Sunday, December 26, 2010

A Fine Taste for Scarlet and Miniver


If you are an Eleanor of Aquitaine admirer, as I am, or simply a fan of strong women in medieval times, this book, by E.L. Konigsberg, is for you.

Eleanor, Duchess of Aquitaine, became Queen of France when she married Louis VII (The Pious), but she bore no male heirs. One day Eleanor went from prayers in the chapel with Louis out to her garden, where she took one look at young, handsome Henry Plantagenet and subsequently wangled a divorce from Louis. Shortly thereafter came a formal invitation into Henry's bed as Queen of England.

Eleanor bore many illustrious children, including Richard the Lionhearted and (later)
John, who "inherited" Ireland, became king after Richard, and signed the Magna Carta.

While still married to Louis, Eleanor satisfied her taste for culture and luxury by going on crusade with her husband to Constantinople and beyond. She was indefatigable and later, at age 84, the queen crossed the Pyrenees to secure a bride for her son Richard.

Eleanor, together with her daughter Marie de Champagne, established the tradition of "courtly love" and hosted poets and troubadours wherever they went.

This novel is a witty, sly re-telling of Eleanor's story from the points of view of Queen Mother Mathilda (wife of Henry I); French cleric and diplomatic wizard Abbot Suger; King Louis of France (Eleanor's first husband); and the knight William [the] Marshal, protector of the royals. The stories are shared as they wait in heaven (termed "Up") for the arrival of Eleanor's husband, Henry, from "Down There."

The book is imaginative and fun to read; the writing is lively; and you gain a wonderful insight into the thinking of the royals and their ministers, along with their antics, anguishes, and achievements.

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED.



Sources: A Fine Taste for Scarlet and Miniver by E.L. Konigsberg; The Book of Eleanor by Pamela Kaufman; Eleanor of Aquitaine, by Regine Pernoud.

Saturday, December 25, 2010

Happy Christmas!

We hope everyone is having a merry holiday season! The Hoydens will be taking a break through New Years, but we'll see you in 2011 with lots of new books and new historical tidbits.

And yes, that's a tree dressed as a giant Christmas Pudding.

Wednesday, December 22, 2010

A Little Bit of Christmas

An English Christmas conjures up all sorts of images: mulled cider and carols, candle-decked trees and frost-laced windows. You've got to hand it to the Victorians, they knew how to do Christmas well. Or, as that ultimate Victorian of the Victorians, Charles Dickens put it, "and it was always said of him, that he knew how to keep Christmas well, if any man alive possessed the knowledge".

This, however, poses a slight problem for those of us who dwell (metaphorically, at least) in those eras prior to the introduction of the Victorian English Christmas. My latest book, The Mischief of the Mistletoe, was set in Bath in 1803. As you've probably deduced from the title, it is a Christmas book. This meant a fair amount of scrounging around to try to figure out exactly how Jane Austen would have celebrated Christmas. (I'd like to say that was also meant metaphorically, but, since Jane Austen was coopted for a cameo in the book, I really did need to know how she would have celebrated the holiday season).

Here are a few of the more interesting things I learned. Holly and ivy? Absolutely. Christmas trees? In the immortal words of HMS Pinafore (more Victorians! They're everywhere!): "What never? Well, hardly ever." I'd always thought the Christmas tree was entirely a Victorian addition, brought to England with Prince Albert. It turns out that it actually came over a little earlier, with Queen Charlotte (formerly of Mecklenburg-Strelitz), who put up a Christmas tree in 1800. It didn't catch on. My characters would, however, have had plenty of greenery and seen the blazing Yule before them.

Which brings us to another Victorianism: Christmas carols. There were certainly Christmas songs and hymns, but Christmas caroling, as such, only became popular in the reign of Victoria. In fact, the entire Christmas season had a slightly different complexion. Whereas, for us, the big show is Christmas Eve and Christmas Day, the earlier English Christmas comprised all Twelve Days of Christmas (I make no promises about the inclusion of partridges or pear trees), with the major celebration taking place on Twelfth Night.

What would Christmas be without Christmas pudding? My book involved a lot of Christmas pudding. It turns out we have George I to thank for that. Plum pudding, it seems, had rather fallen out of favor until the monarch put it back on the map in 1714. There are all sorts of interesting traditions around the pudding. Some claim that the thirteen ingredients are meant to represent Christ and the Twelve Apostles, while the holly garnish stands in for the crown of thorns, and that one is supposed to stir the pudding three times in honor of the Three Kings. My favorite of the Christmas pudding traditions included making a wish as one stirred the pudding and the practice of hiding coins, gold rings, thimbles, or, in humbler households, a bean and a pea, in the pudding, with those who found the item being proclaimed Queen of the Feast or Lord of Misrule, given a prize, or simply getting to go home with the coin, depending on which tradition people were following.

What really struck me, though, was just how much Christmas traditions varied by region or even by town, with all sorts of ideosyncratic local practices-- much as we all have our own bizarre family holiday traditions.

What's your favorite (or quirkiest!) family holiday tradition?

p.s. Speaking of holiday traditions, I'll be following one of my own this Christmas. Two years ago, I wrote a free Christmas novella as a present for my readers. I'll be posting it on my website again this year on Christmas Eve. Just visit my News page on December 24th to find it!

Tuesday, December 21, 2010

A Glass of Cheer



Today is the Winter Solstice, the shortest day of the year. I’d like to salute winter with a good drink, or chase the chill out of my bones in a time-honored fashion. Yes, I do like to know exactly what my characters ate so I can imagine the tastes and the scents.

George Washington and Robert E. Lee both enjoyed eggnog, a delightful concoction of eggs, cream, and brandy. (Or eggs, cream, brandy, whiskey, and sherry, in Washington’s case.) Or, from my grandmother…

Three dozen eggs, three pounds of sugar, half a gallon of brandy, half a pint of French brandy, half a gallon of milk. Beat the yolks and whites separately. Stir the sugar thoroughly into the yolks, add the brandy slowly so as to cook the eggs, then add the milk, and lastly the whites, with cinnamon and grated nutmeg, reserving enough for top dressing.

I think Dickens and Austen would have enjoyed it.

Cavalry punch, as drunk by officers at Fort Laramie and Fort Lincoln, was composed of very strong tea mixed with rum and homemade blackberry wine. A recipe for artillery punch from the same era calls for a pound of gunpowder green tea steeped overnight in two gallons of cold water, then mixed with rum, sauterne, brandy, whiskey, gin, sugar, cherries and other fruit, plus dry champagne. Just in case, you thought there weren’t quite enough alcoholic spirits involved, several modern cavalry regiments celebrate their storied histories at big parties by pouring a new variety of alcohol into a punch bowl every time they list another campaign. Given how long some of them have been around, there are a few dozen types of booze from multiple continents swishing around there. (Okay, I admit I wonder about other countries’ regiments’ drinking traditions.)

I just turned in “Talbot’s Ace,” my novella for next July’s Improper Gentlemen anthology. It takes place during the depths of winter in a 19th century mining town, and features several saloons. My family vacations while growing up featured many trips to Wild West towns, including historic restaurants and saloons. But researching this story gave me the excuse to delve deeper into matters like lighting and beverages. I must say that all those old horse operas my father and foster father loved to watch never hinted at bars which served only beer. Or who knew that Englishmen complained even then that Americans corrupted their alcoholic beverages with ice?

