky I was?” She kissed him: a long kiss. “Very lucky,” she said, licking her lips.

“Very,” he agreed huskily.

All of Anna’s books are available on Amazon US and Amazon UK.

For more information about Anna Belfrage and her books, visit her website!
For a somewhat more visual presentation of The Graham Saga, why not watch the book trailer?

You Tube Link and Anna’s website

From Anna Belfrage’s Website: The Graham Saga…

This is the story of Alex and Matthew, two people who should never have met – not when she was born three hundred years after him.

It all began the day Alex Lind got caught in a thunderstorm. Not your ordinary storm, no this was the mother of all storms, causing a most unusual rift in the fabric of time. Alex was dragged three centuries backwards in time, landing more or less at the feet of a very surprised Matthew Graham.

In a series of books we follow the life and adventures of the expanding Graham family, both in Scotland and in the New World – and let me tell you it is quite an exciting life, at times excessively so in Alex’ opinion.

Sometimes people ask me why Alex had to be born in the twentieth century, why not make her a woman born and bred in the seventeenth century where the story is set? The answer to that is I have no idea. Alex Lind is an insistent, vibrant character that sprung into my head one morning and simply wouldn’t let go.

Seductively she whispered about terrible thunderstorms, about a gorgeous man with magic, hazel eyes, about loss and sorrow, about love – always this love, for her man and her children, for the people she lives with. With a throaty chuckle she shared insights into a life very far removed from mine, now and then stopping to shake her head and tell me that it probably hadn’t been easy for Matthew, to have such an outspoken, strange and independent woman at his side.

At this point Matthew groaned into life. Nay, he sighed, this woman of his was at times far too obstinate, with no notion of how a wife should be, meek and dutiful. But, he added with a laugh, he wouldn’t want her any different, for all that she was half heathen and a right hand-full. No, he said, stretching to his full length, if truth be told not a day went by without him offering fervent thanks for his marvelous wife, a gift from God no less, how else to explain the propitious circumstances that had her landing at his feet that long gone August day?

Still, dear reader, it isn’t always easy. At times Alex thinks he’s an overbearing bastard, at others he’s sorely tempted to belt her. But the moment their fingertips graze against each other, the moment their eyes meet, the electrical current that always buzzes between them peaks and surges, it rushes through their veins, it makes their breathing hitch and … She is his woman, he is her man. That’s how it is, that’s how it always will be.

Other Books in the Graham Saga Series: scale_180_2147483647;donotenlarge-1scale_180_2147483647;donotenlargescale_180_2147483647;donotenlargescale_180_289;donotenlargescale_180_2147483647;donotenlarge

 

Posted in book excerpts, writing | Tagged , , | 6 Comments

The Westminster Paving Act: Setting London’s Roads Aright

Posted on July 1, 2014 by Regina Jeffers

In doing research for a recent release, THE MYSTERIIOUS DEATH OF MR. DARCY, which is set in Dorset, I came across the Purbek marble, a fossiliferous limestone found on the Isle of Purbeck, a peninsula in southeast Dorset, England. That discovery led to one thing and then another, and finally, I came across the Westminster Paving Act of 1762, a dramatic step forward on behalf of London’s dwellers.

maltonchThe Westminster Paving Act removed the responsibility of paving the streets from the individuals to a governmental type commission. Before the act, occupants were responsible for paving and cleaning a specified area before their residences.

From John Wood’s Description of Bath (1749), we discover:

But previous to the Duty of these Officers, every Housekeeper, inhabiting and residing within the City, Liberties, and Precincts thereof, is enjoined, Thrice in every Week at the least, that is to say, on Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday, to sweep and cleanse, or cause to be swept and cleansed, all the Streets, Lanes, Alleys, and Public Places, before their respective Houses, Buildings, and Walls, and all other Public Places, to the End that the Filth, Ashes, Dirt, Dust, Rubble, and Rubbish may be ready to be carried away by the Scavengers, upon Pain to forfeit Three Shillings and Four-Pence for every Offence and Neglect. They are moreover Prohibited from throwing, casting, or laying; or from permitting any Person to throw, cast, or lay, any Ashes, Filth, Duff, Dirt, Rubbish, Dung, or other Annoyances, in any open Street, Lane, or Alley, within the said City, Liberties, Precincts, or Places aforesaid, before his or their own Dwelling-House, Buildings, or other Public Places within the said City; but, on the Contrary, are Required to keep, or cause the fame to be kept, in their respective Houses, Yards, or Backsides, until such Time as the Scavenger shall come by to receive and take the fame entirely away, under the Penalty of Five Shillings for every Offense.

