Voting and distribution of representation by elected officials is a vital and fascinating topic today as it was during the Regency.
We can now watch legislative sessions live-streamed, or follow issues of interest via the internet, but the doings of the government during the Regency were communicated by way of a journal that was sold by a publisher. In 1806 Thomas Hansard began producing reports of parliamentary debates in a journal published by William Cobbett called Parliamentary Debates. Hansard bought out Cobbett in 1811 and continued to publish the debates. This constituted a watchdog system of sorts.
The set-up of the voting system was ripe for reform. In the early 19th century there were two types of constituency, country areas and towns or boroughs. In the countryside only the landowners could vote. In boroughs the level of enfranchisement varied but was usually limited. The constituencies had not been changed for centuries and no longer reflected the distribution of the population. Industrial towns like Birmingham and Manchester did not have MPs of their own. On the other hand some settlements had died out but they were still represented in parliament! In ‘rotten’ or ‘pocket’ boroughs there might be only one or two voters! And we think red-lining is bad!
The early 19th century saw increasing demand for reforms. Most people wanted constituencies distributed more fairly and they also wanted enfranchisement extended, but Wellington’s party, the Tories, resisted.
The Whigs formed a government in 1830 and tried to introduce reform. The House of Commons eventually voted for a reform bill but the House of Lords rejected it. King William IV warned that he would create more peers, who favored the bill, unless the Lords agreed to accept it. Eventually the House of Lords backed down and passed the Great Reform Bill. It received the royal assent on June 7, 1832.
The franchise to vote was only extended slightly but more importantly the new industrial towns were now represented in parliament. Before 1832 Britain was ruled by an oligarchy of landowners. After 1832 the urban middle class had an increasing say.
For me, the most hectic—and refreshing—moment is when one book is finished and turned in. My mind doesn’t like to be idle, so I find things to do. I read. I explore. I bake. And eventually, I reach that moment when my brain says, “The heck with this. Let’s write. The question becomes, what do I write.”
Finding the Idea You Have to Write
Getting started is one of the hardest things a writer has to do.
Where do you begin when you want to write the next great American novel? My first piece of advice is simple: take your expectations down.
That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t dream big. Dream as big as you want. But no great novel can come from you if you aren’t committed to writing the novel in the first place.
Writing is one of those endeavors where best intentions, wishes, and all the things you would’ve, should’ve, could’ve written don’t count for much. At some point, you have to show up and put words on paper. That’s how you win the game—or, more accurately, how you put yourself in the game.
Before there are chapters, however, there is an idea.
And an idea doesn’t have to arrive fully formed.
Where Story Ideas Come From
For me, book ideas tend to come in three ways: a person, a circumstance, or a fascination that won’t let me go.
Because I write historical fiction, I may happen upon an unusual fact or discover a person in history who immediately piques my interest. Something about that person catches hold of me, and I need to know more.
That happened with Queen of Exiles. While researching and writing Sister Mother Warrior, I encountered the story of Marie-Louise Coidavid Christophe, wife of Henri Christophe. Christophe rose as a soldier in the Haitian Revolution to the liberator Dessalines’s right hand man and then became the king of Haiti, which made Marie-Louise its queen. But what fascinated me was how this simple hotelier’s daughter grew to handle herself on the world stage through building a kingdom in Haiti, then in exile arriving to Europe.
I wanted to know her.
Who was this woman? What happened to her? What did she experience? How did someone live through such extraordinary transformations?
That curiosity became a story.
Sometimes, though, it isn’t a person. It’s a circumstance.
My Lady Worthing Mysteries grew partly from my fascination with the complicated political and social world surrounding abolition, race, class, and freedom in Regency England. But another piece came from something much more personal: watching Murder, She Wrote with my mother. Those seemingly unrelated things could live together in my imagination—an amateur sleuth stumbling across murders and a historical world filled with political intrigue—catnip.
Thus a circumstance became a playground for story.
And sometimes an idea begins with nothing more complicated than something you can’t stop thinking about.
A question. An image. An experience. Something strange you read. Something that happened to you. Something you wish had happened. Something that makes you angry, delighted, curious, or confused.
Pay attention to the thoughts that keep coming back.
They may be trying to tell you something.
The StoryMetric™ Idea Assessment: Start With the Bubble
This is why I created the StoryMetric™ Idea Assessment process. That’s a lot of fancy words for the way. Vanessa’s brain works and how she teaches story craft.
As an engineer, I love spreadsheets and forms. But I love love, magical forms that help build to something. So I built a bubble form where I throw ideas into them, play with those ideas, question them, and gradually refine them until I find the story I know I have to tell.