The original cocktail was a Sazerac cocktail, invented in New Orleans. The second place it could be found was Denver. Or how about Deadwood’s fascination with gin cocktails? It basically consisted of gin, bitters, and simple syrup (or gum syrup). Deadwood Dick invented the Yellow Daisy, which contained 2 glasses gin, 2 glasses French vermouth, 1 glass Grand Marnier, plus a dash of absinthe before shaking. Honestly, those ingredients sound more like The Great Gatsby than Deadwood to me.

But those recipes, glamorous though they might be, involve ice. I’d like to focus on nice, warm, comforting thoughts. Like hot toddies or perhaps a rum punch.

A very simple recipe for rum punch, which I’ve never tried, states “Make a rich, sweet lemonade, add rum and brandy to taste, only dashing with brandy. It must be sweet and strong.”

Care to suggest a hot toddy recipe? What’s your favorite recipe for a good, old-fashioned winter drink or a scene featuring a good winter drink?


Friday, December 17, 2010

Mashups and Revisionings:The Romance of Shared, Imagined Worlds

This will be a quick one, (even without pix,which blogger seems to be ignoring today). Because I'm trying to finish up a publishable version for the Journal of Popular Romance Studies of what I spoke about last summer in Belgium: Queer Theory, male/male romance by women for women, and what we can learn from one about the other. With proper academic citations and proof of argument -- which, I find, is particularly challenging as I lack much advanced academic background and as a fiction writer being used to making stuff up.

Still, it's been interesting, especially when I try to analyze my friend Ann Herendeen's bisexual take on Pride and Prejudice, Pride/Prejudice -- and as I trace its roots back to slash fan fiction. I wrote about this sub-genre a while back -- the amazingly popular grouping of do-it-yourself female Star Trek fans, who loved to share their own made-up alternate Universe wherein Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock maintain a hot and also tender erotic relationship. Kirk/Spock fiction it was called. Kirk SLASH Spock... giving rise, some two decades later, to Pride/Prejudice.

But I'd never read any of it until recently, when I got hold of one of the old zines, called Naked Times, and featuring, to my fascination, a story that I learned was a respected classic in the genre, the very hot and sweet 1979 "Desert Heat," by Gayle Feyrer, who some decades later wrote some well-loved and highly prized historical romances, under her own name and as Taylor Chase.

Connections everywhere... and to me the connections seemed particularly apposite since a few weeks ago I attended my first JASNA (Jane Austen Society of North America) conference, and found myself feeling like... well, like I imagine a Trekkie feels at their conventions, engulfed in the warmth of shared knowledge of a world and a population that seems, when you talk about it with other fans, almost as real as our own. "What would Eleanor Tilney say to that?" we asked each other -- or particularly dearly to my heart, "What did the maddeningly quiet Jane Fairfax think at that moment?" (I've got my own answers to that one on my hard drive that I hope will someday make it to print, in a work-in-progress currently called Jane Fairfax's Dream, though my husband likes to call it Bad Mr. Knightley.)

Connections and questions. About why romance -- and popular culture in general at this time -- lends itself so readily to mashups and revisionings. Why do the stories become so much our own, and so shared and beloved, that we want to bring the "hidden parts" into view? As, of course, some of our Hoydens have done, with Lauren's intrepid graduate student heroine on the trail of the "real" Pimpernel, and Janet's disclosure of what really happened during Jane Austen's trip to Bath and an encounters with a sexy bunch of vampires. Or even, on a less fan-fiction note, how Tracy and I have attempted to tell some of the "real" stories of political struggle under the glamorous Regency surface.

Readers, writers, and those hybrid reader/writers among you: Why do we love to retellings so much?

What are some of your own attempts (perhaps, still, like mine, in progress)?

And what are some of your published (or filmed or televised) favorite mashups, revisitings, and revisionings?

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

William & Kate: Why Their Wedding Will Be Historical




On November 16, Prince William of Wales announced his engagement to his girlfriend of more than eight years, Catherine (Kate) Middleton. It was the moment that millions had been waiting for with bated breath.

Royal-watchers released said breath with a joyful exhalation and then began bloviating about what it all meant (mine to follow); and manufacturers from Stoke-on-Trent to Shanghai released the work orders for the commemorative tchotchkes: the tea towels, plates, thimbles, and spoons, and all manner of junk that in fifty years' time will become treasured scraps of memorabilia.


But there is something exciting about a royal wedding, especially this royal wedding. William's parents did not wed in love. On July 29, 1981, when those of us who watched Charles and Diana walk down the aisle of Westminster Abbey, could we have imagined the sorrow that lay ahead and the tragedy that would end Diana's life at the age of 36? William and Kate give us the chance to believe in a royal happily-ever-after again.


And there is an added significance to William's choice of bride. You've heard ad nauseum that Kate Middleton (she will be known as Princess Catherine after her royal wedding on April 29, 2011) is a "commoner."


Well, Diana, was a commoner, too. So was Elizabeth the Queen Mum, born Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon. A commoner is someone who is not of royal birth. BUT in the past, the heirs to the throne have wed commoners who were born to the purple, of noble lineage. For example, the Queen Mum was the daughter of the 14th Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne. Diana's father was the eighth Earl Spencer and her noble lineage goes back several generations farther than the Windsors' does.

What makes Kate Middleton special is that her background is not remotely aristocratic. Her father Michael was a flight dispatcher and airline officer for BA, where her mother Carole (née Goldsmith, as was I -- so I'll be eagerly anticipating my wedding invitation) was a flight attendant. The entrepreneurial Carole Middleton later started a party planning company for children, Party Pieces, which took off, so to speak, landing the family in financial clover. Consequently, through the dint of her parents' hard work, Kate was able to grow up in soft surroundings and attend the best schools.




The last time an heir presumptive to the British throne wed a true commoner--one absent all aristocratic blood--was in 1660 when the younger brother of Charles II, James, Duke of York (the future James II; 1633-1701), clandestinely wed the zaftig . brunette Anne Hyde (1637-1671).


Here's the story of James and Anne, excerpted from my book ROYAL AFFAIRS: A Lusty Romp Through the Extramarital Adventures That Rocked the British Monarchy.

The prodigiously buxom and flirtatious Anne Hyde was the daughter of Edward Hyde, a Wiltshire lawyer who turned to politics, becoming Charles II’s chancellor. Her contemporaries noted her intelligence, though they admitted she was not very pretty; in fact, Anne was most often described as a cow. A hearty eater during an era when slenderness was the vogue at court, the girl’s booty came in for some serious ribbing in a popular rhyme:
With chanc’lor’s belly, and so large a rump,
There, not behind the coach, her pages jump.