Again, if any person or persons shall have any Straw or Hay, brought and thrown down for the Use or any Inn, or any other House, in any of the Streets, Lanes, Alleys, and other Public Places, within the said City, the Liberties, and Precincts thereof, and shall not carry the same into their Yards, Backsides, or Stables, sweep and clean the Place where such Straw or Hay was thrown down, and carry away the Rubbish occasioned thereby, within one Hour after such Straw or Hay shall be unloaded, he or they so neglecting is to forfeit Five Shillings for every Offense, to be levied by Distress and Sale of the Offender’s Goods, by Warrant, under the Hands of Two or more of the said Commissioners.

Now as to the Paving of the Streets, Lanes, Alleys, and Public Places of the City, every Occupier or Owner of any House, Houses, or Lands, next adjoining to such Street, Lane, Alley, or Public Place within the said City, Liberties or Precincts thereof, is Required, from Time to Time, within ten Days next after Notice given by the Surveyor, or Surveyors, to be appointed as above, well and sufficiently to pitch or pave, or cause to be pitched and paved, the Street, Alley, or Lane before his or their Houses, Habitations, Lands, and Public Places respectively, into the Middle of the Street, Lane, or Alley, except in the Market Place, and there only eight Feet in Width, under the Penalty of Ten Shillings for each Perch not so pitched; and so in Proportion for any greater or lesser Quantity or Space of Ground; and under the like Penalty for every Month, ‘till the same shall be pitched or paved; which Penalty is to be levied by Distress and Sale of the Offender’s Goods, and to be applied towards Maintaining one or more of the Scavengers to be appointed as aforesaid.

In London, the responsibility of paving and cleaning the streets was normally written into the building lease/sale. The problem with the London streets in the early 18th Century was the lack of consistency. The paving stones were round and fit to walk upon, but in a carriage the ride was quite rough. The wide flat stones, which were perfect underfoot, created a bumpy ride for they were raised above the flat of the road.

The 1762 Act specified that Purbeck stone should replace the previous stone. The act also called for the replacement of the drainage kennel, which was normally placed in the street’s middle, with kerbside gutters. This standard of the Purbeck stone remained in place throughout the late Georgian Period. Eventually, gravel was added between the stones to level out the road.

The act also required a system of street cleaning. As a side benefit of working as a Scavenger (those paid to clean the street by at a parish rate) grew, the streets became cleaner. For example, discarded ashes were collected to be sold to manufactures of inferior place bricks. Eventually, carts carrying water (barrels pierced with holes) kept the dust down on the road.

In the early 19th Century, the occupant was responsible for sweeping the pavement before his house. The parish scavenger removed the dirt from the street and that on the carriageway.

Unfortunately, all the laws of the land could not force those who occupied single rooms in lodge houses or those who frequented houses of ill repute or beer houses. There were some who simply did not care for the condition of the streets upon which they walked or rode.Jeffers-TMDOMD

Posted in British history, buildings and structures, Georgian Era, Great Britain, Living in the UK, real life tales | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

Life of the Gentry During the Regency Period…

Posted on June 27, 2014 by Regina Jeffers

Caroline of Brunswick

Caroline of Brunswick

During the Regency Period, wealth and social class separated the English citizenry. Beginning with the Royals, citizens found their place based on birthright and wealth. The nobility stood above the gentry, who stood above the clergy, who stood above the working class, etc. As part of the gentry, Jane Austen’s family held certain privileges, but also lacked political power. Although he was a rector, the Reverend George Austen was a “gentleman,” meaning man of the gentry class. Austen’s novels are populated with those of the gentry. Occasionally, her readers encounter the nobility, as in Lady Catherine De Bourgh and the Dowager Viscountess Dalrymple or the clergy as with Mr. Collins or Mr. Elton.

To be part of the landed gentry, the family had to own 300+ acres of property. The Reverend George Austen was part of the gentry, but he came from the lower end of the class distinction, while Jane’s mother came from a wealthier background. When one reads Austen, the person meets the gentry. A member of the gentry was known as a gentleman, but not all members of the gentry acted as a gentleman.

Good manners defined a person during the era. Loosely based on Renaissance Italy and 17th Century French customs, the “rules” of engagement during the Regency Period were strictly enforced by members of the “ton.” One who did not adhere to the rules would be shunned by Society. york_1804_hale

A gentleman, for example, was expected to speak properly and to avoid vulgarity; to be dressed appropriately; to dance well; to be well versed on a variety of subjects and to have a university education or above; and to practice condescion to those of a lower class.