At the beginning, I don’t want perfection. I want possibility.
The Idea Bubble is deliberately simple. Give yourself ten minutes and fill the bubbles. One way to get moving is to use a basic story pattern:
Subject + Verb + Object + Conflict
A girl wants to become an astronaut, but she’s afraid of heights.
Is that your novel? Maybe. Maybe not.
That’s not the point.
The point is that you’ve made something where nothing existed before.
Fill another bubble. And another.
Don’t edit yourself, not yet. Don’t decide whether an idea is literary enough, commercial enough, original enough, or important enough. Generate first. Assessment comes later.
Then take the ideas that create a spark and begin asking questions.
What is the situation or circumstance?
What fascinates me about it?
What question keeps returning?
What connection do I have to this idea—something I’ve lived, witnessed, inherited, studied, or wondered about?
Now we’re moving from having an idea to discovering whether there might be a story inside it.
Give Yourself Permission to Want What You Want
The next question is one writers sometimes don’t want to answer:
Why do I want to write this?
Maybe you’ve never heard of this subject before and you’re fascinated.
Maybe you want to explore something you don’t understand.
Maybe there’s something you want to say that might encourage another person.
Maybe this is personal.
Maybe you simply want to write.
Or let’s get mercenary: maybe you think the idea will sell.
That’s allowed, too.
None of these motivations is inherently wrong.
Some writing may be primarily for you. Some may be intended for a particular community of readers. Some may be a gift you want to put into the world. Some may be unabashedly commercial. Some may begin as one of these and become another.
I’m Vanessa Riley, and I’m giving you permission to write about anything you absolutely want.
You don’t know how far an idea will reach when you’re standing at the beginning.
And there are no stupid ideas.
There are no trivial ideas.
If you look at an idea and think, That’s stupid, my response is that you may simply not have developed it enough yet.
Question it before you discard it.
Turn it around. Make it more specific. Find the conflict. Change the circumstances. Ask what fascinates you about it. Ask why it keeps coming back.
The important thing at this stage is clarity—not justification.
What Kind of Story Might This Be
Once an idea survives that first examination, I start asking another question:
You’re still in a nebulous phase. You aren’t signing a contract with a genre. You’re forming a hypothesis.
But having some idea of where you’re going can begin to tell you what you need to learn.
Genre starts shaping your research. It gives you craft questions. It helps you identify the books you should be reading. It begins to reveal what kind of experience a future reader might expect.
So choose a direction without treating it as a permanent label.
Then test it.
Genre Is Also a Promise
This is where the I shift from What do I want to write? to What experience am I preparing to give a reader?
Genre creates expectations.
A reader who picks up a Mystery has expectations that differ from someone choosing a Romance. A reader selecting Horror is looking for a different emotional experience from a reader choosing Women’s Fiction. Those genres may overlap. Writers may bend conventions. Books may be hybrids.
But readers still bring expectations with them.
That isn’t a limitation. It’s information.
Think about pacing. Character. Conflict. Worldbuilding. Emotional experience. Plot and structure. Ending and resolution. Tone. And of course Genre conventions.
What does a reader who loves this kind of story anticipate in each of those areas?
The fun of writing is knowing the rules and carefully breaking them. You never blindly obey every convention, but you should fulfill expectations, maybe bend them, combine them, delay them, and sometimes give the unexpected.
But you should know the rules and expectations.
Find Your Story Neighbors
The next question I ask is:
What stories live near my story?
I call these Story Neighbors.
A good writer is a reader.
Think about the books you love and the books that resemble some aspect of the story you’re considering. A Story Neighbor doesn’t have to contain your exact plot. It may share your genre, audience, premise, setting, character type, emotional experience, tone, structure, or reader promise.
Then go back and read those books like a writer.
Don’t merely ask whether you’re enjoying them.
Study them. I had a lovely conversation with an author yesterday about the lineal movements within Fire Sword and Sea. Those in between times of the twilight acts really stuck with her and she wanted to know why I chose those moments to open Jacquotte Delahaye’s journey.
That’s inside baseball talk for writers. You should be looking at how quickly the story moves? How are the characters introduced and developed? What creates conflict? How much worldbuilding does the author provide? What emotional experience does the book deliver? How is the plot structured? What happens at the ending? What’s the tone? Which genre conventions appear again and again?
Most importantly:
What might a reader of that book expect when they pick up mine?
You’re learning the neighborhood before you build your house.
