Two Sides to Every Story: After the Gunpowder Plot – Terror or Tolerance in 1617?

Today I have the opportunity to welcome Tony Morgan, back to The Maiden’s Court.  Tony is the author of the previously released  Remember, Remember the 6th of November and the newly released 1617.  Tony stopped by and contributed with a post in this series last year and is back around for round 2!  This time looking at what happened as a result of the Gunpowder Plot.

After the Gunpowder Plot – Terror or Tolerance in 1617?

Last year I wrote my first guest Two Sides to Every Story focused on the Gunpowder Plot of 1605. I asked if Guy Fawkes and his fellow conspirators were terrorists or freedom fighters?

That post was born from my fascination with the parallels between the Gunpowder Plot and the modern day - religious tensions, terrorists on the streets of London, concerns over government surveillance and conflict between Britain and Europe. This in turn was the backdrop for my debut novel, “Remember, Remember the 6^th of November”. The book described a tense race against time to prevent a country’s descent into all out civil war. As the minutes passed by and we reached the 5^th and then the 6^th of November, we discovered if the plot would succeed or fail…

Of course, we know in reality the Gunpowder Plot didn’t succeed. Parliament wasn’t destroyed. King James I went on to live until 1625. He was succeeded by his son Charles, who eventually led the country into the English Civil War, which also raged across Ireland, Scotland and Wales.

Thinking about this, a number of months ago the two classic words “what if” formed in my mind. In particular what if the King had been killed by the Gunpowder Plotters? What would have happened?

Two major possibilities stand out. Firstly, and perhaps most likely, the country would have slipped into reprisals and even civil war fuelled by religious differences. Protestants and Catholics would have fought hand to hand, and door to door. This was already happening and would continue to happen for decades across much of the rest of Europe.

The historical facts of the immediate aftermath are relatively clear. Guy Fawkes was already being tortured in the Tower of London. The leader of the Catholic conspirators, Robert Catesby, and his fellow plotters were grouped together in the English Midlands and being pursued by the authorities. Whether the King was alive or dead, it appears most likely they would have been killed in any case.

Would these reprisals have stopped with the Gunpowder Plotters or extended to attacks on all known Catholics, who in turn would have had little choice to fight back? We know from human history, before and since, that isolated actions of a few can lead to dire consequences for many.

My hope is, even in the circumstances, those who filled the political void left by the destruction of the King, his sons and most of his government in Parliament would have recognized the benefits of restraint. After all who would have benefited from a bloody civil war, other than the French or Spanish eyeing up the potential of another invasion attempt from across the Channel?

If this had happened, protectors would have been needed for the royal princesses. King James’ elder daughter Princess Elizabeth would have become Queen but she was only nine. Interim leaders would be needed to make decisions on her behalf until she could properly hold the reins of power.

Elizabeth was being raised a Protestant like her father. If her advisors recognized the importance of unity to avoid civil war and prevent invasion, perhaps they would have introduced a policy of religious tolerance, where the official Church of England remained Protestant but the people were free to worship in the church of their choice, even if it was of a Catholic denomination?

If all this had happened, the young Queen Elizabeth II would not have been safe. Extremists of both religions and enemy nations would have wished to undermine any policies of tolerance and unseat her from the throne, which would have inevitably led to her death. In parallel, scheming politicians, princes and kings would have sought her hand in marriage to gain control of the country.

In addition, Elizabeth would have to face up to the troubles in Ireland. After decades of war and enmity, it was unlikely short-term policies of tolerance would easily have made it across the Irish Sea. How could she preach tolerance if it was not even practiced in one of her own kingdoms?

From all this, I devised the world, plot and characters for my second novel “1617”. Queen Elizabeth selects Sir Everard Digby as her peace envoy for Ireland but he’s a man with a secret past linked to his role in the Gunpowder Plot which she mustn’t discover. Digby travels to Ireland and faces shipwreck, attack from both sides and the attentions of a Puritan assassin. A plot is hatched against the Queen by Protestant Puritans and Catholic Jesuits manipulated by a French female spymistress who wishes to see Digby dead.

Can the twenty-one-year old Queen Elizabeth II and her policies religious tolerance survive? Find out in “1617”.

Tony Morgan lives in Yorkshire in the UK, close to the birthplace of Guy Fawkes. His books have been described as a perfect read for lovers of the works of C.J. Sansom and S. J. Parris and anyone interested in how historic events have shaped our own times.

All profits for both his books in 2017 are being shared to York Teaching Hospital Charity which supports patients with conditions such as dementia stroke and those receiving chemotherapy.

Find Tony Morgan: Website | Twitter | Goodreads

Book Blurb:

1617 is the exciting sequel to Remember, Remember the 6th of November - a thrilling alternate history filled with secrets, treachery and intrigue. Queen Elizabeth has transformed England into a centre for religious tolerance but conflict is brewing across Europe and there are continued troubles in Ireland. A peace envoy is needed. Sir Everard Digby appears the perfect choice but he’s a man with a secret past which the Queen must never discover…

All profits for both his books in 2017 are being shared to York Teaching Hospital Charity which supports patients with conditions such as dementia stroke and those receiving chemotherapy.  Please spread the word!