When addressing women the eldest daughter in a family would be referred to as “Miss” + her last name (i.e, Miss Elliot or Miss Bennet). The younger sisters would be “Miss” + the woman’s given name (i.e, Miss Anne or Miss Elizabeth). Addressing males followed a similar form. The eldest son was “Mister” + last name (i.e, Mr. Ferras or Mr. Wentworth). The younger sons used both given name and surname (i.e., Mr. Robert Ferras or Mr. Frederick Wentworth).

People of lower rank were expected to wait to be introduced to someone of a higher rank. (Do you recall Catherine Morland and Mrs. Allen at Bath? They must wait for an introduction to Henry Tilney, who calls upon the evening’s master of ceremonies to do the deed.) Women of the period were to be obedient to their fathers and husbands, docile and without opinions, have refined qualities, and attendant to their families. Education was not a prerequisite for women. In Austen’s stories, her heroines often shun these predisposed qualities. One must remember that Darcy admires Elizabeth Bennet’s desire to improve her mind by extensive reading.

Derby from a Field Adjoining Abbey Barnes

Derby from a Field Adjoining Abbey Barnes

Posted in British history, customs and tradiitons, dancing, fashion, Jane Austen, Living in the Regency, Pride and Prejudice, Regency era, Regency personalities | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Life of the Gentry During the Regency Period…

Why Austen’s Works Easily Translate into Modern Adaptations

Posted on June 26, 2014 by Regina Jeffers

600full-pride-and-prejudice-2005 Jane Austen’s works are often classified as “romances.” The assumption comes from the premise that if the heroine meets a handsome man in Chapter One, he must be the hero. Fitzwilliam Darcy is the romantic hero of Pride and Prejudice, and although he does not appear in Chapter One, he does make an appearance by Chapter Three, and Austen’s chapters are short in comparison to contemporary writers. However, if you know nothing of the story line nor do you have sweet dreams of Colin Firth emerging dripping wet from a placid lake (Sigh!) or of Matthew Macfadyen walking through the morning mist with an open shirt and lots of chest hair (Sigh!), you may not think much of the infamous Mr. Darcy.

Quite frankly, upon our first meeting of this wonderful character, he is a jerk. He makes a horrendous “first impression.” But that is the thing with Austen. Her original title of the novel and her theme are one and the same: first impressions are misleading. From the first line of Pride and Prejudice, “It is a truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in want of a wife,” Austen plays a merry game with her readers. “First impressions” are misleading. Repeat that phrase with me: First impressions are misleading. First impressions are misleading.

In truth, Darcy does not come to Hertfordshire seeking a wife; Wickham is not the perfect mate for Elizabeth; Jane might be more beautiful than Elizabeth, but she lacks her sister’s depth of character; Darcy’s best quality is not his wealth, nor is his worst quality his pride. Austen’s theme permeates every line, and, generally, the reader does not recognize that our favorite “Lady” hits us over the head with it. Readers simply sense the resonance found within Austen’s works. Theme explains why Austen’s works are considered “classics.” When I taught school, I used a thematic approach to the literature we covered in class. During the 15 years I spent at the middle school level, we identified common (and not so common) themes, which would tie the many novels we had available for our students together (humor, the Holocaust, science fiction which can become science fact, coming of age, etc.) Theme, well done, brings us universal truths, and discerning readers seek truth well told. Austen writes about the truths of a flawed society in which she was born.

What we find in Austen, as well as in the Brontes, Dickens, Conan Doyle, Shakespeare, etc., is how easily her stories are transferred to the present. Critics of “remaking” the classics refer to the phenomenon as “nostalgia.” We who love these types of stories are accused of wanting to go back to a less complicated time. In reality, I disagree with the idea that the Regency was “less complicated,” but I understand their objections. Yet, it is much more than a longing for an easier time. If it is “nostalgia,” then what is missing from our current time that brings us to seek out another? emma-and-knightley-dancing It is more than an “escape” into the past.

Readers and viewers return again and again to these tales. What parts of these remakes of the classics speak to our contemporary needs and fantasies? I believe, we often use a magnifying lens to view the world. This lens has a filter known as the “past.” We view contemporary society by reinventing the past. Some people would disagree with this idea, but I am of the persuasion we “soften” the difficulties of the Regency.

Early romance writers have set the standard for the times. In contrast, I often write of the prejudice in society, the lack of rights of women, the devastation of being born second or third, the perils of being born first in a wealthy family, the prospects of the servant class, etc., but I can tell you, my works are received with mixed views, because some readers do not wish to know of the seedier side of the Regency.

