Of Myths and Men...er, Gentlemen

There are a number of myths that crop up in Regency Romance novels that drive me crazy. Mind you, until I became a Regency Research Geek, I was just a reader who didn’t know any better, although I sometimes noticed inconsistencies between stories, but not enough to bother me. Nor did I appreciate how much work it is to do that much research. But now that I've embraced the craze, I do know better. And I think all authors owe it to their readers to do their research. When I began researching the Regency Era for The Stranger She Married,a historical romance that just wouldn't go away no matter how much I dreaded taking the research plunge, I realized what a huge undertaking it was going to be. And I also learned that there are a number of "truths" which are, in fact, false.

I don’t know who started these odd beliefs not based on any fact, unless people are confusing Scottish laws/customs with English, but in Regency England, many of the favorite themes that a reader finds in a Regency Romance novel never happened, could never happen, would never happen. Here are a few of the most common mistakes and misconceptions:

Myth: illegitimate sons could become a lord.
1. No illegitimate son could ever inherit a title of a lord; he (or anyone) could inherit property or money if called out in a will, but never the title or entailed property. Also, a man who had just inherited a title had to prove his parents were married at the time of his birth. He would not be legally recognized as a peer, or sit in the House of the Lords, until his birth was proven unquestionably legitimate and the House of the Lords had summoned him. If there were no legitimate heir, however distant, the title died out or went dormant. It did not go to an illegitimate son. Ever.

Myth: an illegitimate son could be made legitimized and therefore inherit a title.
2. No illegitimate son could ever be legitimized. I don’t care who he was or who his parents were; if his parents were not married at the time of his birth, he/she was considered a . (Notice, I did not say they had to be married when he was conceived – just at the time of his birth.)

Myth: children could inherit land or title from their mother's side of the family.
3. In England, unlike some cases in Scotland, no one could inherit entailed property or a title from their mother’s side of the family. Again, wills were a different story.

Myth: an unwanted marriage could be annulled as long as it wasn't consummated.
4. Failing to consummate a marriage never left it open to be neatly annulled. Having a marriage annulled, for whatever reason, was as messy, difficult and scandalous as getting a divorce. I cringe when I read plots in Regency Romance Novels where the hero and e get married to help one of them out of a tight spot with the understanding that as long as they don’t consummate the marriage, they can just annul it quietly. Marriage was considered a permanent arrangement -- not a convenient quick-fix.

Myth: weddings were lavish; with many bridesmaids, a kiss, a ring exchange and a huge reception.
5. These are fairly modern traditions. In Regency England, weddings did not include bridesmaids in matching gowns carrying bouquets and marching down the line in front of the bride, a ring exchange, and a kiss. The typical wedding was a lot like a church service, with an additional ceremony where the bride and groom would take their vows. Afterward, the bride and groom signed the registry, and then they were legally married. Usually, they went to the wedding breakfast -- as all weddings,by law, had to take place in the morning -- but never to a reception.

Authors have a duty to do our historical research so that the stories are as real as possible. Yes, we write fiction, which is why the heroes are usually tall and hunky, and we fail to mention how BAD most peoples’ body and dental hygiene were, or the state of the open sewage, but the back drop of any historical novel should be researched enough to create a believable historical feel. After all, why read a historical novel if the author has only written a fantasy? If authors want to duck out of research, they should write fantasy novels!

That being said, it’s not possible to get every single fact perfect. However, big things should be done right. And readers trust the author to get it right while providing a lovely, happily-ever-after that transports them into a glittering new world. Hmmm. That sounds a little like fantasy after all, huh?

So, gentle reader, the next time you pick up a historical novel, send good thoughts to the author who probably labored over the research to provide you with a window into the past...mingled with a healthy dose of creativity.

Historical Accuracy....Important or just too nerdy?

In my on-line writing group for Regency Writers, some of us were bemoaning the fact that so many novels labeled historicals are historically inaccurate. In the 80’s, historicals were pretty much anything goes. A few authors did a great job of blending a great story with historical accuracy, but many best-selling authors just wrote whatever they wanted and didn’t worry about too much about. Unfortunately, publishers let them get away with it and readers swallowed it. Now don't get me wrong, they crafted wonderful stories with wonderful characters, but they created their own rules which many readers accepted as fact but were, in fact, myth.

A prime example of this is the myth that marriage could be quietly annulled if it wasn’t consummated. I don’t know who started that, but it is unarguably false. There was an ancient Scottish tradition that allowed for annulment in certain circumstances if the marriage was not consummated, but for all intents and purposes, marriage was permanent especially in England. Furthermore, in England, annulment was messy and scandalous and never, ever happened quietly. It also socially ruined both the husband and the wife. Even divorce was difficult to obtain until King Henry VII legalized divorce in England, and even then, never became an easy thing to do until late in the 20th century.

