Back to Top

Author Archives: Diane Gaston

About Diane Gaston

Diane Gaston is the RITA award-winning author of Historical Romance for Harlequin Historical and Mills and Boon, with books that feature the darker side of the Regency. Formerly a mental health social worker, she is happiest now when deep in the psyches of soldiers, rakes and women who don’t always act like ladies.

Two hundred and one years ago on June 24, 1812, Napoleon began his invasion of Russia.

Hess_BerezinaTsar Alexander had angered Napoleon by ceasing to continue the blockade against British goods which was ruining the Russian economy. So, to teach the Tsar a lesson, Napoleon amassed an army of 450,000 men to march into Russia. Napoleon was convinced the whole affair would be finished in 20 days and that the Tsar would capitulate, but if ever weather changed the course of history, it was during this campaign. Weather and the fortitude of the Russian people.

As the French army marched into Russia, the Russian army refused to give them any true engagement. Instead they retreated, burning the countryside behind them. Because Napoleon’s armies replenished their supplies through pillage and plunder, the burning of crops denied the soldiers sustenance.

On June 27, Napoleon conquered Vilna with barely a fight, but that very night a huge electrical storm killed many troops and horses, with freezing rain, hail, and sleet. Later the oppressive heat would kill more troops. Others would desert looking for food and plunder

It was September before the first major battle was fought at Borodino. By then Napoleon had already lost 150,000 soldiers to exhaustion, sickness, or desertion. The Battle of Borodino was an extremely bloody one with total casualties on both sides of 70,000. The Russians withdrew and Napoleon marched triumphantly on to Moscow.

Except the Russians burned Moscow and its stores, leaving only hard liquor. Most of its citizens had fled. Napoleon, nonetheless, waited three weeks in Moscow, expecting the Tsar to request negotiation.

800px-Napoleon_retreat_from_Russia_by_AdamInstead it started to snow and Napoleon realized he and his army could not survive a Russian winter. He ordered the retreat but the Russians blocked his chosen route, forcing his army to retreat over the already burned and barren land from which they had come. The winter came early and was particularly harsh, with high winds, snow, and sub-zero temperatures. Thousands more died of exposure. It was said that soldiers split open dead animals and crawled inside for warmth or stacked dead bodies for insulation.

By the time in late November when the Grande Armée crossed the frigid Berezina River, its numbers were depleted to 27,000 from that original 450,000.

Still, Napoleon stated it was a victory.

Instead it turned the tide of Napoleon’s perceived invincibility. Prussia, Austria, and Sweden rejoined Russia and Great Britain against Napoleon. Although he was still able to raise an army to continue the fight against them, it was never the fighting force it once had been.

Three times in History armies tried to invade Russia only to have their efforts further their demise. Napoleon tried it in 1812; Charles XII of Sweden tried it in 1708; Hitler tried it in 1941. For each the Russian winter and the scorched earth policy took a horrific toll.

The Weather Channel will be airing a new series, Weather That Changed the World. “Russia’s Secret Weapon” to be aired June 30 at 9 pm, will be about the disastrous winter that changed Napoleon’s fate.

Do you have an example of when weather changed the world?

 

IMG_1087-2I am having such a busy month! This past weekend we moved my daughter to Richmond, a feat that took up lots of time and energy in the last week. We also saw the Richmond relatives for Father’s Day and my nephew had this for his iPad–it’s a cover that looks like a vintage book.

In search of something to talk about today, I went to Chambers Book of Days for today and found this entry– (it all seemed to fit….)

THE ROXBURGHE CLUB

This fraternity—the parent of the whole tribe of book-printing clubs which have occupied so broad a space in the literary system of our age—was formed on the 17thof June 1812. The plant shot forth from a hot-bed of bibliomania, which had been created by the sale of the Duke of Roxburghe’s library. On that occasion Earl Spencer, the youthful Duke of Devonshire, the Marquis of Blandford, and a whole host of minor men, lovers of old and rare books, were brought together in a state of high excitement, to contend with each other for the rarities exposed under the hammer of Mr. Evans, in the Duke of Roxburghe’s mansion in St. James’s Square. On the 16th of June, a number of them had chanced to dine together in the house of Mr. Bolland (afterwards Justice Bolland), on Adelphi Terrace. They had to look forward to the exposure on the ensuing day of a most rare and remarkable volume, a folio edition of Boccaccio, printed by Valdarfer of Venice in 1471. They agreed to meet again at dinner on the ensuing evening, at the St. Alban’s tavern, in order to talk over the fight which would by that time have taken place over the body of Valdarfer; and they did so.