Parts of the past survive, while others fade away. From the perspective of current cultural and social ambitions, politics, and historiography, the past is remade. Do not our grandparents tell us of a simpler time? Do we not look back and see with our “selected” memory a past in which life moved as an easier pace? Yet, in truth, those easier times had issues similar to those of which we deal every day. Death, famine, disease, betrayal, corruption, war, etc., exist in each era. ecd1

As a writer of Austen-inspired novels, I strongly feel that I “hold” the past in waiting for my readers to cherish, but I also believe my novels, as well as those of other writers of remakes, reshape the past in the current styles and fashions. Remakes (whether sequels, adaptations, what ifs, different genres with Austen’s characters, etc.) appeal to both our need for the classics and our need for popular culture. As a teacher for 40 years, I repeatedly asked my students to read and view and analyze – to imagine themselves in relation to a past and an ever-changing present.

As a writer, I reimagine Jane Austen’s works as a portal through which the reader can consider what we were, what we are, and what we want to be. In doing so, I emphasized the importance of permitting the canon and its past to be complemented by, and in some sense removed by, the tools and technologies of our contemporary culture and popular media. Often when I submit an Austenesque novel for a contest, I am told by a judge (who has never read such a novel) that I “cheated” because I used readily recognizable characters. I am “punished” by the score I am presented. I attempt to take the constructive criticism and use it, while ignoring the chastisements for my choice of characters. Despite the insinuations of my character for choosing Austen’s most famous couples, I say I have  upped my writing because not only must I tell an engaging story, but I must also keep Darcy and Elizabeth and Anne Elliot and Captain Wentworth true to the nature set for me by Jane Austen. persuasion-2007-persuasion-5251162-1024-576

In such adaptations, those of us who delve into these remakes, retain the specifics of the context and the historical setting, while highlighting and exploring current issues. As I mentioned above, in my many Austen sequels/adaptations, I have used political intrigue, issues of race, women’s rights, the plight of the poor, post traumatic stress syndrome, childbirth, governmental spies, etc. These issues fit the historical setting, but they also speak to modern times.

So, how popular are these remakes? How easily have Jane Austen and others made the journey into contemporary times? In 1995, A&E Network aired an Andrew Davies’ retelling of Pride and Prejudice. It earned the network its highest rating ever in the U.S. In England, 21% of British viewers watched the last episode of this series, which starred Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle. Sales of Pride and Prejudice hit 35,00 copies per week during the broadcast.

In the past twenty years, there have been more than 30 films and TV adaptations of Austen’s works, as well as over 500 continuations and sequels based on Austen’s six simple novels. Multiple markets have grown up around the love of Jane Austen: music to read Austen by; boutiques; guidebooks; cookbooks; dolls; advice books; organized tours, etc.

 

Book Blurb:hhcovercrop Liz Bennet’s flirtatious nature acerbates Will Darcy’s controlling tendencies, sending him into despair when she fiercely demands her independence from him. How could she repeatedly turn him down? Darcy has it all: good looks, a pro football career, intelligence, and wealth. Pulled together by a passionate desire, which neither time nor distance can quench, they are destined to love, as well as misunderstand, each other until Fate deals them a blow from which they can no longer escape. Set against the backdrop of professional sports and the North Carolina wine country, Honor and Hope offers a modern romance loosely based on Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice.

Posted in film, Jane Austen, language choices, Living in the Regency, Napoleonic Wars, Pop Culture, Pride and Prejudice, Regency era, Regency personalities, word play, writing | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Meet and Greet: Tudor-Based Author Judith Arnopp + an Excerpt from “Intractable Heart”

Posted on June 25, 2014 by Regina Jeffers

Today, I welcome the fabulous Judith Arnopp, a Tudor-based historical author, and her latest release, Intractable Heart: The Story of Katheryn Parr

10447319_10152441087330890_1337771090_aIn 2007 Judith Arnopp graduated from the University of Wales, Lampeter with a BA in English Literature and a Masters in Medieval Studies; she now combines those skills to write historical novels.

Her early books, Peaceweaver, The Forest Dwellers and The Song of Heledd concentrated on the Anglo- Saxon/ medieval period, but in 2010, she published a short pamphlet of ‘Tudor’ stories entitled, Dear Henry: Confessions of the Queens. Many loved the effort, and she received endless requests for full length ‘Tudor’ novels.

518fFL77DlL._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-v3-big,TopRight,0,-55_SX278_SY278_PIkin4,BottomRight,1,22_AA300_SH20_OU01_For a while Judith buried herself once more in study, refreshing her already extensive knowledge of the period. The result was The Winchester Goose, the story of a prostitute from Southwark called Joanie Toogood, whose harsh existence is contrasted with that of Henry’s fourth and fifth wives, Anne of Cleves and Katherine Howard. The Winchester Goose is a multi-narrative illustrating Tudor life from several, very different perspectives; a prostitute, a Spy, and a Lady-in-Waiting at the royal court.