Today, more and more publishers are looking for historical accuracy, but still not enough to satisfy many history geeks. The winner of a nationally recognized historical contest began her Regency novel with a grand wedding full of descriptions that are modern inventions which never happened in that era. Why did she win? Probably because it was a lovely fantasy that blended history with modern-day traditions, and she was a good writer. Too bad the judges overlooked the fact that it was historically inaccurate. A few hours spent in research would have won her not only the contest, but the respect of other Regency romance authors and the well-informed readers who know better. However, she probably understood that readers have a certain expectation and wanted to meet that instead of rely upon historical accuracy. Balancing reader expectation with historical accuracy can be like walking a tight rope.

Why do we care about historical accuracy? Several reasons.

First, it’s true. The fiction comes from the plot and the characters, not the setting.

Second, it helps preserve our heritage.

Third, we can learn from the past and see that maybe the good old days weren’t all that good, which helps us appreciate our day....or that the good old days really were wonderful and should be treasured--and remembered.

Fourth, many readers (and writers) are fascinated with that era and want sources to guide them through it.

Fifth, keeping an accurate backdrop helps shape the characters. Research is more than just learning about what the clothing looked like, or what kind of carriages they drove; it’s about society and people, how they behaved and what their expectations and frustrations were. It’s a realm long gone and our only doorway back is through painstaking research.

Some say, “Oh, well, it’s the story we want and the fantasy that entertains us.” To that I say, “Well, fine, then label it a fantasy, not a historical.” If you’re going to call a novel Historical, or Historical Fiction, do the research. I know it's a pain. A few years ago, I had characters nagging me to write their stories but I resisted because I didn't want to do the amount of research that would be required. Finally, when they wouldn't leave me alone, I broke down and began researching. It's hard, and frustrating, and very time consuming. But it was worth it. The fruits of my labor became the Rogue Hearts series, beginning with The Stranger She Married and The Guise of a Gentleman. Are they 100% accurate? Well, I thought so at the time, but since they were published, I have uncovered research which spells minor inaccuracies. The point is, I tried, and none of my errors are glaring. No, I'm not fessing up as to what was wrong. :-)

Because I get asked this a lot, here are some of my favorite Regency research sources:
Jane Austen is without a doubt the most reliable source since she wrote her books while living during that time.
Anything written by Dee Hendrickson is outstanding and carefully researched -- her Regency Reader is a resource I turn to over an over, and it's on CD so it's easily searchable.
Also Georgette Heyer was very careful, especially considering she didn't have the internet to aid her.
Here are some others:
Our Tempestuous Day by Carolly Erickson
The Half Mad Lord by Thomas Pitt
Georgette Heyer’s Regency World
Regency Etiquette: The Mirror of Graces, 1811, by a Lady of Distinction
The Regency Companion, Sharon Laudermilk and Teresa L Hamlin

In the midst of the on-line ranting, one of the published authors in my group shared with us her philosophy:

As a writer, my job is threefold:

1) do my homework well enough to please my fellow history geeks,

2) make the story compelling enough to hook readers who don't care whether or not it's accurate, and

3) don’t stress over writers/readers who prefer the fairytale.

It resonated within me. I hope it helps you, too.

Why all the balls?

Anyone who's read Regency-set novels may have at one point asked the question: "Why does practically every Regency novel contain a ball?"

There's a very good answer to that question and it isn't because authors have no imagination. It's because balls and dancing were a vital part of social life and courtship. Children at a very young age were taught to dance, even young boys who joined the army or navy.

Where were these balls held?

A public 'subscription' ball, was held anyplace with an assembly room. Guests were admitted only if they possessed a purchased ticket. High ticket prices might keep out the lowest class, but didn't stop the rich in trade from attending. (Horrors!) Subscription balls were held just about anywhere--the main room of an inn, a large clearing outside, or a rented public house.

Almack's is an example of a public assembly but the matrons were very particular about who received a voucher to attend. No one was admitted into Almack's without a voucher.

Gentlemen had to be considered eligible, but the "weeding out" process wasn't so strict for the gentlemen as it was for the ladies. For a young lady to receive a voucher, one of the patronesses of Almack's had to approve of her background and character before she was given a coveted voucher.

This picture is of a ballroom in Bath, where Catherine in Northanger Abby meets a dashing stranger who cleverly arranges an introduction.

A private ball was another matter. Most of the great houses had either a ballroom or a large drawing room. People were allowed to attend by invitation only. In Pride and Prejudice, the local matrons convinced Mr. Bingley to host the event and invite all the 'good' families because Netherfield house had a ballroom. Throwing a ball took a great deal of money; servants, candles, food and drink all cost a goodly amount, so only someone well off could afford it. Of course, since most Regency romance novels are about the beau monde, a ball is treated as common-place.

In my newest Regency, The Guise of a Gentleman, Elise is shocked to find that the seemingly common man who accosted her only days ago, is now present at a ball hosted by her good friend. Normally, only the very best ton would be present. What was he doing in such an elite gathering?

And most pressing of all, would he ruin her reputation and tell everyone he'd kissed her at their previous encounter?

The Guise of a Gentleman, available at Amazon, and The Wild Rose Press in both paperback and e-book.