800px-Oldbooks-02Earl Spencer, the unsuccessful candidate for the volume (which had sold at £2260), occupied the chair; Dr. Dibdin acted as croupier. There were sixteen other gentlemen present, all of them possessors of choice libraries, and all keen appreciators of scarce and curious books. The lively Dibdin tells us that they drank toasts which. were as hieroglyphical characters to the public, but’ all understood and cordially greeted by those who gave and those who received them.’ We may presume that the immortal memory of William Caxton was one of the most prominent; that sundry illustrious booksellers, and even notable binders (bibliopegists they called them), were not forgotten. The club was constituted by the persons there assembled; but by the time they had had two annual assemblages, the number was swelled to thirty-one, at which it was fixed.

It was by an after thought that the club commenced its system of printing and reprinting, each member fixing upon some precious article, of which only as many copies were thrown off as afforded one to each, presented gratuitously. By this happy plan the friendly spirit of the brethren was of course promoted, at the same time that some valuable examples of ancient literature were rescued from oblivion. In the Scottish imitative societies—the Bannatyne Club, Maitland Club, &c.—the same plan was adopted; while in others of later institution the reprints have been effected by an equal annual subscription.

The Roxburghe Club still exists today and has produced a remarkable number of books over the years.

If you could have any antique book what would it be? Or do you own an antique book? (I own an 1815 edition of La Belle Assemblee!)

9780955180859Janet first told us about the Threads of Feeling exhibit on display at the Foundling Museum in London in 2011, and a year later, that it was coming to Colonial Williamsburg. I was so excited I marked my calendar. The chances were great that I’d get to see the exhibit–my in-laws live in Williamsburg.

This weekend was my chance. We visited the in-laws and I made it a priority to go to the DeWitt Museum where the exhibit will continue until May 27, 2014.

In 1739 philanthropist Thomas Coram received a royal charter from George II to create a foundling hospital for “the maintenance and education of exposed and deserted young children.” It was intended to address the problem of babies being abandoned in the streets or killed because their mothers could not care for them.

Foundling_HospitalAt the Foundling Hospital (more like we would consider an orphanage), mothers were asked to provide a token to be kept with the baby’s registration as a way to help match baby to mother, if the mother came to reclaim her child. The tokens left were overwhelmingly swatches of textiles. The exhibit displays book after ledger book, each opened to a page showing a baby’s registration and the token left by the mother.

Babies that were left there were only a few days old to two months or so. Initially the hospital only accepted babies under six months of age. Later the age was raised to twelve months. Some of the babies had been named, but all received new names given to them by the hospital. Not all were illegitimate; some married couples gave up their babies because their poverty was so extreme they could not care for them. Some mothers left notes.

It is evident from the tokens that the mothers thought very carefully about what token to leave. Swatches of printed fabrics were cut to show a butterfly or a bird or some other symbol of hope. Some left ribbons of all colors or designs. At that time, ribbons were considered love tokens.

Other tokens were created specifically for the purpose. Hearts were cut out of fabric. Names were cross-stitched. Some swatches were decorated with primitive attempts at embroidery. Others had beautiful crewel work.

One had the overwhelming sense that these babies were loved and that the mothers’ situations were so desperate that giving the baby away to the hospital was the best they could do for them. Their baby would be fed, clothed, educated and apprenticed.

Even though the Foundling Hospital was a popular charity (which continues to this day as Coram), supported by wealthy patrons such as the Duke of Bedford, Hogarth and Handel, it could not afford to care for every baby brought to its doors. From 1749 to 1756, 2,808 babies were brought to the hospital, but only 803 were accepted.

The hospital used a lottery system to decide which baby got in. The mother reached into a bag of balls. If she picked out a white one, her baby could stay. If she picked out a black one, she and her baby were turned away.

This heart breaking policy changed in 1756 when the Foundling Hospital became funded by Parliament and all children up to 12 months old were accepted. The numbers of admissions rose from 200 a year to 4000 a year.

Of those babies accepted, two thirds would die. This horrifying death rate was only a bit higher than the norm of fifty per cent. If a child survived past one year old, chances were great that the child would survive until grown.

The tokens left by the mothers revealed, not only their love for their child, but also the best record available as to what ordinary people wore. Clothing of ordinary people was rarely preserved. Before discovering the tokens, it was assumed that the clothing of the poor was drab. The tokens show that the poor wore colorful clothing, printed fabric, and decorative ribbons.

Most of the fabrics were cotton; most were prints. It was surmised that the demand for cotton, for the masses is what drove the fabric industry to mass produce cloth.

Out of 16,282 children admitted to the Foundling Hospital between 1741 and 1760, only 152 were reclaimed by their mothers.

August_Müller_Interieur_mit_Mutter_und_KindAs I went through the exhibit, reading every page shown, the spirits of the mothers seemed to reach out to me, showing me what an agonizing choice they were forced to make.

Can you imagine how it must have been? To nurse your baby for two months. To fashion some sort of token as the only communication of your love for the child. To finally make the decision to give up your baby because you loved it so much, then reach into a bag and pick out a black ball.

What did those mothers do then?

Here is a lecture about the Foundling Hospital.
Here is a podcast with John Styles, the man behind the exhibit and the museum book.