Judith’s next book The Kiss of the Concubine details the life of Anne Boleyn, told in the first person- present tense, the story takes you to the very heart of England’s most talked about queen.511tRocmLcL._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-v3-big,TopRight,0,-55_SX278_SY278_PIkin4,BottomRight,1,22_AA300_SH20_OU01_

Judith’s latest Tudor novel is Intractable Heart, the tale of Henry VIII’s sixth and last wife, Katherine Parr.
Judith also blogs about the Tudor period, both on her own blog-page and on the English Historical Fiction Author’s website. Her work reaches a world-wide audience, and her following is steadily increasing.
As a self-published author Judith maintains direct control of her work and avoids the hassle involved with agents and publishers. Self-publishing speeds up the process, but accuracy and attention to detail is paramount. Her small team is made up of three proofreaders, an editor, and a cover designer all of whom work with Judith toward a polished finished product.

Linking to Judith:
Website
Blog
Facebook
Twitter
Amazon Author Page

1980701_10152441075315890_1870538565_nAn excerpt from Intractable Heart
March 1543 – Hampton court
Being widowed for the second time is very different to before. Last time I was just twenty years old. I had just lost my mother, and the world was a vast and frightening place. I had little liking for my in-laws and so, with little money of my own, I turned to my friends and buried myself away in the north. But this time, I am comfortably left. I have influence. I have powerful friends and the ear of the king’s daughter.

I also have the admiration and, I hope, the love of Thomas Seymour. He has been paying me illicit attentions for months now, and I had half expected he was dallying with me and would disappear when my husband John died. But instead, he continues to call regularly, treating me like an ornament that will shatter should he speak too loudly. But although I may appear fragile in my grief, inside I am dancing a jig. For the first time in my life I am independent and can follow my own directives.

When Margaret agrees we should join the Lady Mary’s household I am delighted. My life so far has been spent in relative obscurity, far from the delights of court, the gossip and the intrigue. The only time I knew myself to by fully alive was during the siege at Snape, when the danger and conflict made the blood course like a raging river through my veins. But the excitement was short lived and as soon as it was over life returned to its habitual tepid trickle of muddy ennui.

I love clothes; I love jewellery; I love to dance, and I have not yet fully enjoyed any of those things. I have kept my inner-self repressed, my thoughts and beliefs hidden. Now, in Lady Mary’s household I can give my personality full rein – although perhaps, since Mary is so vigorously conservative, it will be as well to keep my views on church reform quiet.

But, just a few weeks into our engagement at court, Margaret has fallen ill. I tuck her into bed, feel her brow which is cool and dry, and ask delicate questions about her female condition. She has no sign of fever. There is no rash, no pain but she is pale and listless, constantly dissolving into tears for no reason at all. I mix a concoction of chervil and woodruff and wait while she drinks it. She pulls a face and hands me the empty cup.

“There,” I tuck the blankets around her. “Try to rest. I will send for some books to divert your mind but do not read for too long.”

Homer is curled into a tight ball on the bed beside her, her finger tips move gently in his coat. Her tragic white face reminds me of when she was a child at Snape. As I close the door I pretend not to see her composure crumple as she subsides into tears again. I don’t know what to do to help, perhaps weeping will relieve her.
Lady Mary will be waiting for me. I skim along the corridor, past the chapel where the choir is practicing, their soaring voices lifting spirits, infusing an ethereal peace throughout the palace. As I hurry through the outer chambers I spy Thomas, send him a fleeting smile as I pass. My heart beats a little faster but I cannot stop. I must wait until later when we have arranged to meet in the gardens.

“Ah, Lady Latimer.” Mary puts her book on her lap as I join her at the fireside. “I was just finding the place where you left off.” Her finger trails down the page, stops and taps three times on a red lettered word. “Here we are. This is it.”

She passes me the book and, still a little breathless from my haste, I begin to read. She lays her head on the back of her chair and closes her eyes. From time to time I look up to ensure she has not fallen asleep.

Although she is younger than I by a few years, she appears older. There is a perpetual crease between her eyes, making her seem cross and unapproachable but, in the company of friends, she is amiable and sweet tempered. Poor Mary, she has been through so much, there is little wonder she is so cautious, so serious. Born a princess, for the first few years of her life she enjoyed adulation from everyone but, when the king began to seek a divorce from Catherine, Mary’s life changed forever. Not only was she dispossessed as a princess, she was forced to bear the stigma of illegitimacy. The hand that was once sought by European princes is now spurned. No one is sure where she stands in the line of succession. It is doubtful if even the king himself remembers.