An Idea Doesn’t Have to Become a Book
Shocking but true. This may be the most freeing part of the entire process.
After you’ve bubbled and questioned and researched and read and considered genre and reader expectations, you’re allowed to decide:
Not this one. Not now.
My process isn’t designed to force every idea into becoming a novel.
It’s designed to help to help me write that next important book. That means a lot of ideas go into a file cabinet or a waste can.
Sometimes when I go through this process ideas bubble to the top and I have enough direction to begin the story.
Sometimes I need more research before I decide a bubble’s fate.
Sometime the bubble pops under its own weight. Because there’s just not enough there.
All of this deciding is part of the progress.
Never give up too quickly, but don’t waste time on an idea that’s going no where or is not the right time.
Remember the next great American novel doesn’t begin as the next great American novel.
It begins with somebody showing up.
It begins with curiosity.
It begins with a bubble.
It begins with words on a page.
That’s how you put yourself in the game.
I’ve just walked you through my STORYMETRIC™ Story Starter / idea assessment process. Because you guys are my audience, I’m giving you a link to download the free PDF for this concept. It’s a fillable PDF. It’s printable and it will help you decide on what’s your next great American novel will be.
Through this last quarter of 2026, I’m going to be teaching, so buckle up, subscribe, stay tuned, and let’s write together.
This week’s books include:
Romance — Last First Kiss by Julian Winters: An event planner is forced back into the orbit of Jamie, the person who broke his heart, giving the two a second chance at both love and self-discovery while planning a high-profile wedding.
Horror — Mazywood by Tananarive Due: Decades after a celebrated Black actress’s death, her filmmaker grandson visits her secluded California home and confronts the monstrous legacy of the choices she made to survive old Hollywood.
Women’s/Commercial Fiction — The Me I Used to Be by Kristan Higgins: Twenty-five years after a tragedy shattered their friendship, four former best friends reunite for their high school reunion and confront the secrets, regrets, and unexpected lives that have shaped who they’ve become.
Historical Fiction — Fire Sword and Sea by Vanessa Riley: In the seventeenth-century Caribbean, Jacquotte Delahaye defies the limits placed on women to become a pirate captain and ultimately turns from the pursuit of riches toward a fight for freedom and liberation.
And Loyalty Books is my Indie of the week. Check them out for these and my books.
You can also try one of my partners in the fight, bookstores large and small, who are in the trenches with me.
You can find my notes on Substack or on my website, VanessaRiley.com, under the podcast link in the About tab.
Hey. Let’s keep rising and creating together. I need you. That’s the truth. Like, share, subscribe, and stay connected to Write of Passage.
Thank you for being here.
I want you to come again. This is Vanessa Riley.
This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit vanessariley.substack.com/subscribe
Today Regency Reflections welcomes Dina Sleiman. Dina is stopping by to show just how much influence the Regency era had beyond the shores of England.
Although my new historical romance, Love in Three-Quarter Time, is set near the American frontier, it is also set during what would be considered the Regency period in England. And because American culture was so influenced by Britain, I think any Regency fan will enjoy reading about those influences in my book. Most of my characters come from an English background. In fact, several minor characters are directly from England. And my heroine, little trouble maker that she is at times, decides to fake a Yorkshire accent to try to impress her potential employers with her European background. The story takes place in Charlottesville, Virginia, home of Thomas Jefferson and many other members of the “planter elite class,” which gives it a sophisticated touch reminiscent of Regency England. But it’s also situated not far from the Shenandoah mountain range, which was still considered the frontier in 1817.
Let’s look at some of the elements associated with Regency culture that are seen in my book.
Fashion
1817 Regency Gown
Fashionable Americans wore the same styles as their European counterparts, and made every effort to keep up with the latest trends. In 1817, for ladies this meant higher waists than ever before and sculpted bodices. Hemlines were also higher than ever and skirts were wider and more frilled than during other times in the Regency Era. I especially give a close up look at the ball gowns of that day since my heroine’s mother is a seamstress. You’ll also see plenty of the hats, gloves, and fans that this era is known for. In men’s fashion the style had moved to trousers rather than breeches, and Hessian boots had grown passé. Although, you’ll still see these boots on some of my less fashion conscious characters.
Science
Of course scientific advances are the same in both the United States and England. The US could boast several impressive universities at that time, and plans for building the University of Virginia in Charlottesville were already underway. Let’s not forget that Benjamin Franklin had been an American innovator in science not long ago. My heroine’s sister, Patience Cavendish, has a love for science and a penchant for discussing the latest theories of heat and sound. Like her former president, Thomas Jefferson, she is very influenced by Enlightenment thinking.