Try to visit Williamsburg to see these Threads of Feeling. It is worth it.

Posted in Research | 19 Replies

Today the dh and I are celebrating our wedding anniversary and we want to take a little break to do something fun. So I’m recycling a 2008 blog I did on Regency Weddings.

We were married a gazillion years ago, before a bride would even DREAM of a wearing a  strapless gown. Before I married, I’d never read Georgette Heyer or Regency Romances and it had been a few years since I’d read Jane Austen.

But take a look at my wedding dress.

It’s a little hard to tell here, but it has an empire waist, leg o’mutton sleeves, and ribbon trim. It’s a Regency Dress!

I’d never heard of the Regency, but somehow I picked a Regency dress.

Like me, Regency brides did wear white, but they didn’t have to. In the Regency, white gowns were popular for many occasions. Other colors like pale pink and blue were also worn at weddings. The older the bride, the darker the color. Wedding dresses were worn after the wedding, too. By the time Queen Victoria became a bride and wore white, the white wedding dress was well on its way to becoming a tradition.

Princess Charlotte, who wed Prince Leopold in 1816, wore a dress of silver lamé, embroidered in silver. 

Sites that tell more about Regency Weddings:

Jessamyn’s Regency Costume Companion

Regency Weddings

Quick facts about Regency Weddings:

1. Weddings could take place after reading of the Banns, a license, or a special license. Banns must be read for three consecutive Sundays in the parishes of both the prospective bride and groom. A license, purchased from the bishop of the diocese, did away with the banns but the couple still had to be married in the parish church. A special license, purchased from the Archbishop of Canterbury, allowed the couple to be married in a location other than a church and without banns. Licenses were never blank; different names could not be substituted.

2. Scottish weddings went by different rules. In Scotland couples could be married by declaring themselves married in front of witnesses, by making a promise to marry followed by intercourse, or by living together and calling themselves married.

3. Weddings could not be performed by proxy. Both the bride and groom had to be present.

4. Ship captains could not perform marriages. Couples could be married aboard ship, but only by clergy. (How many times have you read that plot?)

5. Brides had wedding rings; grooms did not. The bride could give the groom a ring as a wedding gift, but it was not part of the ceremony and didn’t symbolize he was married.

Do you want a Regency Wedding? There are many sites on the internet offering custom made Regency wedding dresses:

Jane Austen Centre Giftshop
Fashions in Time

Or if you are handy, you could make your Regency gown:

Do you have any questions about Regency weddings?

Did anyone else have a Regency wedding dress?

A Reputation for Notoriety is now available as an ebook, if you are like me and prefer ebooks.

 

Today is Memorial Day in the USA, a day of remembrance that began as Decoration Day, a day freemen (freed slaves) decorated the graves of Union soldiers. The holiday eventually became a day to include remembrance of all who have died in defense of our country.

Most of us do not know first hand what soldiers face when they are sent into combat. We suppose their valor, their fear, their willingness to face enemy fire. We imagine it and recreate it in books (Most of my heroes are soldiers or former soldiers) and movies.

One of my favorite war movies is one released in 1964, Zulu. Zulu tells the true story of the Battle of Rorke’s Drift on January 22, 1879.

The British had invaded the Zulu lands in South Africa under the direction of the British Governor General, but without the sanction of the Government, as part of an attempt to unify the area under British rule. On January 22, at Isandhlwana, a British force of 1700 men was attacked by the Zulu and defeated, leaving only 400 survivors. One Zulu reserve corps of 3,000 missed the battle, but wanted to partake in the glory of victory. They attacked a British store depot and hospital at Rorke’s Drift.

There was only a tiny British garrison of 140 men at Rorke’s Drift. Many of them were sick or wounded. They were commanded by Lieutenant John Chard of the Royal Engineers, who outranked the one infantry officer present, Lieutenant Gonville Bromhead (played n the movie by a very young Michael Caine), whose company had been assigned to guard the station.

The 140 men at the station fought for 12 hours to repel repeated attacks by the 3,000 Zulu warriors. Queen Victoria’s government rewarded their heroic defense by awarding 11 Victoria Crosses and 5 Distinguished Conduct Medals.

What I loved about this movie was its depiction of the valor and dignity of both the British soldiers and the Zulu warriors. I loved that bravery and sacrifice was celebrated.

It turns out that my favorite two scenes in the movie didn’t really happen, but they still depict soldiers at their best.  Here is a YouTube video of those two scenes.

And here is to the valor of soldiers. We remember them today.

Come visit the Pink Heart Society today for my blog on Male on Monday. I’m giving away a signed copy of A Reputation for Notoriety.

My winner for last week’s giveaway of A Reputation for Notoriety is….bn100. Congratulations, bn100. Email me at diane@dianegaston.com with your mailing address.

 

Posted in TV and Film | 1 Reply
Follow
Get every new post delivered to your inbox
Join millions of other followers
Powered By WPFruits.com