Regency Dancing and the Quadrille

Dancing was an important part of British society. Most everyone, from lower gentry to upper aristocracy considered dancing as an indispensible form of courtship. Almack’s was famous for hosting gatherings of the Beau Monde. One of these popular dances was called the Quadrille.

In his memoirs, Captain Gronow recalls its first appearance within the fashionable ballroom at Almack's:

"In 1814, the dances at Almack's were Scotch reels and the old English country-dance; and the orchestra, being from Edinburgh, was conducted by the then celebrated Neil Gow. It was not until 1815 that Lady Jersey introduced from Paris the favourite quadrille, which has so long remained popular. I recollect the persons who formed the very first quadrille that was ever danced at Almack's they were Lady Jersey, Lady Harriet Butler, Lady Susan Ryder, and Miss Montgomery; the men being the Count St. Aldegonde, Mr. Montgomery, Mr. Montague, and Charles Standish."

Within a few short years, dozens of sets of music for quadrilles were being published and new sets of figures composed. The opinionated Jane Austen, however, was less than impressed with this new dance:

"Much obliged for the quadrilles, which I am grown to think pretty enough, though of course they are very inferior to the cotillions of my own day." Jane Austen to her niece Fanny Knight, February 20, 1816

Every fashionable Regency ballroom must include at least one quadrille, which is actually a set of five shorter dances. The most highly fashionable dancers might even indulge in some of the brand-new dance forms of the very end of the 1810s that adapted the formation of a couple facing a couple, and figures of the quadrille into country dances and recreated the idea of "improper" dances, in which the leading couple in a set started off on the opposite gender's side. Scandalous!

Dances were not started with everyone moving simultaneously. Instead, the first couple, or head couple, began a set. The rest watched to see what the dance would be. This was a position of honor and responsibility, an opportunity for that couple to show off the excellence of their steps and set the standard for the other dancers. In Mansfield Park, Fanny found herself in this honored position:

"...and she found herself the next moment conducted by Mr. Crawford to the top of the room, and standing there to be joined by the rest of the dancers, couple after couple, as they were formed."

As the couple worked their way down a long set of dancers, which could take ten minutes or more, the other dancers joined in, until the entire set was moving. Once the lead couple reached the bottom, they stood out briefly before rejoining the dance to assist the other couples progressing down the set. This time was a great opportunity for private conversation with one's partner. It also had the additional advantage of allowing time to catch one's breath after such vigorous non-stop dancing.

In my newest Regency Romance Novel, The Guise of a Gentleman, the hero, Jared, knew attending balls and dinner parties in the country was his best way of getting to know the other members of the aristocracy to help him discover the leader of the pirate ring he'd been steadily tracking down. Such gatherings were also a place where the heroine, Elise, went when she decided to cast of her mourning dress and reenter society. But, unbeknownst to them, they'd already met...

Regency Mourning Customs

In my Regency Romance Novel, The Guise of a Gentleman, I deal with and mourning. There is a widow who is still mourning her husband, and then later in the book, the hero’s father dies, so my characters deal with death and mouring. So here is a little more background on the mourning customs of Regency England.

Mourning customs in the Regency Era were less rigid than in Victorian England. The excessively strict rules for mourning come about after Queen Victoria’s husband dies and she wouldn’t give up her black. Keep in mind that these are not LAWS for mourning. Any display of mourning was done at a person’s discretion. However, there were social norms, that, if not followed, might raise some eyebrows.

In the excellent book, The Rise of the Egalitarian Family, Trumbach gives the following data for mourning:
12 months for a husband or wife
6 months for parents or parents in law
3 months for a sister or brother, uncle or aunt
6 weeks for a sister in law or uncle or aunt (no explanation for the duplication here so perhaps it had to do with the closeness or lack of same
3 weeks - uncle or aunt, aunt who remarried, first cousin
2 weeks - first cousin (and whether they were close or not?)
1 week - first and second cousin, and husband or stepmother’s sister.

Trumbach says there was usually a designated female who kept up the family tree and ordained the degree of mourning required for the dearly (or not so dearly) departed.

Bombazine and crape were typical fabrics used for clothing of deep mourning. Crepe was a lightweight black silk, while azine was a medium-weight silk and wool blend. Over time, shinier fabrics emerged in the evening. The less wealthy simply took apart their clothes, died them black, then re-sewed them.

Mourning - or lack hereof – could also be used as an opportunity to get back at someone you disliked by cutting down on the time or style of one’s mourning.