Politics
Both England and America were still recovering from the War of 1812. In addition, the abolitionist movement was active in both countries. Britain had abolished all slave trade at this time, although not slavery itself. America had recently abolished international slave trade but not domestic. Of course, my abolitionist characters hope that America will keep the momentum moving toward freedom, but I’m concerned that unlike in England, it will take drastic measures to put an end to slavery in the American South.
Economics
Both countries were still recovering from the devastating effects of the “Year without a Summer” of 1816, which was reportedly caused by a volcano in Indonesia. Virginia itself was far enough south to escape the worst of the famine, but it did affect the economy throughout the US and earned several mentions in my book. It comes into play as my hero, Robert Montgomery, makes some important business decisions about his plantation.
Arts and Architecture
Monticello
The Romantic Movement was fashionable in art at this time throughout Europe and the US. My artistic character, Felicity Cavendish, is a fan of this movement. In architecture the style was called “Regency” in England and “Federalist” in America, but both were heavily influenced by the Neo-classical style. This can be seen in Jefferson’s Greek Revival architecture at Monticello and my own fictional creation, White Willow Hall.
Music and Dance
While Americans enjoyed the same cultured composers as their British counterparts, they each had their own unique folk music as well. For high society balls, the dances were nearly identical at this time. England beat us to the “scandalous” waltz, however, when the Prince Regent introduced it in 1816. The waltz coming to America is a primary focus of my book, so you’ll get to enjoy many details of the waltz and other ballroom dances, as well as a peek at the world of ballet. In fact, my heroine Constance Cavendish, turned to teaching dance to support her family after her father died, leaving them destitute. Since men were highly sought as dance masters at the time, Constance must move to the frontier in search of better employment.
Religion
A few weeks ago Reagan Walker shared an in depth article on this blog about the religion of this time in England. I loved this quote she shared from an Anglican minister about other Anglican ministers of this time. “[With few exceptions] the clergy held and taught a negative and cold Protestantism deadening to the imagination, studiously repressive to the emotions, and based on principles which found little sanction either in reason or in history. The laity willingly accepted it, as it made so little demand upon their conscience, so little claim upon their life.” My heroine’s spiritual journey is moving from this type of thinking to a warm and vibrant evangelical sort of faith, also typical of this time, thanks to my handsome circuit riding preacher, Lorimer.
Naturally, some elements in the book are purely American including Thomas Jefferson, the Monacan Indians, the tobacco plantations, and the frontiersmen in buckskin clothing, but I think you’ll find plenty of European influence to please even the most Regency-loving soul. In fact, my characters enjoy a good Austen novel as well as anyone, although the author is still anonymous at this time. I call this my “Scarlett O’Hara meets Jane Austen novel,” and I included plenty of Austen-like twist and turns for a fun, romantic read you’ll be sure to enjoy.
Explore the world of 1817 Virginia and follow in the footsteps of Constance Cavendish, the former belle of the ball, who must now teach the dances she once loved and risk her heart in order to restore her family and her faith. As the fiery Constance falls into genteel poverty, the opportunity of a lifetime may await her in the frontier town of Charlottesville. But the position will require her to instruct the sisters of Robert Montgomery—the plantation owner who jilted her when she needed him most. As Robert and Constance make new discoveries about one another, can they face their past and the guilt that threatens to destroy them in time to waltz to a fresh start? Or will the curtain close on Constance for good this time? Fans of Julie Klassen will love this original novel from Dina Sleiman! http://zondervan.com/9780310334156 Also visit Dina at http://dinasleiman.com
When my husband and I were married some twelve years ago, there were few impediments for us to reach the altar as soon as we wished to. He knelt down on one knee to ask me, I gave an enthusiastic “Yes!” and almost immediately afterwards, we began making our joyful plans.
Besides the all important wedding gown, the perfect candlelit venue and the explosion of decisions that had to be made, we focused little on what the government required for our union and more on how we would put our personal mark on the day we’d pledge our future lives to each other. In fact, we lived in a location that had minimal government restrictions – we were citizens of the country and were of legal age so we had but to file with the county official’s office and in turn, would have been required to wait only 24 hours before making our walk down the aisle.
In researching Regency Era marriage for a recent book project, it was fascinating to learn how different our options would have been had we lived in England some 200 years ago.
Of course the differences in how an eligible young lady would have made her social debut, how a young man and woman would meet and how courting would commence is in stark contrast to what we know today. But as for government, it’s interesting to find that there is just as much government restriction on the act of marriage (and just as much dodging of said restrictions) as there would have been in force during the Regency Era.