For several years before the Restoration, Anne had been a maid of honor to Mary, the Princess Royal, sister of Charles and James. But it was in Paris at the exiled court of the Queen Mother Henrietta Maria where Anne first met Mary’s brother James, the Duke of York.
The stuttering duke was stiff and reserved, with a downer of a personality, but by all accounts, James, tall, blue-eyed, and fair, was even more of a rake than his less classically handsome brother, Charles. It certainly wasn’t charm or affability that was the chick magnet—in fact, James was considered rather slow and plodding, particularly compared to the exceptionally bright and witty Charles. But then again, James didn’t attract the beauties of the age, as did his elder brother. On James’s embracing of Catholicism as well as loose women, Charles observed,
“My brother will lose his throne for his principles and his soul for a bunch of ugly trollops.” He jested that James’s mistresses were so universally hideous that his priests must have given them to the duke as penance.
With Anne Hyde, however, “dismal Jimmy” (as Charles’s famously clever mistress Nell Gwyn called him) must have scintillated. Apparently their affair grew passionate after the exiled court had moved to The Hague. After the Restoration, Anne’s father sent for her, and she returned to London, fat and glowing—but as Anne was always fat and glowing, her father didn’t notice that she was also pregnant.
Hyde should have congratulated himself on the fact that his daughter had inherited his canny political skills, because in August 1659, Anne had successfully convinced the duke to sign a marriage contract. After that, they cohabited intermittently and clandestinely as man and wife.
On Anne’s return to England, realizing they’d be caught sooner or later, James sneaked into Worcester House, her father’s home, with an Anglican chaplain in tow. The chaplain married Anne and James in a private ceremony on September 3, 1660. Only after they were legally wed did Anne’s new husband throw himself upon the king’s mercy, begging him to allow them to publicly marry.
King Charles summoned Chancellor Hyde, a portly Polonius who had known nothing of his daughter’s affairs until the news was broken to him by two of his friends, the Marquis of Ormonde and the Earl of Southampton. Hyde assured the monarch that as soon as he got home to Worcester House, he would toss Anne out into the street as a strumpet. At the suggestion that Anne might actually be married, the politician then changed his tack, ranting that he would sooner see his daughter be the king’s whore than the duke’s wife—and if Anne were really married to James, she should be thrown into a dungeon in the Tower of London and an Act of Parliament passed to behead her.
“And I shall be the first man to propose that to Parliament!” Hyde shouted.
Charles endeavored to smooth things over, but poor Anne ended up locked in her room. However, Anne’s sympathetic mother managed to sneak the duke into her daughter’s chamber for conjugal visits.
But Anne, a mere commoner, had unintentionally created an international incident.
The Queen Mum, Henrietta Maria, came over from Paris “to prevent so great a stain and dishonor to the Crown.” Then a group of courtiers was enlisted to convince James of his wife’s rampant promiscuity—and therefore, her unsuitability to be his duchess. Anne was traduced by men who had never even met her, all claiming to have bedded her. It seemed that every man in England had crawled out of the woodwork to testify to Anne’s lasciviousness, each sworn statement more outlandish than the last.
Charles didn’t believe a word of it, and assured his increasingly livid chancellor that his daughter was being unjustly slandered. As Anne lay abed, the birth of her baby imminent, the king sent his most trusted ladies to attend her.
But that wasn’t the end of it. Anne, shrieking with labor pains, was forced to endure another torment. The oh-so-sensitive Bishop of Winchester visited her bedside and demanded, “Whose child is it of which you are in labor? Have you known any man other than the Duke of York?” Anne responded in the negative, and probably spat out a lot of other negative things to the bishop besides.
Enter Henrietta Maria, in high dudgeon at Dover, ready to defend her son’s good name and tar Chancellor Hyde with the brush of treachery for daring to marry an undeserving creature of his own lowly brood into the royal house—little realizing that she and the chancellor were on the same side.
Charles stepped in and averted a crisis by making Hyde a baron, with a gift of £20,000 (well over $4.3 million today) to sustain the honor. By the time the groom’s mother reached London, she was greeted by the bride’s father, now Baron Hyde of Hindon, a peer of the realm. The following year Charles made Hyde Earl of Clarendon.
The dowager queen’s argument about the worthiness of Anne Hyde’s family had thus been gracefully nipped in the bud, and eventually, Henrietta Maria grew to accept her new daughter-in-law.
Anne was clearly the dominant partner in the marriage, yet she could not prevent James from returning to his rakish ways soon after their union was legalized in the eyes of family and state. “The duke is in all things but his codpiece led by the nose,” Samuel Pepys observed.
Anne coped with her husband’s frequent infidelities by overeating. She was also perpetually pregnant, giving birth to eight children in nearly as many years, but only two daughters, Mary and Anne, survived to adulthood. The rest died in infancy.
After suffering from cancer for three years, Anne finally succumbed to the disease in 1671, a few weeks after giving birth to her eighth child. In her final days, she also became a secret convert to Catholicism.
One evening after enjoying a hearty dinner at Burlington House, Anne retired to pray, and then collapsed in the chapel. A frantic James sent for the Bishop of Oxford, but by the time he arrived, Anne was incoherent.
She died at St. James’s Palace in her husband’s arms, with the words “Duke, Duke, death is terrible. Death is very terrible.” She was buried in Westminster Abbey.
Anne’s two daughters each went on to become Queen of England, and both would make their mark in British history. Mary, born on April 30, 1662, would marry William of Orange and become a key player in the Glorious Revolution that would overthrow her own father and place herself and her husband on the English throne. Her younger sister, Anne, born on the sixth of February in 1665, would inherit her mother’s corpulence as well as her father’s crown. Under Queen Anne, England and Scotland were combined into a single nation in the Act of Union signed on May 1, 1707, thereby making Anne Hyde’s younger daughter—the issue of the woman who was such a “stain and dishonor to the Crown”—the first monarch of Great Britain.

So, are you a royal watcher? Do the impending nuptials of William and Kate have you excited or are you more fascinated with their place in the pageant of history?

Friday, December 10, 2010

Holiday Wish List: Books, Books and More Books


'Tis the season: things are slowing down at my day job and I finally have the chance (I hope) to catch up on my reading! Nothing beats sitting by the fireplace late at night, reading by the low lights and glow of holiday decorations---my wish list is naturally longer than "War and Peace" but my preference for a good historical tale, romance or otherwise, comes shining through. Here are my top picks this year:

1. Cleopatra, A Life, by Pulitzer Prize winning author, Stacy Schiff. Everything I've heard about this book is spectacular. Move over Philippa Gregory, from the excerpts I've read and the reviews, Ms. Schiff has done for ancient Egypt what Ms. Gregory did for Tudor England. Here's a bit from the New York Times review: "Ms. Schiff waves onto the stage Cleopatra’s Alexandria in all its splendor and beauty: its gleaming marble edifices, the oversize sphinxes and falcons that lined the paths to the city’s Greek temples, the Doric tombs decorated with crocodile gods in Roman dress. She enables the reader to see Cleopatra’s court — her elaborate retinue of tasters, scribes, lamplighters, royal harpists, masseurs, pages, doorkeepers, notaries, silver stewards, oil keepers and pearl sorters — and to picture her fleet of royal barges, equipped with gyms, libraries, shrines to Dionysus and Aphrodite, gardens, grottos, lecture halls, spiral staircases, copper baths, stables and aquariums." Ms Schiff portray her Cleopatra as the ultimate heroine: "Her death , an honorable death, a dignified death, an exemplary death,” over which she presided herself, “proud and unbroken to the end” — even won over her detractors, Ms. Schiff observes: “by the Roman definition she had at last done something right; finally it was to her credit that she had defied the expectations of her sex.”