The widow would be in black for the first six months, and then in half mourning (black and white mixed) for the next six months. After that, the widow would go into half mourning. White, grey, and even lavender were suitable for half mourning. Again these are ideals, and not everyone observed them. Ackermann’s had a half mourning dress in a 1819 issue that was all white. Lavender is not mentioned in this issue, but it was commonly accepted as an appropriate half-mourning costume. I saw mention that there were some fashions circa 1811 of someone wearing scarlet for mourning, but have not yet been able to find the actual print. To complicate matters, scarlet is used to describe any brightly-dyed, plain-woven woolen fabric up through the Victorian era. At the same time, it is also used to describe items that are scarlet (red) in color. I find it impossible to determine which meaning is being used when they say it was a scarlet mourning shawl, but I found this:February 1811 For the Promenade, cloaks in Scarlet merino or grey cloth,black velvet pelisses, lined with grey sarsenet,wrapped plain in tippets; Spanish hats in velvet, or cottage bonnets in black, grey, or scarlet cloth.
In March 1811 La Belle Assemblee Ladies Magazine said that as scarlet mantels were much worn during morning, and generally succeeded by short pelisse of purple velvet. Ladies Monthly Museum didn't have any mention of scarlet. So who knows?

Brides never wore mourning to the wedding. White was a good choice though a widow could wear brighter colors. A new bride was not supposed to be in mourning at all; though if her parents had recently died she might wear more sober clothes for a period, especially as brides were not supposed to go out socializing for a month after their wedding.

Julia Johnstone (before she was ruined and became a courtesan) had her court presentation and her debut in society not long after her father died, so clearly the world didn’t simply stop for people who were in mourning. However, while in full mourning, the family of the deceased typically avoided formal entertainment such as balls, dinner parties and dances. They were expected to limit social obligations to necessities and church.

Upon his mother’s in 1818, the Prince of Wales announced that he intended “to wear the longest mourning that ever son did for a mother...” and he actually limited the official mourning period for the people of England to six weeks.

Only the length of public and court mourning was set out. The Lord Chamberlain notified the Gazette as to what it would be. If anyone were invited to court during this time, they were also sent instructions as to what to wear.


A hatchment or a mourning wreath would be suspended over the front door of a deceased persons house for 6 to 12 months, after which it was moved to inside the parish church. The last recorded use of a hatchment was when one was hung in a London street in 1928. Hatchments were used from the 17th to 19th centuries. In The Guise of a Gentleman, my e left her up mourning wreath for years, and it wasn’t until she took it down that gentleman began thinking she might be ready to be courted (which is partially why she left it up).

Men wore black armbands, black gloves and some wore black cravats. Some wore all black for their mourning time. There is no mention of half mourning attire for men.

When announcing a , the announcement came trimmed in black, so the receiver would have some warning about the contents of the letter.

Widows not supposed to dance or to go to the more frivolous and silly plays while wearing mourning. Widowers were never expected to go into seclusion for more than a fortnight, if at all, because it was known that men had to conduct business.

Widows were not supposed to marry until a year had passed (to see if she were expecting the child of her former husband, to end any doubt about the identity of child’s father in she were found to be increasing) but many did remarry. This could cause a scandal but it was usually forgotten in a year or so. Widowers did not have the same reason for waiting a year to remarrry, and if they had small children, widowers were forgiven and even expected to remarry soon.

There were no hard and fast rules about these things. It all depended on how the biggest gossips and movers of society reacted. Men were criticized much less for such beach of propriety than . What a surprise!

I couldn’t find the official mourning proclamation for Princess Charlotte, but I did find this for the father of Queen Victoria, the Duke of Kent, who died in 1820.

Lord Chamberlain's Office, Jan. 25.
Orders for the Court's going into mourning, on Sunday next, the 30th instant, for his late royal highness the duke of Kent and Strathern, fourth son of his majesty, viz.
The ladies to wear black azins, plain muslin or long lawn, crape hoods, chamois shoes and gloves, and crape fans.
Undress.—Dark Norwich crape.
The gentlemen to wear black cloth, without buttons on the sleeves or pockets, plain muslin or long lawn cravats and weepers, chamois shoes and gloves, crape hatbands, and black swords and buckles.
Undress.—Dark gray frocks.

Herald's College, Jan. 25.
The deputy earl Marshal's order for a general mourning for his late royal highness the duke of Kent.
In pursuance of the commands of his royal highness the Prince Regent, acting in the name and on the behalf of his majesty.
These are to give public notice, that it is expected that upon the present melancholy occasion of the of his late royal highness Edward Duke of Kent and Strathern, fourth son of his majesty, all persons do put themselves into decent mourning, the said mourning to begin on Sunday next, the 30th instant.
HENRY HOWARD - MOLYNEUX-HOWARD, Deputy Earl-Marshal.

Horse-Guards, Jan, 25. It is not required that the officers of the army should wear any other mourning on the present melancholy occasion than a black crape round their left arms with their uniforms.
By command of his royal highness the commander-in-chief.
HARRY CALVERT, Adjutant-General.

Admiralty-Office, Jan. 25.
His royal highness the Prince Regent does not require that the officers of his majesty's fleet or marines should wear any other mourning on the present melancholy occasion of the of his late royal highness the duke of Kent and Strathern, than a black crape round their arms with their uniforms. J. W. CHOKER

For more information on mourning clothing, go to The Jane Austin Centre

Ice in Regency England

A question was posed on my historical author loop which prompted a discussion I found interesting. It was about ice.