When the King and Catherine of Aragon parted Mary was separated from her mother, never saw her again. While Anne Boleyn was queen she was forced to act as an underling to the Princess Elizabeth. Mary being Mary of course, she came to adore her little half-sister and even now the girls keep up a correspondence.

It is only since the demise of the last queen, Katherine Howard, that Mary has regained some of her former standing. Until such time as her father remarries she assumes the role of hostess at court, and she does it well. Elizabeth, now also stripped of her title of princess, remains at Hatfield, banished and out of favour with her father. No-one at court knows Elizabeth very well although we are all curious about the offspring of the queen of whom we must not speak.
©juditharnopp2014

 Now that we have covered the customary author formatted interview, let us learn a bit more of Judith Arnopp, the person. So tell us, who was your first celebrity crush? Did you have posters of him all over your bedroom walls?

My first crush was Donny Osmond, and he was on my wall for a few years before I discovered Queen and Freddie Mercury. Fred is still my favourite musician, although I’ve taken the posters down now. The picture I’ve had the longest has been on my wall for almost forty years. It is a portrait of Richard III. I first became interested in Richard long before all the recent hype. In the 1970’s he was still widely regarded as a bit of a monster, but he became my teenage hero and is my eldest son’s namesake.

Do you have a passion for a particular cause or charity?
In my younger days I was a bit of an eco-warrior; but, although I still care very passionately about the environment, I have mellowed in my maturity. During the 70’s and 80’s when I first started to bang on about ‘green’ issues, I was regarded as ‘a bit of a nutter’; however, concern for the environment is more widespread now, and I have become normalized.  My family has been vegetarians for years. I try to use organic food wherever possible and bio-degradable packaging, etc., but it is very hard to be perfect, and I often lapse. We grow our own summer fruit and vegetables and to save trees my books are only available as print on demand, and I concentrate most of my marketing on the Kindle.

 What is your idea of perfect happiness?

My perfect day is usually spent at the coast (not far from home) walking the West Wales cliff path with my best friend/lover/husband, John. We stroll, have a picnic, watch the birds and the dolphins, and it is just a perfect lazy day, especially if it is sunny. We have been together for thirty odd years, and spending time together is still what we like to do best. Or at least, that is what he tells me.

Describe a bit of where you live now (in generalities). What drew you to settle in the area?
I am very, very lucky. It was a huge adventure for us when we moved our family from a town just north of London to West Wales about twenty years ago. Our children were growing up, and the world we lived in was fast and becoming a scarey place to raise kids. We came to Wales and have never regretted it for a moment.
We have a lovely smallholding with smashing views and perfect peace. The children were able to have as many pets as they could fit in: ponies and dogs and rabbits, chickens and goats. They were also able to roam the countryside safely. They are grown up now, but come home often; for most of the time these days John and I are on our own.
I don’t think I would have evolved into a professional author if we’d lived anywhere else: the silence gives me time to think and the long winter nights provide the perfect environment for studying and creating stories. Time has passed, and one by one the animals are dying off, and we are evolving. Now we just have one Welsh mountain pony and a daft Jack Russell. We run part of the smallholding as a holiday let, which writers and artists in particular find a haven of peace. Y Cwtch

In what hobbies or pastimes do you partake?
John and I both enjoy gardening, but should really down size to something smaller now. The garden is so large and demanding it doesn’t leave us enough time for walking and sketching, which we also enjoy. My back is beginning to resent the weeding, and I have had to employ a gardener to see to the lawns. The garden is very pretty and green, full of birds and is a lovely place to sit and contemplate my next project.

Tell us about the genre in which you have chosen to write. Why were you drawn to it?
It was natural for me to write historical novels. It was always my chosen reading genre, and after I graduated with an English and Creative Writing degree, I went on to take a Master’s degree in Medieval Studies. Since I had the combined skills of creative writing and history, I just fell naturally into historical fiction.

Who are your inspirations? Which authors influence your story choices or literary style?
They do say everything you ever read influences you in some way, so I have a great number of authors from which to choose. One of those I love and think have influenced me the most are Geoffrey Chaucer; I love his down-to-earth characters, who are as convincing and funny today as they were in the 14th century. I enjoyed Shakespeare from an early age too. When I was a little girl, my mum used to listen to recordings of Hamlet and Macbeth while she did the ironing, and I must have absorbed it while I was playing.
At school Shakespearean language just came naturally, and I did very well at that part of my English A level. I studied him again at university, and the plays were the favourite part of my course. Modern influences are people like Hilary Mantel and Michel Faber; I like literary characters who are so finely drawn one can scarcely tell he is reading. It is as if they are in the room or seem so real one might bump into them in town. I don’t like overdrawn, blousy, unlikely characters. I love Mantel’s Cromwell; I might not agree with every aspect of the character she has imagined, but I can completely believe the quiet, unobtrusive manner in which he deploys his agenda.