I can't wait to read this book. And BTW, check out the beautiful cover. When I first saw it, I thought this was some kind of Regency-Cleopatra-Story. But I saw the author in an interview (on the Daily Show, no less) who said as soon as she was seated, "The cover is historically accurate. A Queen in ancient Egypt would have worn pearl earrings and pearls threaded through her hair." After that, I got this sort of "you had me at hello" feeling.


2.Lady of Hay by Barbara Erskine, a kind of time-travel history. The heroine is hypnotized to regress to the twelfth century in Wales where she re-lives her previous life as Matilda, hanged for treason. Guaranteed to please the lover of Gabaldon's books, as quoted from Geraldine Ketchum on suite101.com. This book has just been re-released.

3. Sarum by Edward Rutherfurd tells the history of a family and a village in England from prehistory to modern times. Somehow, I missed this book. Good thing it seems to be perpetually in print!

What's on your wish-list this season? Any new books that have grabbed your attention? Romance, historical fiction or other?

Wednesday, December 8, 2010

Literary Happy Holidays


In the midst of finishing a draft, starting on revisions, and holiday decorating and shopping (so much left to do!) I found time to curl up with Lauren's The Mischief of the Mistletoe. It was an absolute delight. I tried to use it as writing motivation by telling myself I could read a section if I wrote so many words, but I ended up reading way more than I was supposed to. One of the many things I loved about it was sharing the holidays with favorite characters at a Christmas house party hosted by the Dowager Duchess of Dovedale.

I've always liked stories set during the holidays. There's something fun and fascinating about seeing how celebrations are both familiar and different with different characters, in different historical eras. A familiar frame, filled in in myriad ways. I confess, though I love most Dickens, A Christmas Carol has never been a favorite of mine. But growing up, I was fascinated by the glimpses into holidays in another era with the Christmas scenes in Little Women and also the Hanukah scene in the All of a Kind Family books. Emma has key scenes that take place at Christmas celebrations and Pride and Prejudice has the Gardiners' Christmas visit. Brideshead Revisited has Charles's Boxing Day arrival at Brideshead (vividly captured in the miniseries) moving into New Year's. Barbara Hambly's Darwath fantasy trilogy takes place in a parallel universe, but there's a major scene that takes place at a midwinter festival. Like The Mischief of the Misteltoe, Deanna Raybourn's Silent in the Sanctuary also offers a delightful (if dangerous) Christmas house party.

Writing this post, I realized a lot of my favorite holiday stories are television episodes. I write this I'm watching a Christmas-season episode of House as I write this post (not surprisingly, it steers well clear of sentimentality). The X-Files episode "How the Ghosts Stole Christmas" is probably my favorite holiday story ever. One of my holiday traditions is to watch it as I wrap packages. And of course Mulder and Scully had their first kiss on New Year's Eve (I usually watch "Millennium" while I'm dressing for New Year's Eve).

My mom and I wrote two Christmas novellas when we were writing traditional Regencies as Anthea Malcolm. They were a lot of fun to do. It's a bit of a challenge to write a Regency-set Christmas story, as so much of what we now associate with the holiday (such as Christmas trees) became popular in England in the time of Victoria and her German husband Albert. But one still has Yule logs and wassail bowls, mistletoe, pine boughs, and spiced wine.

I hadn't dealt with the winter holiday season in any of my novels until my forthcoming Vienna Waltz. Vienna Waltz takes place at the Congress of Vienna in late November 1814. A year ago, I was revising my first draft. I knew I needed a epilogue to wrap up some plot lines, but I hadn't written it yet. At a holiday show that included some early 19th century Christmas music, it occurred to me that I could set the epilogue during the holiday season.

Which tied in nicely with my research. Dorothée de Talleyrand-Périgord, Prince Talleyrand's niece-by-marriage (his nephew's wife) and his hostess at the Congress (and very likely later his mistress but that's another post) gave a party at the French Embassy at the Kaunitz Palace on Christmas Eve 1814. Dorothée is a major character in Vienna Waltz, and her Christmas Eve party became the setting for my epilogue. I was even able to include a Christmas tree. Dorothée had one by the staircase in the Kaunitz Palace and set quite a fashion at the Congress. It was called "Christmas Berlin style." Which made me realize in future books I could have my hero and heroine take the tradition back to Britain, long before Victoria and Albert made decorated trees part of a traditional English Christmas. As I writer I find it a challenge not to make a holiday scenes too sentimental. But in this case I think--I hope--the setting ended up being an interesting contrast to some of more disturbing revelations the characters are still dealing with in the epilogue.


What are some of your favorite holiday-set stories? Writers, have you written stories set during the holidays? What are some of the particular challenges?

Monday, December 6, 2010

Welcome, Laurel McKee!

Duchess of Sin (book two, Daughters of Erin)
by Laurel McKee
Available Now!
Excerpt

Blonde and beautiful Lady Anna Blacknall is in the mood for mischief. Entering Dublin's most notorious den of vice, she finds herself in the arms of a mysterious, emerald-eyed Irishman. And although he is masked, his tender kiss is hauntingly familiar.


Conlan McTeer, Duke of Adair, has come to Dublin to fight for a free Ireland. But he's suddenly reunited with the young Englishwoman who had once claimed his heart, and his passion turns from politics to pleasure. When their sizzling encounter brings danger to Anna's door, she must decide where her loyalties lie-and quickly. For someone will do whatever it takes to destroy Conlan . . . and anyone he dares to love.


Duchess of Sin is set in Ireland in 1800. Is there a particular reason you chose that year?

Thanks so much for inviting me to visit the Hoydens today! I love this blog, and am always learning new, fascinating things here. I chose that year because 1) the first book in this series, “Countess of Scandal,” took place in 1798, and I needed the heroine of “Duchess”, Anna, to grow up a bit before she got her own story!  Also it’s the year the official Act of Union between England and Ireland took place, with much drama and upheaval, and I needed that to be the story’s background. (It also happened to be Christmastime, and I got to research fun Irish Christmas traditions as a bonus!)

How did you become interested in this time period? What you love about it?

I’ve always been fascinated by Irish history! I grew up hearing stories of history and mythology at my grandparents’ house, and it always sounded like such a beautiful, dramatic place full of larger-than-life characters and romance. I also love the Georgian period, especially in Ireland—the fashions, the wild parties, the gorgeous architecture, the dangerous background of the times! It just took me a while to find the right characters for the setting…

What do you like least about this period? Anything that constrained you or that you had to plot carefully around?

The real history of the times! I wouldn’t say I like it “least”—it’s fascinating stuff, and full of suspense and danger, but it’s also very complicated. Before I even started writing the Daughters of Erin series, I had to read a lot and try to figure it all out in my own mind. We’re used to thinking in terms of “good guys versus bad guys,” but in this period it was not nearly so clear-cut. So many Irish were also English and vice versa, and the issues of the day were complex and very deeply felt. The vast majority of my research didn’t make it into the stories themselves, or they’re just background, but I felt like I needed to understand it if I was to create the right atmosphere! I’m not sure I still totally understand, but I did enjoy the research. 