Was ice used in drinks?

Yes and no. There WAS such a thing as ice. Ice houses were common in England in the Regency Era and earlier. Many estates had ice ponds where the ice was cut and it placed inside an underground ice house where it would stay frozen even during the summer. In America, ice was covered with sawdust to keep it from melting, but I don’t know if that were true in England. There was an ice house near Gunter' Tea Shop in London, which is famous for its “ices,” meaning a sweet frozen treat much like our shaved ice or the Italian sorbet. King Charles had an ice house in one of the city parks. The British made lemonade and sherbets as well as ice cream. They sometimes had ice sculptures as decorations for some of their fancier events. But I have found no evidence that they ever had ice IN their drinks.

England was cold during the Regency era, even more so than it is now, since they were in the middle of a mini ice age. It was so cold back then that Thames froze over more than once and they usually had a riotous party on it. During the cold winter months (and I live in Arizona where it really isn’t all that cold, comparatively speaking), I seldom want ice in my drink during the winter, so I doubt very much anyone felt the need to invent it in England during this time.

However, in warmer climates such as Italy, they frequently added ice to beverages. According to many travel writers dating back to the mid 1700's, Italians put ice in their lemonade, orgeate, sherbet. In Venice, they couldn’t have underground ice houses due to all the water underneath them, of course, so they brought ice in from surrounding areas to keep it from melting. Places like coffee houses and pubs would provide it to the public. Obviously, the rich had their own stash, just like everything else.

So there you have it. Something we take for granted will be in our freezer whenever we want it would have been something of a commodity in Regency England. Of course, that’s true about a lot of things. I’ve often said I’d love to visit, but I’m not sure I’d want to live there. Still, isn't the fantasy of Regency England glorious? That's why I love to read and write it!

Why I Read and Write Regency Romances

When I was a youth, I read almost everything, especially sci fi and fantasy, but was always more interested in the interpersonal relationships and romances than the plot itself. I started reading Romances when I was about 14 or 15, and was immediately attracted to historicals of all kinds.

You’re going to laugh when I confess how clueless I was, but I didn’t really know what a Regency was until I started really researching it. Until then, I couldn’t have told the difference between a Regency and a Victorian. But I love historicals overall. I grew up on Little House on the Prairie books, Jane Eyre, Anne of Green Gables. Historicals are like a whole new world, totally different from the modern world in which I live. Regency in particular is fun because the manners and mores of society are so formal and lavish (unlike my reality). Besides what’s not to love about men who can dance? Not to mention that there are few things as manly as a man riding horseback or fencing or willing to engage in a dual to protect his honor. Or that of his lady love. I have a thing for medieval romances, too. Love those knights who are all about duty and honor.

Honestly, I didn’t know if I wanted to choose Georgian, Regency or Victorian until I really did my research. I discarded Georgian because I detested the white wigs and the wide panniers women wore then. I chose Regency over Victorian for a number of reasons: it was during and right after the Napoleonic war, which provides the perfect backdrop for the tortured hero still haunted by the horrors of war (my favorite kind of fictional character); it was a unique period, people were more free thinking and also their days were filled with huge, lavish parties which adds an element of fantasy or magic (yeah, still soooo not like my real life); I like the clothing styles and part of the fun of a historical is getting immersed in the ‘world’ which includes describing clothing; and a large part of my decision to go with fantasy is because it is a solid market niche which helps with marketing.

To do research, I read a lot of Regencies, but the most helpful resources are books actually written by authors who lived in that era, which is why Jane Austen is used so much by Georgian/Regency Era authors; she lived during that time, so what she writes is how things were, rather than someone’s perception of how things were. Georgette Heyer is also hailed as the "Queen of Regency" because of her uniquely believable voice. I've heard she wrote her books using the same terms and speech as her grandmother (who was born just after that time) used which is how she so easily achieved that voice. I also read a bunch of research books. And I joined an online writer's group called the Beau Monde which is for authors of the Georgian/Regency Era. The members are a plethora of information and can sometimes just answer questions, other times they can recommend sources for what members need.

In addition to the Beau Monde RWA group, some of the best sources for that era are:

The Regency Companion, by Sharon Laudermilk and Teresa L Hamlin
Georgette Heyer's Regency World, by Jennifer Kloester
Dee Hendrickson's Regency Reference Book (now on CD)
Our Tempestuous Day: A History of Regency England, by Carolly Erickson
The Prince of Pleasure and His Regency, by J.B. Priestly

I love Regency because of all this and more. Mostly, I love it because of the men. Or at least, my perception of the men. They were all about honor and duty. They were so wrapped up in honor that they were willing to die for it. And that is a character trait I find immensely attractive.


Donna Hatch is the Author is "The Stranger She Married" and "Troubled Hearts," both available on Amazon.com, The Wild Rose Press, and her website, www.donnahatch.com

Summer Treasure Hunt - Day 23 winner

The winner of Day 23 of our Summer Treasure Hunt is Shirley Bahlmann. Congrats, Shirley!