Country road in Gretna Green, Scotland (Photo: Wiki Commons)
The first of these restrictions involved the literal “Las Vegas” of the day – or Gretna Green, Scotland. It was to this elopement location that many couples embarked upon a journey along the Great North Road from London in order to quickly exchange their vows. Similar to the little wedding chapels that one might find along Nevada’s famous neon strip, the tiny village of Gretna Green became the virtual Vegas of its day.
It lies just over the border to Scotland and at the time, became a famous spot for couples escaping the 1754 Lord Hardwicke Marriage Act that was still in effect in the Regency years. The British government dictated that a couple must have parental consent to marry if under twenty-one years of age. In contrast, Scotland’s age for eligible marriage was just sixteen. This led to many couples fleeing up the road on a days-long journey to traverse the border and become a Mr. and Mrs. both quickly and legally.
With this ring… (Photo: Wiki Commons)
Another stark contrast in Hardwicke’s Act dictated the waiting period required to be married in satisfaction to the church. In the Regency Era, Hardwicke’s Act would have compelled couples to be married in a parish building by an ordained minister. By Scottish law, a man and woman could be married with virtually no notice and required only to make a commitment before two witnesses in order to make their marriage contract binding. This spurred the act of marriages performed by “anvil priests”, or blacksmiths that acted as marriage officiates in the village for runaway marriages. [Click here for more information onanvil priests.]
Another practice for a couple wishing to be married in the Church of England was the reading of the banns of marriage (also known as “banns”). This proclamation of marriage was announced publicly within the church for three weeks in succession prior to a marriage taking place (mainly so that anyone citing a credible reason that the marriage should not take place would have adequate notice to make such a stand against the union). Today, a couple may be required to participate in marriage counseling or take classes to satisfy the requirements of a particular church or denomination, but the requirement would be independent of government decree. In addition, couples may declare their intent to marry by proclaiming their engagement in a public announcement, newspaper article or engagement party, though these practices are social in nature and are not dictated as a requirement by the government. For those traveling to Gretna Green, no such proclamation was expected or required.
It is interesting to note that now more than 200 years after the time of these original runaway marriages, Gretna Green remains an extremely popular wedding venue. In fact, it is estimated that one in six Scottish marriages occur in the small village made famous for its take on marriage minus the control of government.
Today, a wedding ring is a must. The making of a marriage promise is still a lifelong commitment. And whether or not we travel to Gretna Green to exchange the all important vows or whether we follow the requirements of the government in the locale where we live, we still say “with this ring…” with as much heart as those couples would have all those years ago.
In Romans 13, Paul warns his flock to obey the rulers over them, saying, “But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain . . .”
These days, “the sword” of the government is usually jail time or fines or community service, and only occasionally the death penalty. But in the Regency, it was different.
Criminals were still sent to prisons then. But in the Regency, prisons weren’t nearly as regulated as they are now. Some prisons didn’t provide enough of food or other necessities for the prisoners. Some were workhouses. Worst of all, some were “hulks”: old ships moored in the Thames, where hundreds of men were locked below deck, in the dark, doomed to fight and starve and probably die long before they were granted the dubious opportunity of transportation to the colonies.
And it wasn’t just men in the prisons or hulks: children convicted of crimes were sent there, too. While men and women were generally separated in prison, adults and children were not. You can just imagine the fate of those children.
If you weren’t sent to prison, you might be sent off to the colonies, on the theory that if you couldn’t commit any more crimes in England if . . . well, if you weren’t in England anymore.
But perhaps the biggest difference between the way our government punishes crime and the way crime was punished by the government of Regency England was the death penalty. We still have it, yes, but it’s rarely used, and generally only for very serious and violent crimes. Moreover, these days, attempts are made to administer it humanely. But in the Regency, not only were hundreds of crimes were punishable by death, if you were sentenced to death, you were going to die publicly and probably not painlessly, by hanging.
However, reform of the penal code was beginning – and ongoing – in the Regency. According to Donald Low in his book The Regency Underworld, in 1816 Sir Samuel Romilly succeeded in getting pickpocketing to be no longer punishable by the death penalty. In a time when over two hundred crimes could be punished by death, this was a notable success. Other reformers began trying to implement corrective programs in the prisons or, at the very least, to separate serious criminals from the less serious, instead of having them all mill about together, the worse corrupting the better (see Peel’s Prison Act of 1823).