Remember, Remember the 6th of November

Amazon UK
Amazon US

1617

Amazon UK
Amazon US

Copyright © 2017 by The Maiden’s Court

Two Sides to Every Story: The Women Who “Settled” The West

Today I have the opportunity to welcome not one, but two authors to the Two Sides to Every Story series!  I don’t get to do that every day!  I have had the great pleasure of working with M.K. McClintock several times in the past with her Montana Gallagher series and she brought Samantha St. Claire with her to discuss the two sides to the women who settled the western United States.  I hope you will enjoy it as much as I have!

The Women Who “Settled” The West: For Good or Bad

Samantha St. Claire ~ The Good

Putting the morality of prostitution to the side, I’d like to consider how the institution made positive contributions to frontier development. Yes, positive contributions, by soiled doves and working girls.

Working camps brought the men first; the women followed. Scattered shacks and tents transformed to towns upon arrival of the fairer sex. Money became the common denominator as both sexes came seeking fortune. The women, especially those serving as madams, often succeeded where the men did not. Many were shrewd business women investing their earnings in land and new businesses in these boom towns. Some even acted as loan agents, providing banking services.

However, it is their charitable acts that make these women noteworthy. Let’s start by considering Annie who as a young girl traveled west with her family in search of a better life. Both parents died of cholera, leaving the orphan to find a way to survive. With her tall, slender body and flaming red hair, she thrived the working girl life in a variety of camps. Moving to San Francisco, she came into the employ of the celebrated Madam Mina Hayman. The young woman, showing an aptitude for finances, soon became Madam Hayman’s protégé. Taking over the business years later, Annie, now calling herself Jessie Hayman, expands the business. When the San Francisco fire of 1906 ravages the city, she provides the victims food and clothing.

“Diamond” Jessie Hayman was not alone in her charitable deeds. Laura Evans of Leadville, Colorado fame was reputed to be “tough as nails” but stories abound testifying to her generous heart. She provided food to families of injured or out-of-work fathers. Most remarkable was how she disguised her girls in nurses uniforms during the flu pandemic of 1918, sending them to care for the sick.

Often, our obituaries say much about how we used our days. When Virginia City’s Madam Julia Bulette was murdered, all the mines and saloons closed out of respect and her funeral was attended by thousands. Like others, she was remembered best for nursing victims of influenza and donating to miners suffering hardship.

Julia Bulette, Virginia City Madam
Credit: Public Domain

MK McClintock ~ The Bad

Mary Katharine Haroney, Mattie Blaylock, and Molly Hall all sound like the names of respectable women, but names—and appearances—can be deceiving. These were the fallen women, soiled doves, and sportin' women in what we commonly call the “Wild West.”

Sure, some of these women who braved the west went onto become millionaires and national heroes, building towns and helping others, but at what cost? Some were outlaws and thieves like Laura Bullion, who joined the Wild Bunch gang. Many others died from childbirth and disease, plying their trade from the back of wagons, shacks, or grubby tents for little more than $0.25. If they were lucky, they might pull in up to a dollar or more. Many died violently, became addicted to drugs, or committed suicide, preferring that to a slow and miserable death.

Maggie Hall, a young beauty from Dublin, arrived in America and found it difficult to secure a job. She became a saloon girl then fell and love and married a wealthy man whose father cut him off when he found out. At her husband’s behest, Maggie started to entertain men so they could bring in more money. When she finally left her husband and became a high-priced prostitute, there are some who would say she was redeemed by helping a small town through a small-pox epidemic. Soon after, she died from consumption.

Maggie Hall
Credit: Public Domain

Most of these women were young and illiterate, though not all, and while it’s optimistic to think of the grand madams being respected and praised for their contributions to building the west, those powerful and wealthy were far and few between. Then there were the poor souls forced into the sex trade by family, captors, or husbands, with little choice to spend their short lives as working girls, addicted to opium.

The more populated the West became, the more respectable the women who arrived. With them came more close-knit communities, families, churches, and more respectable men. And criticism toward prostitution grew.

Would the “Wild West” have boomed and built up if these ladies of the night found another way to earn a living? There’s no denying that some of these women were in it for business and knew how to make a lot of money, earn respect, and become prominent citizens. But what about the young women who worked for them? Who searched for a better life out west, and instead of being told they were too good for that way of life, started on a path of misery from which few escape.

No matter which side of the story you choose to believe, there’s no doubt that the working women contributed a great deal to “settling” the West.