Only a few more days left of our Summer Treasure hunt, so keep playing!

And...I've been tagged for the Crazy Eights game by Joyce DiPastena, author of "Loyalty's Web" who is not only a gifted author, but also a marketing guru. I have to say, though, that with my copywriting background, it almost causes bodily pain to do 8, instead of 3 or 5 or 7 but Crazy Fives just doesn't have the same ring to it.

So here we go, more than you ever wanted to know about me:

Eight Things I Look Forward To:
*My "free day" with regards to dieting
*Bedtime (or naptime, on the rare occasion that happens)and I mean that both for my children and for myself
*My husband's day off
*Book club meetings
*A free moment I can spend reading just for the pleasure of it and not necessarily to do research
*Dessert (see the first of this list)
*Date Night with my husband
*The next extended family gathering

Eight Things I Did Yesterday:
*Got up (that was a biggie)
*Made a half dozen important phone calls
*Went to work
*Networked
*Blogged (sorta)
*Wrote about 5 pages on my current Work in Progress
*Drove my daughter to and from work
*Made spaghetti with homemade meatballs


Eight Things I Wish I Could Do:
*Make the New York Times best-sellers list
*Hire a full-time housekeeper
*Quit my day job
*Spend more time with my husband and children
*Travel - especially to England
*Take ballroom dancing classes with my husband
*Work out with a personal trainer
*Travel back in time for a few months to see what Regency England was really all about

Eight Shows I Watch:
Um, I don't? I have a really hard time making myself sit down and watch TV without thinking about everything I should be doing instead. Once in a great while I used to watch stuff on the Discovery Channel; Man vs Wild, Animal Planet, Myth Busters
Some Old Favorites were: Quantum Leap, Star Trek, Dr. Quinn Medicine Woman.

Eight Friends I’m Tagging:
Erin Quinn
Kathryne Kennedy
Laurean Brooks
Amber Scott
Diane Gaston
Denysé Bridger

Um, I'll have to come back to this since I'll have to research this further...

Day 9 Winner

The winner of Day 9 of our Summer Treasure Hunt is June Kirk of Arizona. Yeay, June!

Day 8 Winner

Congratulations to Valerie ards of Germany for winning my Regency Romance, The Stranger She Married. I'm excited that I will now have an International Audience. How cool is that?

Day 7 winner

Hi Everyone!

The winner of Day 7 of our Summer Treasure Hunt is Heather Justesen. Congratulations, Heather!

Keep playing and keep winning free books and other great prizes.

Day 5 & 6 Winners

The winner of Day 5 of our Summer Treasure Hunt is Wendy Steed from Idaho. le Oreluk of Illinois is the winner of Day 6.

Congratulations!!!

For those of you who might have missed the previous winners, here they are again:

Day 1 - Terry Fleming of California
Day 2 - Phyllis Lamken of Idaho
Day 3 - Debbie Lambson of Utah
Day 4 - Gloria Lyons of Michigan
Day 5 - Wendy Steed of Idaho
Day 6 - le Oreluk of Illinois

Thanks everyone!

How to Light a Candle in Regency England

How does one light a candle in Regency England?

Usually with a "spill." It's a twisted piece of paper, long and narrow (from a distance it looks kind of like long kitchen match). It was common for a bunch of these to be kept standing in some kind of jar or vase on the mantel, then you lit them from the fire. If there's no fire in the room, then you’d have to light the candle with flint and tender, sparking at least enough of a fire to light the spill. There was also something called a tinderbox which was a small box of flint, firesteel, and tinder (typically charcloth, but could also be dry, finely-divided fibrous matter such as straw). The world became a much easier place with matches were invented! Matches were invented in 1823, and didn't come into mass production until around 1824.

Interview with Historical author, Laurie Alice Eakes

Historical Hussies: So, tell us a little about yourself. When did you start to write and how long did it take you get published?

One of these days, I'll come up with a good answer for this. It's a bit complex. I wrote my first novel when I was knee high to a gnome, but I didn't do anything with it. I loved writing and played around a lot, but I went to college, worked, went to some more college, worked, moved a gazillion times, got addicted to research... But the stories were always there. I sold three novels to small presses and they got good reviews, but then I got my MA in writing, got an agent, and finally sold to a traditional publisher. Altogether, 19 years passed between when I wrote my first novel and when I sold my first novel to a traditional publisher, but in actual writing years, I'd say probably I wrote for six years if I put all the fits and starts together.

H.H: How did you break into publishing?

I broke into publishing the first time, the small press route, by happenstance. A friend told me about a publisher looking for novels with characters with disabilities. My first novel, which had been sitting around for years, fit the bill, so I dusted it off and sent it in. They contracted it. RT gave it a **** review, but I made about $200.00 on it and it didn't seem worth the time or effort. I did sell two more to small presses, then gave up. The next time, which was five years later, I got the nastiest rejection I'd ever heard of anyone getting and was going to give up altogether. I had a good corporate job and had little time to write. But my agent encouraged me to try one more project. That sold to Avalon and ended up winning the National readers Choice Award for Best Regency. It took me two years to sell a second one, but now I've sold seven books in five months—four to Avalon and three more to Barbour Books, who bought my second one.

