I am doing a last set of post 1st round revisions of A Notorious Ruin before I send it off for final editing. Lots of boxing in it. So you get this post.
look! A lady in a pretty dress!I am doing a last set of post 1st round revisions of A Notorious Ruin before I send it off for final editing. Lots of boxing in it. So you get this post.
look! A lady in a pretty dress!The last few days I’ve run across some totally awesome things and I am going to share them with you.
A Linguist Explains What Old School British Accents Sounded Like
As a matter of fact, there are actually very good reasons to think that neither Shakespeare nor Ichabod should be speaking with what we currently think of as a “British” accent at all. What? Yes, really. Let me explain.
The recitation of the sonnet in the first video. Oh. My.
The Hidden Wardrobe – a costume collection explored From The National Trust. Go there. Look around.
“Nuns Can’t Paint”: Sexism, Medieval Art, and Dudes on Mopeds
A reminder of just how deeply “isms” are embedded in our culture, in this case, sexism.
It’s one thing to argue that nuns make bad art because they’re not trained artists; because they’re hyper-emotional; because they’re women. It’s another to imply that at the moment they take their vows, the moment these women simultaneously renounced and calcified their femininity, medieval nuns lost all aesthetic taste.
Enjoy your Wednesday!
What are you waiting for? It’s free. It’s sample chapters from books by several of the Risky Authors.This is your chance to check us out Risk Free at the Riskiest Regency site on the internet. Go forth and download.
First, catching up with news!
A Notorious Ruin, Book 2 of the Sinclair Sisters series is in final edits. I should have a cover shortly. It’s getting real, folks! Readers of this blog probably know there is boxing in this story. I like it. Lots and lots.
Alphas Unleashed, a SciFi and Paranormal Romance Anthology is out now! My story is Dead Drop which is set in the My Immortals series world. There are stories by SE Smith, Mina Khan, me, and Michele Callahan. Here are some buy links should you be so moved:
Print is on its way…
In October, I’ll have a story in a Historical Romance Christmas Anthology, In The Duke’s Arms. That’s the name of a coaching inn in Nottinghamshire. Get it? It’s going to be awesome. My story has the duke. I started writing it yesterday. The authors are:
Grace Burrows
Miranda Neville
Shana Galen
Carolyn Jewel (that would be me!)
I have a very good set of references on this, but it never hurts to look around for more information. I need to pull out those sources and get reacquainted with them. Allow me to digress a bit before I get to the point.
You may or may not recall that in the course of some other research, I came across information about taxes. That research also uncovered information about the British lottery. As in, you could win a lot. Which got me thinking…
Years ago, I read a story by Balzac in which a very poor character had been saving up money to buy into the national lottery using a special run of numbers. At last, the character has enough money and entrusts the money and her run of numbers to someone else to purchase the ticket. And the number wins!!! Only the person spent the money on something else and never bought the ticket. Then there’s the Conrad story (Or was it Henry James?) where a man’s son is reckless in every way the father fears and has warned him against. Except the young man places a wager that will bankrupt the boy … and he wins, and on and on, with everything turning golden for this young man. Those two stories have been bumping around in my head for years.
And so, it’s early days and everything could change, but the heroine who will find herself In The Duke’s Arms (bwahahahahah!) is a very poor relation who wins the lottery and then buys a house in Nottinghamshire. Assuming this stays as the basic premise, as I was notebooking, I got to wondering how much she should win, and what her initial expenses would be, what it would cost her to live in her house, and how much she could routinely give away as charity without compromising her future. Jane Austen, it turns out, budgeted the equivalent of $600. I have only one source for that so consider it unconfirmed.
And that lead me to this fantastic site: The Price of a Loaf of Bread. Go there. Bookmark the site. Spend hours reading. The link convention there is weird: highlights instead of underlining, so when you see that, it’s a link to more great content.
After clicking around to various places and sites, the yearly amount spent on food per average person during the Regency, was about £3.5, subject to variations depending on the harvest. In calculating my heroine’s possible expenses I bumped that figure up a bit, but not by much. I have decided, preliminarily, that she will win £75,000 pounds and spend £20-25,000 on her house, outfitting it, buying new clothes, staffing up, etc. I know from seeing period advertisements that rather large estates were advertised for £8-16,000 pounds.
And now here is my question for you:
The scenario:
You are a poor female relation, 25-28 years old, living with relatives who are heedless of you. You are a chaperone to the pretty young daughter with a fortune. Everyone likes you, though, because you are genuinely nice (even though sometimes you wish you didn’t have to be.) You can look forward to a life of dependency, as you have no fortune and are only average in looks.
And then…
You buy a lottery ticket and you win. A lot. Besides an estate, what would you buy for yourself? What indulgences would you allow yourself?
Go.
My current project involves a scene in which my hero (a duke!) is at his hunting box in December. As I was writing this scene, several questions arose.
1. The term “hunting box.” I have seen the term in historical romances, but is it period? The answer is yes. A hunting box implies something small, but in looking at images and floor plans, these structures were not small. This makes sense if you think about the need to accommodate staff, guests, and their servants AND the equipment, horses and dogs.