Anything you flat-out altered or “fudged”? If so, why?

No, everything that’s in there I found in the research somewhere! That’s one of the fun things about these books (to me, anyway!). I was tempted to spend more time describing fashions and furniture, but I restrained myself!

Any gaffs or mea culpas you want to fess up to before readers get their hands on the book? I know I always seem to find one after the book has gone to press. *sigh*

LOL! That’s why I never really read them after they’re “real books.” I just know I would find something and would get upset about it when there’s nothing I can do about it! I’m sure there is something there I wouldn’t like…

Tell us a little about your hero. Something fun, like his favorite childhood pet, or his first kiss.

I do love Conlan so much! He’s a duke, with the accompanying deep sense of responsibility and duty, but also dark and brooding and wild, with green eyes and Celtic tattoos (I sort of pictured Richard Armitage as I wrote!). I know his childhood pet was a beloved pony, because he’s a great rider as an adult!

At first I had a hard time finding the right name for him, but a friend came to my rescue. Her son is named Conlan, which she said meant “hero”—perfect! (but her son is only 3 now, so it will be a while before he can read his namesake’s story)

What sparked this book? Was it a character? An historical event? A scene you just couldn’t get out of your head?

I knew when I started this series there would be 3 books, and Anna would be the second heroine. But I wasn’t sure who her hero would be, or what would happen to her. Then Conlan appeared in the first book and they sort of took over their scenes together, and in my research I discovered the upheaval around the Union and all the great people and stories around it.

Did you have to do any major research for this book? Did you stumble across anything really interesting that you didn’t already know?

For the first book, I read a huge amount about the 1798 Uprising, but luckily I already knew something about it and it was easy to find resources. I knew very little about the Act of Union, except that it made the United Kingdom “official” and there was a great deal of skullduggery and corruption about it. I basically had to start from scratch. I also had to find out what life would be like for a duke with an Irish title like Conlan, which was fascinating! And Christmas—that kept it fun

What/Who do you like to read?

I am not a very discriminating reader! I will read anything and everything that looks remotely interesting. Luckily that can be “research” or “inspiration” now and not shirking my chores, as I was accused of when I was a kid and hid out with a Nancy Drew book in my closet for hours! I read lots of historical non-fiction, romance, mysteries, literary fiction, etc. I’m very obsessed with steampunk at the moment! (And when the holidays start to feel overwhelming, I burrow under the covers with an Austen or Bronte novel. It’s like hanging out with old friends)

Care to share a bit about your writing process? Are you a pantser or a plotter? Do you write multiple drafts or clean up as you go?

I’m pretty much a pantser! I’ve tried writing out charts and scene boards and stuff like that (I have a weird love of office supplies, so I love messing with colored sticky notes and highlighters), but it just doesn’t work for me. I end up spending most of my time changing the charts. To get to know characters and their stories I just have to sit down and write them. Sometimes they surprise me that way, or run away from me, but it’s what works for me! And by the time I finish a book I’m pretty tired of it and ready to go on to the next project, so I try to make it as clean as possible the first time.

What are you planning to work on next?

The third Daughters of Erin book, Lady of Seduction (Caroline’s story! She’s the bluestocking sister, so of course I love her) is out in June 2011! There’s a hint of her tale, and we meet her hero, in Duchess of Sin. And my other self, Amanda McCabe, has a book out in March 2011, The Shy Duchess (a spin-off from the Diamonds of Welbourne Manor anthology). It’s duchesses all the time around here!

If anyone is interested in more of the history behind these stories, I have info and sources on my website, http://laurelmckee.net! Plus excerpts, pics, and a fun contest…

Thanks so much for having me here today!

Friday, December 3, 2010

Elmore Leonard's 10 Rules of Writing


I couldn’t resist this book. I’m looking to simplify my life and tighten my writing style, and I admire Leonard’s lean, eloquent, often unexpectedly moving prose. So I thought maybe I’d share his admonitions.

Rule 1: Never open a book with weather.

I guess . . . unless you’re Jack London describing snow or Zane Grey describing the purple sage and the sky.

Rule 2: Avoid prologues.

“A prologue in a novel is backstory, and you can drop it in anywhere you want. There is a prologue in John Steinbeck’s Sweet Thursday, but it’s okay because a character in the book makes the point of what my rules are all about. [One character] says: ‘I like a lot of talk in a book and I don’t like to have nobody tell me what the guy that’s talking looks like.”

Sweet Thursday came out in 1954, when I was just beginning to be published and I’ve never forgotten that prologue.”

Rule 3: Never use a verb other than “said” to carry dialogue.

“Said” is far less intrusive than ‘grumbled, gasped, cautioned, lied.’ Or his most disliked word, used by Mary McCarthy: ‘asseverated.’”

Rule 4: Never use an adverb to modify the verb “said.”

As in “he admonished gravely...”

Rule 5: Keep your exclamation points under control.

“You are allowed no more than two or three per 100,000 words of prose.”
Aw, heck.

Rule 6: Never use the words “suddenly” or “all Hell broke loose.”

“I have noticed that writers who use ‘suddenly’ tend to exercise less control in the application of exclamation points.”

Rule 7: Use regional dialect, patois, sparingly.

“Notice the way Annie Proulx captures the flavor of Wyoming voices in her book of short stories Close Range.”

Rule 8: Avoid detailed descriptions of characters.

“In Ernest Hemingway’s Hills Like White Elephant, what do ‘the American and the girl with him’ look like? ‘She had taken off her hat and put it on the table.’ That’s the only reference to a physical description in the story, and yet we see the couple and know them by their tones of voice, with not one adverb in sight.”

Rule 9: Don’t go into great detail describing places and things.

“Unless you’re Margaret Atwood and can paint scenes with language or write landscapes in the style of Jim Harrison. But even if you’re good at it, you don’t want descriptions that bring the action, the flow of the story, to a standstill.”

Rule 10: Try to leave out the part[s] that readers tend to skip.
“Think of what you skip reading a novel: thick paragraphs of prose you can see have too many words in them . . . I’ll bet you don’t skip dialogue.”

Wednesday, December 1, 2010

The Other Side of the Coin-- or the Channel

Yesterday, there was a post on All About Romance about the pro-English bias in historical fiction, a world in which the English are always good, the French are always bad, and, yes, the demmed Pimpernel is that elusive.

There’s an interesting post to be written on the sources of this bias. Just off the top of my head, I can come up with half a dozen completely unsupported theories, ranging from linguistic bias to literary tradition to lopping off heads being generally considered both unsporting and messy to that nasty French waiter who corrected your grammar when you were on a class trip to Paris in ninth grade. Fill in your own explanation here.

AAR made an important point. For those of us who write in the early nineteenth century, while it’s fun to play with the burlesqued image of the nasty Revolutionary Frenchman (see Blackadder, e.g. Nob & Nobility), like any historical event, the Revolution consisted of multiple stages, giving way to the Directory, the Consulate, and finally the Empire. There were, as there are anywhere, idealists and opportunists, visionaries and scoundrels—sometimes rolled up in the same person.