H.H: What inspired you to write romance?

You know, I love other genres and read most of them, esp. mysteries. But nothing makes my soul sing like romance. I believe in everlasting love and think that we're meant to be in pairs. Look at Noah's Ark. Pairs. O everything. I played matchmaker with friends in school and was pretty successful. What better way to play matchmaker but in books, where I can guarantee the outcome?

H.H: What genre or sub-genre do you write? Why did you choose this genre?

I write sweet historicals and inspirational historicals. So far, all my contracted books are in the 19th century in America or England. Why these subgenres? I love a message of hope and belongingness; forgiveness and acceptance getting across to people without preaching. The inspirationals lend to these messages more strongly than secular books, but I prefer to write the sweet because I'm just more comfortable writing sweet and they don't' conflict with my Christian message in the inspirationals.

H.H: What difficulties does writing this genre present?

Lots of don'ts in both the sweet and the inspirationals. I have to be extra careful that I offend no one, so feel a little constrained at times. At the same time, I love the challenge of getting the reader to feel the pull between the hero and heroine, that tension of attraction, without being overt in what I say.

H.H: Tell us about your other works, books, stories, etc.

I have these three books coming out with Barbour, which will be books 2-4 for them. The first one, Better than Gold, is a mystery romance set in Iowa in the 18770s. People are hunting for lost gold said to be hidden in this small town. It's re-released in a compilation with two other books under the title Wild Prairie Roses.

My next book with Avalon is scheduled for a June 2010 release, where my heroine is a doctor and the hero was a doctor blinded in an accidental shooting and how both live through tragedy and rebuild their lives and careers. The Avalon series is all about career women in the 1890s—doctor, lawyer, merchant (ship captain) chef.

H.H: What are you working on now?

I am working on the second book in the New Jersey Historical Series for Heartsong Presents by Barbour books. The first one was set in 1809 and centered around the glass industry in NJ and will be out around Christmas. This one is in the north and takes place in 1858. The third in the series will take place in Cape May in the 1890s. But before I write the third one, I have to write the second book for my new Avalon series. This is about a female lawyer in the 1890s.

H.H: That sounds very unusual. How do you write? Are you a pantser or a plotter? Is it your characters or your plot that influences you the most?

I am a plotter. Once I learned to plot ahead of time, I started not only finish manuscripts, but selling them. My stories have definite plot, even a little suspense, but they are definitely focused on the characters.

H.H: I love those character-driven stories! How do you choose your characters' names?

I use all sorts of resources. One thing I try to do is use surnames from the state or county in which the story takes place. Then I check popular names at the time of the story for the right names. Then I go to meanings of the names. It's quite a process and takes me a while to decide.

H.H: Do you write with music playing? If so, is the music likely to be songs with lyrics or only instrumentals?

Classical music. I have satellite radio so the classical station is on all day. Lyrics totally distract me

H.H: What has surprised you about being a published author?

How it kind of freaks people out. I live near Washington, DC, where it's what do you do, not who are you in greeting. When I say author, people kind of get quiet. You can hear their brains clicking—in what box do we put a writer? It's kind of amusing. I didn't know it would be a conversation-stopper as much as it's a conversation starter.

H.H: What do you like to do when you aren't writing?

Watch old movies, especially Bogart and either of the Hepburns. I'm also into Foyle's War right now. I like music of all kinds, especially live, and theater. Hiking is great, but I don't get enough of it in these days.

H.H: What one thing do you like most about writing? Least?

I like the independence, having a job I can do whenever I like. I don't like the insecurity of it, the wondering when or if the next contract will come.

H.H: What was the most unusual way you came up with a story idea? What made you to think, ‘hey, I could make that into a story?’

Probably the inspiration for my next Avalon book, but if I tell, it gives away the crucial surprise in the story. So maybe the Iowa historical series I wrote with two other authors. The little bit about lost Civil War gold no one ever found. Well, what if a lot of people seek it and someone actually finds it?

H.H: If you could spend an hour talking to anyone from any time in history, who would it be? And Why?

This is hard to answer. Right now, I'm thinking maybe John Fielding of Bow Street. Why? Because he was blinded, yet still did his job and did it amazingly well, at a time when blind people were generally hidden away or left to beg and definitely not given meaningful work to do.

H.H: I love the Bow Street Story! How do you do research for your books? What’s the most interesting bit of research you’ve come across?

I research in libraries and on site and on-line. I've had several graduate hours in how to research, so am pretty good at it, forming a search-string and all that. I love original documents when I can find them, so Google Books is a blessing for the public domain stuff. Same with Gutenberg. I've also gotten some great books from InterLibrary Loan, and never forget Microfilm. Lots of old stuff on Microfilm, fiche, and now on CD.