Do you have a favorite character or two amongst the many you have created?
My favourite has to be Joanie Toogood from The Winchester Goose. She is a prostitute from Southwark, and it is largely through Joanie’s eyes that the reader views the goings on at Henry VIII’s court. She is outspoken, prosaic, but very warm-hearted and funny. I also have a soft spot for Harold Godwinson from Peaceweaver. He is big, brave and, like all of us, flawed. It was horrible to have to kill him off at the Battle of Hastings, I felt I was destroying someone I love.

Do you feel your novels have a “message” or a particular theme? Or are your titles purely for entertainment?
I try to give women from history a voice. When the chronicles were written women were unimportant, their thoughts and feelings and, in some cases even their bravest actions, were air brushed from the record. I have to be careful not to make them too strong though. I wouldn’t want to have them behave in a manner that doesn’t ring true to the period. I think it is important to be faithful to the time in which one writes.

What is your writing environment like?
Oh, it is lovely. I am so lucky. I have a large study with a gorgeous view across the garden to the mountain beyond. My desk is big; it has to be to accommodate all my research books. The upper part of two walls are the bookshelves, overflowing with history books, and below there are storage cupboards for office supplies and boxes of first draft material.
I am watched as I work by a portrait of Richard III and another of Henry VIII. The fruit bowl is within arm’s reach, as is the phone so I don’t to leave the desk too often. Sometimes I sit here all day, only getting up to fetch coffee and lunch. It isn’t healthy, and I do try to make certain I take a couple of trips around the garden every day, but often I am so engrossed in my work I don’t notice how much time has passed.

Posted in book excerpts, British history, Great Britain, Industry News/Publishing, interview, Living in the UK, real life tales, Wales, writing | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

Editing 101: Homophones and Other Words Often Confused

Posted on June 24, 2014 by Regina Jeffers

editing2While editing, we must take comfort in the fact none of us can know everything about language choices. I know the frustration. There is nothing worse than to reread a passage six months after its publication and to spot an error in usage. It is impossible to catch every mistake. The challenge is to learn enough to reach a point where we are comfortable with our language choices. That being said, …

Discreet is being careful or confidential in what one reveals, while discrete means not attached – to be separate or distinct.

Accept means to receive, while except means to exclude or to omit. Everyone except the Republican candidate has accepted the invitation for the debate.

Effect is a noun meaning “result.” Affect is a verb meaning “to influence.” Where the confusion comes is effect can also be a verb meaning “to cause.” (For editing purposes, I find it easier to avoid effect used as a verb, finding better suited synonyms.)

Altogether means wholly. All together means every person and thing at the same place.

Assent means to agree, while ascent is an upward motion.

Dispute means to oppose, doubt or question the truth of a situation, whereas disprove means to prove to be false or in error. There is a difference in disputing the politician’s words and disproving them.

When used as a noun, blond generally refers to males, while blonde refers to females. When used as an adjective, blond is used for both genders.

Acute means intense or of great or critical importance, while chronic means prolonged, recurring or continuing over an extended time period.

Use dissociate, not disassociate when describing what people do when they remove themselves from an affiliation.

Passable means able to be passed or crossed – also barely satisfactory in quality. Passible means capable of feeling or sensitive.images-1

Advice is a noun meaning a recommendation, while advise is a verb meaning to counsel.

Naval refers to military ships (i.e, navy), while navel is the “bellybutton.”

Adverse means unfavorable (as in adverse weather), while averse means opposed to or having a distaste for.

Torturous means extreme pain or punishment. Tortuous meaning full of curves and bends, twisting or winding (The road ran along a tortuous course.).

The palate is the roof of one’s mouth. A palette is the board upon which an artist places his paints. A pallet is a simple bed or mattress (customarily made of straw).

Bemuse means to confuse, to bewilder, or to become lost in thought; amuse means to entertain or to hold another’s attention.

Pique means to excite(as in interest), to stimulate or to wound one’s pride. Peek means to take a brief look, customarily through a small opening. Peak is the highest point of elevation.