This has been much on my mind recently, because, after several volumes of “English Good, French Bad, Please Pass the Port and Mind the Sheep!”, my next book, The Orchid Affair, features a hero who’s not only French, but a genuine, card-carrying Girondin, second in command at the Prefecture of Paris, and right hand man to Bonaparte’s Minister of Police.

My hero, Andre Jaouen, isn’t an Englishman in disguise or Sir Percy Blakeney cunningly masquerading as a Frenchman. He’s not an Andrew pretending to be an Andre, or the lost half-brother of the Dauphin. Andre isn’t an aristocrat at all, or anything close; he’s an avocat from Nantes, a provincial lawyer who got involved in the revolution from the ground up, serving as a delegate from Nantes to the Estates General and later to the National Assembly. A child of the Enlightenment, he read Rousseau and believed it, believed that man’s chains could be broken and the injustices of an unnatural order be set right.

With hindsight, we know exactly how the Revolution went astray, leading to rivers of blood in the Place de la Revolution and the rise of a pudgy Corsican dictator. But we have the advantage of two hundred years and heavy history textbooks. How would someone have felt at the time, not knowing, at the start of it all, how it would all turn out? I wanted to explore the workings of someone who genuinely believed in the ideals of the Revolution—and who is forced to come to terms with the way it all played out.

But we can still pass the port.

What do you think of the English bias in historical fiction?

Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Cinema for Authors


Pam's post last Friday reminded me of how much inspiration and honest-to-goodness craft authors draw from movies.

I'm currently taking Alexandra Sokoloff's fabulous Screenwriting Tricks for Novelists, where we study movies' structures to improve our books. As you can imagine, we discuss a lot of movies as the best model for our novels. Now this is not quite the same as being a favorite movie, since things like thematic similarity have to be considered as well as plot line.

Sometimes the class feels like a wild discussion among friends where everyone's trying to suggest the best possible movie for somebody else to study, including the reason why.

To my fascination, only four historical movies (in the New York publishing sense of "history") get mentioned regularly.

Chinatown
Gladiator
The Last of the Mohicans
Sense & Sensibility

Of these four, The Last of the Mohicans and Sense & Sensibility are definitely my favorite two films. I've undoubtedly seen Sense & Sensibility a lot more often. (I adore Alan Rickman in this film!)

But I'd have to say The Last of the Mohicans is much closer to my novels, for more reasons than sharing an American frontier setting with my books. I cherish the line "I will find you" as a declaration of love in the face of all odds.

What movie is most like your book or books? Is it a historical movie or a contemporary movie? How is it different from your "favorite" movies?

Monday, November 29, 2010

A Shout Out to Thomas Edison

On Thursday, November 29, 1877, Thomas Edison revealed a device that was to fuel all of my adolescent fantasies: the phonograph.

It's difficult for me to imagine what life must have been like before recorded music. I recently completed a novel in which the heroine is a violinist, the hero a composer. In the first scene, she desperately tries to memorize the song she's just heard played. Without a way of recording the music, she had little hope of remembering the piece after only one hearing. Yes, there was sheet music, but it's difficult to recreate an entire symphony when you're looking at one instrument's part at a time.

Parts of a turntable
Edison's first attempt wasn't all that different from the record players I knew and loved during my youth. There was a spinning cylinder, a groove, and a needle; there were speakers.


David Bowie's UK release of Space OddityWhen I was a child, I watched a man walk on the moon for the first time. At school that autumn, I was one of a dozen children in my class who dreamed of becoming an astronaut. The teachers told us that sometime in our lifetime, we'd be living in outer space. A scant four months later, David Bowie released "Space Oddity", and the song became the soundtrack for all my dreams of space flight. (Only as an adult did I catch the double-edged metaphor between Bowie's astronaut and heroin use).

That was the first of many moments of my life that were punctuated by music. I remember where I was standing and what I was wearing the first time I heard The Damned's "New Rose" (arguably the first punk rock record). I met my husband in a record store while Elvis Costello's "Armed Forces" LP spun on the turntable.

In 1983, as my husband and I drove over the Bay Bridge together for the first time to the city where we'd live for more than 27 years, we listened to Bach's Brandenburg Concerto number 2. In a way, this song brought me full circle to my childhood memories of "Space Oddity." Is it any coincidence that this song was chosen to be the first one recorded on the played on the "golden record", a phonograph record containing a broad sample of Earth's common sounds, languages, and music sent into outer space with the two Voyager probes?

It's no wonder I wax nostalgic over vinyl records (no pun intended). They were a huge part of my identity; they were my obsession and the soundtrack of my life. A friend of mine who happens to be a full generation younger than I am came over for Thanksgiving dinner a few days ago. As I spoke of Elvis Presley, Bill Haley, and punk rock, he nodded rather dazedly, like I used to do when my father spoke of World War II or the Great Depression. When he piped up, it was to say that he had never seen a vinyl record! I was sad and amazed, and pulled out one of the thousands in my front parlor. We spent a good portion of the evening listening to some of those old songs -- none of which he'd ever heard. How does one grow to adulthood without having heard "Blue Suede Shoes?"

Today, in honor of the man whose invention gave me so much joy, I lift a glass to Thomas Edison.

Am I alone in having such vivid musical memories? Is this phenomena limited to my generation, or do youngsters have their own modern soundtracks (stored digitally, no doubt) that old fogies like me know nothing about?

Friday, November 26, 2010

Harry Potter and the Paradoxes of Adaptation


First, a question, for any of you who might have also already seen Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part I -- and who know your British landscapes better than I do.

Where were those wonderful location shots taken?

What were the regions the filmmakers sampled: now high and dramatic (was it the Lake District? Scotland?); now infinitely flat with moody, lowering skies (I took it to be the East Anglia I imagined for Almost a Gentleman, but I'm probably dead wrong.)

In any event, there was none of that all-too-recognizable teacozy greenery checkered by hedgerows you're likely to encounter in one or another televised Jane Austen redo. As Harry, Ron, and Hermione go on the lam from the Ministry of Magic and in pursuit of the horcruxes, the camera plunges them into bleak dark gray nights of the soul when it's not leaving them unprotected and vulnerable to the sky's glare. As though the land were conspiring with the miserable, horny adolescence they're trying to work through, under the worst of conditions. Like those earlier miserable, horny (if much less heroic) English adolescents, the romantic poets.

I felt those landscape shots (and they're long; and slow) to be nothing less than a wryly patriotic statement on the part of the filmmakers. Yes well, we could have given you what you've come to expect from quaintsy screen Britain, but we've got rather an embarrassment of riches here, you see -- quite as we find ourselves burdened with a surfeit of acting talent (Alan Rickman, Ralph Fiennes, Imelda Staunton, and more and more). And so we shall be using what we've got sparingly and as we like, thank you very much.

To which I could only gasp, thank you. Yes, I loved it -- my inner art snob and passionate romantic sides going limp and dreamy in tandem at the rate of twenty-four frames a second. Even as I wondered how (and even if) a movie that would be utterly incomprehensible to anyone who didn't know the Harry Potter books could possibly even be called good.