Most interesting? Probably all the work I did on midwives when working on my master's in history. They were interesting women in Early Modern Europe and North America, much more influential than other women generally were. I can go on for hours about midwives.

H.H: What advice would you give aspiring writers today?

Write. Finish. Rewrite. Finish. Submit. Write more. If the fire, the call, is inside you, you won't give up until you reach your goal.

H.H: Thank you for the Interview.

Thank you for having me here today. Please come visit my blog, where I am posting a free read at fairly regular intervals. This is a story I wrote, but which I never intend to sell, so am giving it away to my readers for fun and enjoyment.

Interview with Historical Author Miranda Neville

H.H: What genre or sub-genre do you write? Why did you choose this genre?

I write historical romance. I've always loved historical novels since I was a teenager devouring Georgette Heyer and Jean Plaidy. I guess I've always had a hankering to write one myself. Last year my father was moving out of my childhood home and I found a box of my old high school stuff that included several unfinished regencies. (They weren't any good!) I've never really considered writing contemporary fiction.

H.H: Tell us about your book, Never Resist Temptation.

Never Resist Temptation, set in Regency England, starts with that old romance staple, the e who is lost at cards by her wicked uncle. Jacobin, being a feisty lady, runs away and goes to work as a pastry cook at the Brighton Pavilion. Then her uncle is poisoned by a dessert she made and she’s on the run again. The good news is she’s been offered another job; the bad that her new employer is the winner of that card game. Anthony, the Earl of Storrington, has his own reasons for employing a pastry chef. He’s unaware of her true identity but things soon heat up between them and he is torn between his growing attraction and his plan to use her for his own ends. Jacobin has to overcome her distrust and team up with Anthony to prove her innocence.

H.H: And it's a great book, too, I must say! So, when did you start to write and how long did it take you get published?

It took about five years between starting my first novel and finding a publisher--for my third. Manuscripts one and two will likely never see the light of day.

Historical Hussies: So, tell us a little about yourself? What is your typical day like?

I grew up in England but I've lived in the United States for almost thirty years. These days my home is a traditional style New England house in beautiful rural Vermont. I own a small business which runs smoothly enough to give me time to write, especially now my daughter is in college.

I wish I could describe a brilliantly disciplined writing schedule. Up at 6 am and four pages before breakfast. That kind of thing. Alas, I am pretty haphazard, though I do try to write SOMETHING, even a paragraph, every day. I do spent a lot of time planning the next section or chapter of my WIP in my head: while driving, walking, making dinner etc. Then, when I'm ready to write it down it comes out pretty easily.

H.H: Tell me, how do you write? Are you a pantser or a plotter? Is it your characters or your plot that influences you the most?

I am very much a plotter. I have a chapter-by-chapter plan before I start a book. Which isn't to say things don't change, a lot. But I prefer to know just where I am going even if I end up taking detours.

I tend to begin with the idea for a story. Then I work on characters who will meet the demands of the plot. Once the characters are set they control things. Changes to my original idea are almost always character driven. "That won't work because he wouldn't behave like that." Most annoying!

H.H: That sounds like a great way to do it. And what are you working on now?

I have a two book contract with Avon for a series surrounding a group of Regency rare book collectors. I used to work in the rare books department of Sotheby's auction house so I'm drawing on my own background here.

H.H. Wow, that’s cool! Well thank you for being our guest here today. It’s been fun chatting with you. I look forward to you next book.


Miranda Neville’s debut romance, Never Resist Temptation, was published by Avon in March.

Regency Beds

Regency Beds

Unlike the pillow-top beds with either springs or air underneath, Regency beds were very different. Mattresses were large stuffed bags, with several layers of stuffing. The poor slept on mattresses stuffed with straw, if they were lucky. The wealthy typically slept on feather mattresses. Though very comfortable, the feathers became compact, so they needed to be shaken up to regain their fluff and were usually only used on the top layer, the way a duvet cover is, similar to our pillow-top mattresses. Another common mattress filling was horse hair, believe it or not. It’s durable and has a certain give and doesn’t pack down as badly. So a Regency lady may have had one mattress of horsehair, and a thinner mattress on top filled with feathers.

Beneath the mattress, there were no springs, instead, there were ropes or coarse woven bands crossing the frame which kept the mattress off the floor and supported the person. The ropes tended to sag over time so they had to be tightened periodically; hence the saying “sleep tight.” Beds – at least those of the upper classes - were commonly surrounded by a canopy and curtains to keep the drafts out.

Because beds were often shorter than beds we sleep on today, people have theorized that our ancestors were considerably shorter than we are now. However, people back then didn’t sleep flat on their backs; they slept elevated by several pillows. There was one account of a man making reference to not lying flat on his back until he was dead. I’m not sure if the tradition of sleeping half-inclined was to aid with breathing, or what. But a feather bed piled high with down pillows sounds…well, forgive the pun, but it sounds dreamy. No wonder it was fashionable to sleep in late!