2. Who was allowed to hunt and why is, for England, a question of class and rank that comes down to this: if you needed to hunt to put food in your belly, chances are you were legally prohibited from doing so. In order to demarcate who was of sufficient rank to be allowed to hunt, there were any number of thresholds; your family, property you owned, a legal entitlement you might possess, your yearly income, the value of your estate. It’s exactly as complicated as you’d imagine when the real requirement is that you be of sufficient rank–in a culture where rank was derived from ownership of land. Down there at the border between “commoner” and “has enough money and does not need a job” there were ambiguities.
3. If you were a gentleman with the right to hunt—likely on your own property, you also had servants, and those servants, by law, were not permitted to hunt. Laymen could not legally be in possession of the implements of hunting; breeds of hunting dogs, guns, snares, nets, and the like. Nor could they be in possession of game. The penalties could be severe: significant fines, months to years in jail, and, even, transportation. What, then, was the gentleman to do when his servants were prevented from assisting in his hunting? We’ve all seen pictures of servants holding hunting equipment. The answer is a certificate; a document that granted a legal exemption from the laws.
This certificate was a legal document obtained yearly from a local clerk appointed specifically to issue the certificate. If there was no appointed clerk, the local land surveyor would issue the certificate. The certificate cost 3 pounds 1 shilling. The servant or other layman was required to produce the certificate on demand.
Think, then, what this would mean for a household with sporting gentlemen. Legally, only servants who had been issued certificates could accompany their employers on hunts where they would be required to hold or handle dogs, dead or living game, or other hunting paraphernalia.
4. The Gamekeeper was another position entirely, and there were, again, specific legal requirements to be met in order to exempt a layman from the usual restrictions against hunting, and to prevent a land owner from appointing more than one. A Gamekeeper had what amounted to limited police powers. He could seize game and equipment from others, and he could detain them and search property. A lord or lady of a manor could appoint one and only one gamekeeper per property. The position would naturally be one of power, as you would expect, both among and over the local commoners and among other servants. In historical novels in our period, we should be mindful of the importance of the position and of the legal and extra-legal powers that came with it.
There were also, as you would expect, hunting seasons. Humans the world over have understood that if you do not allow future generations of animals to procreate and raise their young, you will not have future animals. It should be no surprise that the hunting that the proscribed periods coincide with the breeding and raising of young, and that, for birds, that included leaving the nests and eggs alone.
Here is a list I put together from the 1809 Game laws. Obviously, it’s possible the dates were different in different years, but likely not by much, if at all. I did my best to decode the day of certain holidays. For some there were inconsistent results. I also added the NO and YES months for hunting as after a bit my brain hurt.
But, at last, a handy chart to refer to! Would they REALLY have been hunting grouse in June?
1-June to 1-Oct | Moulting season for water fowl. NO: June July Aug, Sep YES: Oct, Nov, Dec, Jan, Feb, Mar, Apr May |
1-Feb to 1-Sep | Partridge NO: Feb, March, Apr, May June July Aug YES: Sep Oct, Nov, Dec, Jan |
1-Feb to 1-Oct | Pheasant – unless kept in a mew or breeding place NO: Feb, March, Apr, May June July Aug Sep YES: Oct, Nov, Dec, Jan |
10-Dec to 20-Aug | Black game (birds except grouse) aka heath fowl NO: Dec-10 Jane Feb March Apr May June July Aug-20 YES: Aug 21, Sep. Oct Nov Dec 9 |
10-Dec to 12-Aug | red game (grouse) NO: Dec-10 Jane Feb March Apr May June July Aug-12 YES: Aug 13, Sep. Oct Nov Dec 9 |
1-Mar to 1-Sep | bustard NO: March, Apr, May June July Aug YES: Sep Oct, Nov, Dec, Jan Feb |
10-Dec to 1-Sep | Heath fowl in New Forest Co of Southampton (black game) NO: Dec-10 Jane Feb March Apr May June July Aug YES: Sep 2. Oct Nov Dec 9 |
2-Feb to 24-June | No burning of gaig, link, heath, furze, goss or fern for preservation of black game and grouse on nay mountains, hills, heaths, moors, forests, chases or other wastes |
1-Mar to 30-June | No taking eggs of wild birds |
Pedestrian animals: hart, hind, buck, doe, boar, fox, and hare
24-Jun to 14-Sep | Hart and buck from St. John the Baptist day til Holyrood-day |
14-Sep to 2-Feb | Hind and doe: Holyrood to Candlemas |
25-Dec to 2-Feb | Boar: Christmas to Candlemas |
25-Dec to 25-Mar | Fox: Christmas to Lady-day. Lady day is either Jan 1 (which does not make sense, or March 25-ish, which makes more sense) |
29-Sep to 2-Feb | Hare: Michaelmas til Candlemas |
No hunting at night. No hunting on Sunday or Christmas. Morning is either 6 AM, 4 AM, or 8 AM depending on the bird and time of year.
No tracing and killing hares in the snow.
No lord or lady of any manor shall appoint more than one gamekeeper within one manor, with power to kill game. Gamekeeper must be registered with the clerk of the peace in the county in which said manor lies.
Persons are forbidden to bear any hawk of the breed of England called nyesse, goshawk, passel, laner, loneret or falcon or disturb or slay them. Same for eggs.
No unauthorized fishing between 6:00AM and 6:00PM.
There you have it.