Perhaps viewers who don't know the Potter books are too small a market segment to be taken into account. Which is a shame, because I wanted to share this, as I want to share all the art and entertainment I love, with the non-Potter-reading husband I met a very long time ago in a 17th century poetry seminar, where we shared Donne's Good-Morrow poem as my Mary and Kit do in The Slightest Provocation.

It was Michael who taught me how to love meditative, austere film in the first place. So though he could appreciate the look of it, it was no fun for him trying to figure out who was who and what was what. I didn't know either some of the time, but I knew it probably didn't matter if you weren't sure if you'd ever encountered Mundungus Fletcher before. (You didn't in any of the movies, according to the ever-alert Potter Uber-nerds at Mugglenet.com; you might, as I did, vaguely remember him from the books; and as I did as well, you'd probably figure what the hell, it's one of the great minor-character fictional names of all time, relax and enjoy it.)

But then, I'm a devoted and strongly opinionated Potter reader. Unlike my teenage niece and nephew, I can't keep the horcruxes straight, but I don't think you have to. In fact, I don't think you should bother.

Caution: there are spoilers next (though a reader's spoiler might be an unread movie-goer's salvation).

What I do know (or better, could hardly help knowing by the end of Book 5), was that Snape had always been in love with Harry's mother, that he'd been a fraught and confused (hell, tortured) double agent for most if not all of the time of the books, that he was already a goner -- and that of course he had to kill Dumbledore, because in J.K. Rowling's good and decent world of magic, the worst thing you can do is allow a child to commit a sin that will poison the rest of his life -- as would have happened to Draco Malfoy if he'd killed Dumbledore as Voldemort wanted him to (that was the point of Voldemort wanting Draco to kill Dumbledore, for pity's sake).

And even through all the confused plot comings and goings in Deathly Hallows Part I, a very hot-looking Alan Rickman (with good hair, for once in the film series) managed to communicate all that understanding, even to my befuddled husband, through a very few closeups of the pain in his eyes.


What I also know is that there's no point trying to unravel the mysteries of Voldemort's evil, as the Mugglenet folks try to do. Unlike Blake's Milton, J.K. Rowling is not of the devil's party. Voldemart brings out the worst -- the most banally bad, vain, craven, trivial, self-serving -- in his followers. He isn't interesting or captivating in himself. And the one of his followers who does mesmerize us with horror and dismay is the terrifyingly perky, conformist, officious, racist (and brilliantly named) Dolores Umbridge. As inhabited by Imelda Staunton, a little of her pink-clad presence goes a very long way. And the quick moment when Harry finds some Nazi-style Muggle-baiting pulp fiction squirreled away in her desk drawer for her private delectation, is, I hope, a young person's brilliant and scarifying visceral introduction to the banality of evil.

Other moments I loved included the brilliant and not at all obvious decision to portray Ron's fevered, jealous fantasy of Harry and Hermione kissing in a hyped-up video-game-art style. A seventeen-year-old boy's version of the erotic (simultaneously overcooked and sanitized at the same time, like some novel cover art I could mention, but won't).

But perhaps my favorite moment of all came and went far too quickly, quite early in the film, when, in order to protect her Muggle parents against Voldemort and his followers, Hermione performs the Obliviate Charm on them, erasing all their memories that they ever had a daughter. As the camera pans around the Grangers' middle-class living room, Hermione's image fades from every photograph on wall, mantel, table-top. Little girl Hermione, baby Hermione... all painfully, shockingly gone, from the pictures, from her parents' minds and memories. And of course these must be real little girl and baby pictures of the actress, Emma Watson -- who we ourselves have watched grow up on screen from the age of nine.

The quasi-documentary quality of the Potter films -- watching its three young stars go from childhood to young adulthood is part of the strange metatextual appeal of the series, and something best done on film. Time passes on film and in photographs. Children grow up. Adults grow older -- and if we have kids in our lives, they don't let us forget that.

Which dovetailed nicely with my experience seeing the movie -- metatextual again. My friend Ellie got the tickets -- for her, our friend Fran, me and Michael, and Fran's daughter Hannah, a lovely young journalist, who (I will proudly tell you) recently had 3 front-page stories on The Contra Costa Times.

Fandango recorded us as 4 seniors and 1 adult. "Hannah's our adult," we laughed. And sighed, and marveled, even as I'm sure that each of us reviewed our happy memories of little-girl Hannah and baby Hannah, happily coexisting with the beautiful presence of Our Adult Hannah. As J.K. Rowling and the writers and director of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows have created a paradoxical visual fiction of time and memory.

My thanks to all of them.

Any other thoughts on the Potter books? The movies? And (don't forget) the locations.

Wednesday, November 24, 2010

Welcome Gillian Bagwell and THE DARLING STRUMPET


The History Hoydens are pleased to welcome novelist Gillian Bagwell, who makes her s historical fiction debut on January 4, 2011 with THE DARLING STRUMPET: A Novel of Nell Gwynn Who Captured the Heart of England and King Charles II.

Advance praise for The Darling Strumpet! "
"Richly engaging portrait of the life and times of one of history's most appealing characters!"
- Diana Gabaldon, author of the best-selling Outlander series
"Bawdy and poignant ... an ebullient page-turner!" - Leslie Carroll, author of Royal Affairs
"Hard to resist this sort of seduction - a Nell Gwynn who pleasures the crowds upon the stages of London and the noblest men of England in their bedrooms. A vivid portrait of an age that makes our own seem prudish, told with verve, humour, pathos... and not a little eroticism." - C.C. Humphreys, Actor and Author of Jack Absolute.
Apart from what I said in my blurb, I think that Gillian hit it out of the park on her first at-bat, not only because she wrote an exceptional novel about one of my favorite women in history, but because (see Isobel's recent post on covers) her publisher's art department gave her one of the most eye-catching (to say the least) covers to ever grace a work of historical fiction.

Congratulations to Gillian!


What follows here, is her guest post for the hoydens and our readers:

~Leslie

SEPTEMBER 1660
September 1660 was the fourth month since Charles II had ridden into London on his thirtieth birthday to claim his throne after years of exile during the Commonwealth under Oliver Cromwell.


The new Parliament was still working hard to finish important business before they adjourned. Finances were the most pressing issue. A committee reported that the government’s revenue was estimated at £819,398 and expenses at least £200,000 more than that. They resolved to find a way to get the revenue up to £1,200,000, and also allocated £5000 for the repair of the King’s houses as well as £10,000 and £7000 respectively for the King’s brothers, the Dukes of York and Gloucester.




Diarist John Evelyn recorded his visit to St. Margaret’s Fair in Southwark, where he saw “a monstrous birth of twins, both femals & most perfectly shaped, save that they were joyn’d breast to breast, & incorporated at the navil, having their armes thrown about each other thus.” He illustrated his entry with a drawing, and continued, “We also saw a poore Woman, that had a living Child of one yeare old, who had its head, neck, with part of a Thigh growing out about Spina dorsi. The head had the place of Eyes & nose, but none perfected.” He also saw “Monkeys and Apes daunce & do other feates of activity on the high-rope to admiration…. They saluted one another with as good grace as if instructed by a Dauncing Master. They turned heales over head, with a bucket of Eggs in it, without breaking any: also with Candles (lighted) in their hands, & on their head, without extinguishing them, & with vessels of water, without spilling a drop.” Diarist Samuel Pepys also wrote on September 10 that he had visited the fair in Southwark, “I having not at all seen Bartlmew fayre.”