This post isn’t anywhere near exhaustive – the people of the Regency were inventive, and the nuances of the penal code numerous and arcane. It’s a rich field for research, but one that requires a strong stomach.
But even with all these differences between then and now, prison still isn’t a good place to be, and not even always a safe place. The spirit of the reform work and the concern for prisoners that began in the Regency are still carried out today by ministries like Prison Fellowship. And then as now, children still feel the pain imposed by the penal system. With Christmas coming, Angel Tree is a great place to start if you feel a call to ministering to the children of those in prison in this day and age. And just about every city has a prison with people in it who can use visitors and books and Bibles. Things might be better now, but they’re far from perfect. The light of Christ still needs to be taken to the darkest of places.
Tories, Whigs, Foxite-Whigs, oh my. What shall become of us, Lord?
The government is not stable, barely lasting two years. My fears of invasion, a total loss of the country I know and love, fills my heart.
How can Providence allow such upheavals?
Why change from Pitt, to Grenville, to Portland? Is the title of Prime Minister difficult to hold?
I know I am just a woman. I should contend myself to my needlework. Surely, there are enough ribbons to be added to little Mary’s gown to make my mind numb to fear.
Yet, how can I even think of my girl coming of age in times like these. My heart aches at seeing her cast into this society where dissension reigns. She cannot be a war bride. No! Not her.
My thumb has turned painful. I yank the needle freeing it from the swelling flesh. I’ve pricked finger and stained the satin hem.
Is this coursing of rouge a sign to come? Don’t our enemies in France lay in wait for our weakness? This turmoil is the proper time to strike.
I dispatch my maid for fresh muslin. I will not ruin anymore ribbons with my wringing of hands. Doubt will not save my country.
As I swaddle my hands in the soft cloth, my palms meet. A peace settles on my shoulders. The churning of my stomach quiets. I remember Your words.
Romans 13:1-4
1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
So Pitt, Grenville and now Portland… You ordained them to be Prime Minister, in such a time as these?
I slump in my chair. The very thought of this contention being God’s will disheartens me. Yet, the soft words of the passage sing in my soul.
Romans 13:5-7
5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
6 For this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God’s ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.
7 Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.
Now my heart is pricked. For I have not given tribute to the governing, just gossip and trepidation. I repent of that Lord. I uncover my hands, slapping flesh to flesh, and pay tribute. I pray for Providence’s guidance and mercy to fall upon my leaders. It is the best offering I can render.
Laurie Allice Eakes (LA) invites you into an Interview with Cheryl Bolen (CB), author of Marriage of Inconvenience from Love Inspired Historical.
Cheryl Bolen, author of Marriage of Inconvenience
LA: What drew you to write about the Regency Time Period?
CB: My World War II book—the fourth complete book I’d written but not found a publishing home for—won a lot of contests, but publishers kept saying it didn’t fit into a genre. The final editor judge in one contest told me if I wrote a historical romance that took place before 1900 she would like to look at it. The only period I liked was the Regency England Georgette Heyer had introduced me to. I hadn’t read many of the contemporary writers of Regency because I found some of them not understanding the era as well as I thought I did. That’s when I had a light bulb moment. I can write that! I began A DUKE DECEIVED, and months later that senior editor at Harlequin Historical bought it.
LA: Tell us what year your book is set in and why you chose that particular time.
CB: My newest release is set sometime after Waterloo but before 1820. I actually picked that time because it was a continuation of a series that began earlier and which locked me into a particular time. (The first books in the series, however, were written for a secular publisher, but readers had been clamoring for me to tell this proper miss’s tale.)
LA: What’s your favorite, unique Regency aspect of the novel, something you wouldn’t be able to include in a novel set in another place or time?
CB: Definitely the clothes—both men’s and women’s. Love the elegant, feminine lines of women’s but especially love that the men wore knee breeches, neckcloths—and unlike men later in the century, they were clean shaven!
LA: What are the biggest challenges to writing in the Regency Period?
CB: Some vocabulary is peculiar to the Regency, and you want to use it in a context that won’t confuse readers.
LA: Why did you choose to write Regencies for Love Inspired?
CB: I was honored that the senior editor of Love Inspired Historical came to me and asked me to write for her. I was thrilled because I’d developed a love of inspirational romances. Deeanne Gist is a friend of mine, and I love her award-winning books. LA: What is your favorite Regency Food, aspect of dress, and/or expression?