This one is a bit harder for both words can mean “to take for granted.” However, assume means to adopt (as in manners or dress), to undertake a duty, to affect, or to pretend to have (as in assuming another’s identity). Meanwhile, presume means to accept something as true until proved otherwise or to take upon yourself without permission or through a dare (as in ‘How dare you presume to speak for me?’).

Antidote means a substance administered to counteract the effects of a drug, while anecdote is a brief recounting of an interesting event.

Each other is used when two people, places or things are involved. One another is used for three or more.

Farther refers to distance, while further to refer to degree or extent.

Fewer is used for things which can be counted; less for bulk or quantity.

Unaware means not conscious of, while unawares means unexpected, without warning.

Persecute means to harass, while prosecute means to bring legal action against.

Are there any particular words you find difficult? How about the words which drive you a bit batty? Add them below, and we can take a closer look next time.images

 

 

Posted in editing, language choices, Uncategorized, word play | Tagged , , , | 4 Comments

West Virginia Day – June 20

Posted on June 20, 2014 by Regina Jeffers

West Virginia Day – June 20
Posted on June 20, 2011 by reginajeffers
June 20 celebrates the birth of my home state. West Virginia was founded in 1863. I just returned from WV on Sunday. I love driving the mountain roads, but I’m sure many others do not. They are intimidated by the curves. When I come out of the tunnel at Bluefield, the one which separates WV from Virginia, my heart always says “home.”

On June 20, 1863, West Virginia became the thirty-fifth state in the Union. The land that formed the new state formerly constituted part of Virginia. The two areas had diverged culturally from their first years of European settlement, as small farmers generally settled the western portion of the state, including the counties that later formed West Virginia, while the eastern portion was dominated by a powerful minority class of wealthy slaveholders. There were proposals for the trans-Allegheny west to separate from Virginia as early as 1769. When Virginia seceded from the Union in 1861, the residents of a number of contiguous western counties, where there were few slaves, decided to remain in the Union. Congress accepted these counties as the state of West Virginia on condition that its slaves be freed. “Montani semper liberi,” “mountaineers always freemen,” became the new state’s motto.tsusa_img_virginia_hawksnest

Posted in West Virginia | Tagged | 2 Comments

Oh the Places You Will Go…The Places Prominent in Jane Austen’s Life

Posted on June 18, 2014 by Regina Jeffers

The grand country estates and locations used in the film adaptations of Jane Austen’s novels often lead her fans into believing that “our Jane” lived in some of Britain’s finest homes. But where, oh where, did Jane Austen call home?

Steventon Rectory in Hampshire
steventonrectory The Steventon Rectory was Jane Austen’s birthplace. She lived at Steventon until she was five and twenty, from 1775-1801. It was a 17th Century property surrounding by large fields and sporting an attached farm. The Rectory is no longer standing, but St Nicholas Church, where Reverend Austen was the rector, can be seen. However, please remember that if you go to Hampshire that St Nicholas burned down and was rebuilt in 1872.

Bath
In 1800, Reverend Austen considered retirement. Because the Austens had met and married in Bath, the resort city became their destination. In May 1801, the Austens moved into a temporary “home.” In September, they found more permanent accommodations. They finally moved into 4 Sydney Place. There’s a plaque outside the house to commemorate Jane Austen’s years at the house. Because it was much smaller than their Steventon home, the Austens sold off Reverend Austen’s library and the pianoforte.

Southampton and Godmersham
With the passing of Reverend Austen in 1805, Jane, her mother, and her sister Cassandra found themselves in poor financial straits. The Austen took on the support of their mother and sisters. In 1806, the women moved in with Frank Austen and his new wife in Southampton. In 1808, they went to stay with Edward Austen at his Godmersham estate in Kent.

Chawton

Chawton Cottage

Chawton Cottage

In 1808, Edward lost his wife to childbirth. After this tragedy, he offered a six-bedroom cottage on another of his estates to his family. The women moved into the Chawton cottage in Hampshire, which was close to the Steventon property upon which they had once lived. By this time, James Austen was the Steventon rector. Jane published four novels while living at Chawton. She finished a fifth and started a sixth one during those years.

Winchester
grave By 1816, Jane was no longer able to write. Her illness had progressed. In May 1817, her family took Jane to Winchester so that she might be near her physician, Giles King Lyford. They moved in with their old friends, the Biggs, at 10 College Street. In July 1817, Jane Austen lost her fight with her illness. She passed peacefully. She is buried at Winchester Cathedral.

Posted in buildings and structures, Great Britain, Jane Austen, Living in the Regency, Pride and Prejudice, real life tales, Regency era, Regency personalities | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Oh the Places You Will Go…The Places Prominent in Jane Austen’s Life