James, Duke of York


This September was to be a month of high drama for the royal family. The first act took place in secret at about midnight on September 3, when James, the Duke of York, married Anne Hyde, the daughter of the King’s advisor Edward Hyde, newly created Earl of Clarendon. James and Anne had met and fallen in love when Anne was maid of honor to Mary of Orange, the sister of the King and Duke, and had entered into a contract of marriage in Breda the previous fall. At the time, the chances of Charles’s Restoration to the throne had seemed remote, much less the eventuality of James becoming king. Now everything was different. And to complicate matters, Anne was already very much pregnant.

Ann Hyde

On September 5, diarist Samuel Pepys wrote, “the Duke of Gloucester is fallen ill and is said will prove the smallpox.” On September 11 he noted “The Duke of York did go today by break-of-day to the Downes. The Duke of Gloucester ill.” The Duke of York was going to meet his sister Mary, who was coming from The Hague, and also taking the opportunity to review the fleet, as in May Charles had made him Lord High Admiral. The timing was unfortunate. For several days, the attention of the King and court had been focused on the 20-year-old Henry, Duke of Gloucester. Pepys had heard right, and the duke did have smallpox. On the morning of September 13, it was announced that he was out of danger. But as the day wore on, he grew worse, and that evening at nine o’clock he died – “by the great negligence of the Doctors,” Pepys thought.


Charles was devastated. His youngest brother had suffered years of imprisonment as a child when Cromwell was in power, had finally been permitted to go the court of his sister Mary, and had later become somewhat of a religious-political football when their mother Queen Henrietta Maria tried to convert him to Catholicism. Young Henry was well liked. Evelyn eulogized him as “a prince of extraordinary hopes.” He had seemed to have a promising life before him, and now he was gone. The King secluded himself for days, though on Sunday September 16 Pepys saw him in Whitehall garden “in purple mourning for his brother.” Pepys also noted with approval “how far they have proceeded in the pellmell and the making of a river through the parke.”
On September 27 Thomas Rugg reported “Playes are for the present forbidden because of the death of the Duke of Gloucester.”


Meanwhile, the departure of Mary of Orange from The Hague had been delayed by bad weather, so the Duke of York spent five days at sea in the Downs. When there was still no sign of his sister’s ship, he put in at Gravesend, only to learn of his younger brother’s death, and he hastened back to London.


Soon after the duke got to Whitehall, the news of his marriage to Anne Hyde leaked out. James went to the King and begged his brother for leave to acknowledge the marriage, vowing that otherwise he would leave England, never to return. Charles was not opposed to the marriage, but rightly supposed that Anne’s father might be. Clarendon was not popular, and the marriage of his daughter to the king’s brother might be considered coming it a bit high. (As I write this, the engagement of Kate Middleton to Prince William has just been announced – the first time since the marriage of the Duke of York and Anne Hyde that a presumptive heir to the throne will be married to a commoner.)


Charles knew the situation was delicate, and enlisted the Marquess of Ormonde and the Earl of Southampton to talk to Clarendon. They began by saying that the Duke of York had acknowledged his love for Anne, that she was thought to be with child, and that the King requested his advice.


Clarendon exploded. Not, as one might expect, at the Duke, but at his daughter. He raged, calling her a strumpet and swearing he would disown her and turn her into the street. Ormonde and Southampton, no doubt startled, explained that in fact Anne was married to the Duke. Clarendon, apoplectic at the thought that his daughter had put him in the situation of seeming to aspire above his place, roared that he would rather she was the Duke’s whore than his wife, and that the King should send her to the Tower and cut off her head. He meant it, and when the King checked in to see how things were going, Ormonde and Southampton said maybe the King could talk sense into Clarendon, who was clearly mad. The King didn’t fare much better, and when Clarendon got home he ordered his wife to lock Anne in her room.


In the middle of all this came the funeral of the young Duke of Gloucester. On September 21 Pepys wrote that he went “back by water about 8-aclock; and upon the water saw corps of the Duke of Gloucester brought down Somersett house stairs to go by water to Westminster to be buried tonight.”


On the twenty-third, Pepys wrote, “The King having news of the Princesses being come to Margetts, he and the Duke of Yorke went down thither in Barges to her.” Mary, having had a terrible crossing and narrowly avoiding shipwreck, now faced the double shock of learning of her youngest brother’s death and of James’s marriage to her former lady in waiting, who would now take precedence over her.


A few days later another member of the royal family arrived in London. Prince Rupert, the dashing nephew of Charles I, famous for his military exploits and successes during the war as General of Horse of the Royalist army, slipped rather quietly into Whitehall. Jane Lane, who had helped King Charles escape after the Battle of Worcester, wrote to Rupert’s mother Queen Elizabeth of Bohemia, “Methinks his Highness looks very well. Everybody here seems to look very graciously on him.” Everyone but Samuel Pepys, apparently, who on September 29 sneered, “I hear Prince Robt. is come to Court; but welcome to nobody.” In the same entry, Pepys recorded that he had spent “all day at home to make an end of our dirty work of the playsterers, and indeed, my Kitchin is now so handsome that I did not repent of all the trouble that I have been put to to have it done.”


The turmoil over the marriage of the Duke of York and Anne Hyde was not at an end. Queen Henrietta Maria, the mother of the King and the Duke, was furious when she heard the news, and fired off letters to both sons. Something Must Be Done, and she was going to do it. Jane Lane’s letter to Elizabeth of Bohemia summed up the situation. “We are like to have the Queen very suddenly here, which many are discontented at.”

Sources and further reading:
Online:
The Diary of Samuel Pepys - http://www.pepysdiary.com/
Publications:
1660: The Year of Restoration, Patrick Morrah (Beacon Press, 1960)
The London Stage, 1660-1800, A Calendar of Plays, Entertainments, and Afterpieces Together with Casts, Box-Receipts, and Contemporary Comment, Part I, 1660-1700, ed. William Van Lennep et al. (Southern Illinois University Press, 1963)
Pepys’s Diary, Volume I, selected and edited by Robert Latham (Folio Society, 1996)
The Diary of John Evelyn, ed. Guy de la Bédoyère (Boydell Press, 1995; First Person Singular, 2004)

































Gillian Bagwell is the author of the upcoming novel The Darling Strumpet, based on the life of Nell Gwynn, who rose from the streets to become one of London’s most beloved actresses and the life-long mistress of King Charles II.
This is the fifth in a series of articles chronicling the events from May 1660 through January 1661, in commemoration of the 350th anniversary of the Restoration of the English monarchy, the reopening of the playhouses, which had been closed for eighteen years under Cromwell, and the first appearance of an actress on the English stage, in contrast to the old practice of boys playing women’s roles.

For links to the other articles and information about Gillian’s books, please visit her website, gillianbagwell.com.