CB: I don’t get into food a lot in my books because I don’t think modern readers would like to read about the excessive gluttony of the period! I love the wonderful formality and manners of the upper classes in their speech of the period. I really don’t like it when I read a book where an earl says, “Call me John.” This simply wasn’t done. Ladies were always Miss Lastname even to their closest friends. LA: What is your favorite Regency setting; e.g., London, country house, small village?
CB: For my own books, I like a mix of the two. I’ve been to London many times and like to describe it as I believe it looked in the Regency, but there’s nothing like those grand country estates, and I like my readers to get a taste for that, too. LA: What makes your hero and heroine uniquely Regency?
CB: In my newest book, the hero is in Parliament, and it plays a particular role in my book. They both favored reforms to benefit the lower classes.
LA: Tell us about your book.
CB: It’s actually sort of funny that in the same month I’ve got two new releases, and both of them are G-rated. As an ebook only, I’ve got CHRISTMAS BRIDES: 3 REGENCY NOVELLAS.
Marriage of Inconvenience, Love Inspired Historical: Proposing to the Earl of Aynsley seems a sensible—if unconventional—solution to Miss Rebecca Peabody’s predicament. As a married woman, she will be free to keep writing her essays on civil reform. Meanwhile, the distinguished widower will gain a stepmother for his seven children and a caretaker for his vast estate.
But the earl wants more than a convenient bride. He craves a true partner, a woman he can cherish. To his surprise, the bookish Miss Peabody appears to have every quality he desires…except the willingness to trust her new husband. Yet despite his family’s interference, and her steadfast independence, time and faith could make theirs a true marriage of hearts.
Cheryl Bolen’s Bio: A former journalist who admits to a fascination with dead Englishwomen, Cheryl is a regular contributor to The Regency Plume, The Regency Reader, and The Quizzing Glass. Many of her articles can found on her website, www.CherylBolen.com, and more recent ones on her blog, www.CherylsRegencyRamblings.wordpress.com. Readers are welcomed at both places.
Cheryl holds a dual degree in English and journalism from the University of Texas, and she earned a master’s degree from the University of Houston. She and her professor husband are the parents of two sons, one who is an attorney, and the other a journalist. Her favorite things to do are watching the Longhorns, reading letters and diaries of Georgian Englishmen, and traveling to England.
I’ve always found the process of democracy—and elections in particular—rather fascinating. And as we head into the month of November here at Regency Reflections, we’re going to talk a bit about government.
In Regency England, I’m afraid voting options were rather limited. Britain’s Parliament is (and was) divided into two houses, the House of Lords and the House of Commons. The House of Lords was composed of peers who were approved membership by their fellow peers, and these positions in the House of Lords were handed down through heredity. Your regular English coal miner or weaver or farmer had no voice in anything that happened in the House of Lords.
The House of Commons was a little more democratic in nature. These members were “elected,” by counties and boroughs, though a lot of corruption was embedded in the electoral process. When Regency characters in novels and movies mention purchasing a seat in the House of Commons, that’s because the electoral process was so crooked individuals could well “purchase” seats that were supposed to be “elected.”
Further complicating the issue, a Member of Parliament representing a county had to have a yearly income of 600 pounds. And a Member of Parliament representing a borough had to have a yearly income of 300 pounds. Thus election to and involvement in parliament was unattainable for the average Englishman. In fact, lower born sons of peers filled a good number of the seats in Commons for this very reason.
Even more disparaging, all voting was done open ballot, and oftentimes retribution could occur if you voted for the wrong person. For example, if an earl’s third son was running for a seat in Commons and you farmed the earl’s land, you could go cast your vote for the opposing candidate. But you might well loose your rights to farm as a result.
Elections were hardly honest or fair. It was a world where the most elite and wealthy controlled the government and gave the bulk of the country’s citizens very little power. Most citizens were not even allowed to “vote.”
To vote in county elections, a person had to be:
1). Male
Though offensive to most people living today (myself included), this was completely normal for the time period. Women’s suffrage wasn’t even thought of yet.
2). A Property Holder with land worth 40 shillings or more per year
This is known as the forty shilling freehold.
To vote in borough elections, you had to be:
1). Male
2). A resident of the “right” county or borough.
There were a lot of populated cities in Regency England that didn’t get any representatives in the House of Commons. The designated “boroughs” were delineated during the Middle Ages and not changed until 1832. So numerous cities that sprang into existence due to industrialism were denied members to the House of Commons, while some extremely small communities that had been thriving 400 years earlier got to elect officials.
3). Owner of a certain amount of wealth or property.
The degree of wealth and property ownership varied from borough to borough. In some places, the forty shilling freehold stood. In others, not receiving alms or poor relief earned you the right to vote. And in others, simply owning a home gave you opportunity to vote.
So now I’m curious. If you’d been living during the Regency days, do you think you (or your husband) would have been able to vote? I daresay my husband would not own enough property to qualify.
Whenever I read a Regency novel set during the Napoleonic Wars, I’m interested to see how the war and France are portrayed. Of course France was hated. They were, after all, the bad guys, trying to invade England, take over Europe, and end the world in with some sort of nuclear holocaust (well, maybe not quite that extreme, but you get the picture). And then after you look at France the country, there’s it’s leader: Napoleon Bonaparte, the Corsican Monster , tyrant, etc.
Yet as the British are sitting on their nice little island, thinking of names to call France’s new ruler, they quite happily forget that Napoleon was much less of a tyrant to the French people than King Louis XVI. Or King Louis XV. Or King Louis XIV. In fact, the average Frenchman and Frenchwoman had a much better life under Napoleon’s rule than under Louis XVI’s.
(Heaven forbid we actually let the French people choose their own ruler rather than foist another wasteful, birth-ordained monarch on them.)
French citizens aside, anyone familiar with the Napoleonic Wars will tell you Napoleon had a lust for power. Though he never claimed to be a king, he did aim to conquer much of Europe. And so, it stands to reason that we’re all lucky England was around to protect the rest of the world from the big, bad Mr. Bonaparte. Correct?
Not exactly.
At the beginning of the Napoleonic Wars, England was much more of a big, bad bully than France. In fact, England—with all its outrage against the Corsican Monster—was the one to start the Napoleonic Wars.
Yes, that’s right. England picked a war with France, not the other way around.
England and France had been enjoying a tenuous peace, as delineated in the Treaty of Amiens, which lasted from the spring of 1802 to 1803. Neither France nor England was doing any of the things it promised to do in that treaty. In fact, England was much more aggressive than France, gathering another coalition of nations to fight France. Napoleon, however, withdrew troops from certain territories he’d agreed to evacuate. In all fairness, both countries signed a treaty that neither intended to honor.
When this finally became clear to England, the country did what it was so very fond of doing two hundred years ago. It declared war. Then the British navy promptly captured two French ships within a matter of days. I can just imagine the conversation between the British and French soldiers as the French were once again losing two of their ships to the Brits.
Frenchman: “But you can’t capture our ship. We’re at peace. Remember that treaty our countries signed last spring?”
Brit: (Laughs cruelly) “We decided to call off the treaty and declare war two days ago. Hadn’t you heard?”
Frenchman: “No! We’ve been at sea for the past three months.”
Brit: “Oh well, we’re taking your ship anyway, and you’ll need to come with us. I’m sure you’ll have a nice time moldering in one of our prison hulks until you die in about three months time.”
Ah yes, England was quite the picture of benevolence two hundred years ago.
So in retaliation, Napoleon rounded up all the Brits visiting France on holiday and interned them in a citadel located in northwestern France.
England was outraged, of course. How dare Napoleon actually fight back!
And so there you have it, the story of how England started the Napoleonic Wars.
If you’ve read any significant amount in the Regency genre, you’ve come across references to the décor fashion trend involving Egyptian-style furniture. Ever wondered or imagined what it was like?
It’s clear to me why this particular style is not remembered with fondness and it hasn’t swept back around in nostalgic, retro reoccurrences. Regency culture became fascinated with ancient articles upon the publication of Henry Holland’s book “Etchings of Ancient Ornamental Architecture”. This ushered in a period of interest in the producing of copies of ancient objects coming from Greece, Rome, and Egypt.
comfy?
When the book, “Reproductions of Classical Furniture” by designer Thomas Hope came out in 1807, the Egyptian reproductions using mainly mahogany, but also rosewood and zebrawood, became wildly popular in high echelons of society. The pieces had straight lines, and used symbols as decoration.
In my home, we enjoy a pretty heirloom chair that once belonged to my husband’s grandmother, who was born in 1903. The chair is old, but not Egyptian. It’s been featured in many humble portraits taken in the Karsten home.
It has a problem, however, in that the green velvet-covered, thick-looking seat’s stuffing is completely shot. It’s:
Lovely to look at,
Delightful to touch,
But if you sit,
You’ll find it’s not much.
I happened upon a recent guest stroking this chair’s highly-polished carved wooden back. The reverent look on her face (she didn’t know the seat is corrupt) reminded me of a caution in Matthew 6:19, which says “Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal.” The Egyptian furniture trend which is long gone and my own pretty chair prove the Truth of the verse all too well.