---

Samantha St. Claire is the alter-ego and pen name of an author of YA historical fiction. Kat's Law was her first venture into romantic historical fiction. With residences in both Washington and Idaho, she's spent long hours traveling the route of the old Oregon Trail, gathering inspiration for her novels along the way. The second book in The Sawtooth Range Series, High Valley Promise, released in 2017. She is currently at work on her next story.  Learn more at https://samanthastclaire.net/

In this thrilling and romantic conclusion to Kat's Law, Dr. Kathryn Meriwether must deal with a Cholera outbreak threatening the residents she cares for in Snowberry, Idaho, a killer not armed with a gun as the one whom ex-Texas Ranger Jonathan Winthrop pursues into the Sawtooth Range, but just as deadly and unpredictable. Once again, each will handle the crisis with the skills they've been given, but ultimately will find a greater strength in facing their future together. A high valley promise will unite them as an undeniable force to meet the challenges of their frontier home.

Buy the Book: Amazon

MK McClintock is an award-winning author who has written several books and short stories, including the popular "Montana Gallagher" series, the "Crooked Creek" series set in post-Civil War Montana, and the "British Agent" series. She spins tales of romance, adventure, and mystery set in bygone times. MK enjoys a quiet life in the Rocky Mountains. Learn more at www.mkmcclintock.com.

One woman's desperation to escape would become the greatest journey of her life.

Amanda Warren arrived in Briarwood, Montana with one satchel and a dream. After death destroyed her happiness, she fled, unwillingly to believe that was the end, yet her weary spirit thought only of survival.
Then she met the Gallaghers.

They took a chance and gave her a home and a family, but is she strong enough to make a new start?

Ben Stuart has seen more of life than he wants to remember, but with the Gallaghers he had found a place where he could forget times gone by and live the life he always wanted. When Amanda arrived at Hawk's Peak, Ben saw a woman hiding from secrets and running from her past. Will he be able to convince her that the journey is over?

Buy the Book: Amazon

Copyright © 2017  by The Maiden’s Court

Two Sides to Every Story: Port Royal, Jamaica

Today I have the opportunity to welcome Johanna Craven, author of The Devil in the Deep Blue Sea, to The Maiden's Court with the next contribution to the Two Sides to Every Story series.  I know it has been a long delay since we had an installment in this series (more ARE coming) and I hope you will enjoy this one.  Today we are treated to a piece about the life in Port Royal, Jamaica.

Port Royal, Jamaica – Wicked City or Island Paradise

In the seventeenth century, tiny Port Royal on the south coast of Jamaica was a flourishing trade centre and a notorious hang-out for pirates, privateers and prostitutes. The streets glittered with gold and the taverns numbered one for every ten men. In 1692, the town was destroyed by an enormous earthquake and tsunami that left a third of the city at the bottom of the Caribbean Sea. An act of divine retribution against 'the wickedest city on earth'? Or a tragic end to an island paradise?

Well, that depends on who you ask…

---

6th March, 1686

My dear sister Mary,

It has been three days since John and I arrived in Port Royal. This is a place of great beauty; clear blue seas and white sands, with a dramatic backdrop of the Blue Mountains. Flowers grow in every colour of the rainbow and fish leap from the sea like firecrackers. A paradise, some would say. But looks can be deceiving, Mary. This place is far from paradise.

Port Royal has a fine harbour and its position in the centre of the Caribbean makes it a perfect base for merchants and naval men. But with these honest seamen have come a despicable crowd of pirates, privateers, and smugglers, all eager to make their fortunes, with no regard for decency. The churches are near empty while the taverns overflow with scoundrels and fallen women. 'The Sodom of the New World', says John. I pity my dear husband for the impossible task he has been given; saving the souls of these wayward people. Indeed, this town is a veritable hell on Earth.

Keep us in your prayers. I shall write again soon.

Ever yours,

Elizabeth

---

9th October 1688

Edward, my friend, I have found Heaven. A paradise where the liquor flows like water, the streets shine with gold and the women leave little to the imagination.

They welcome privateers here- the celebrations in the street when a ship returns full of French treasure is something to behold. Ah, but don't worry, I've no thought of turning to lawful privateering. Why should I give a share of my hard-fought riches to the Crown?

No, my friend, it is still a pirate's life for me- and men of our sort are welcomed in Port Royal. All right, perhaps it's a stretch to say the governor welcomes us, but he certainly turns a blind eye to our comings and goings. With the sheer numbers of our kind, the poor fool has little choice!

Needless to say, our crew is now using this fine town as a base- indeed several of the men have found wives here, although I fail to imagine what would possess them to give up the lavish life this place offers in exchange for a family!

The drink of choice here is a rum punch we like to call Kill-Devil. Our captain claims the secret ingredient to be gun-powder. Whether to believe him, I am unsure! Either way, the punch has fuelled many a memorable night. I only wish you could join us, my friend.

A man in search of a fine life could do no better than to come to this jewel of a town.

Your friend,

Jack

---

3rd November, 1691.

Mary,

As you know, it has been four years since anti-piracy laws were passed in this Godforsaken town. Four years I've been hoping to see its inhabitants come to their senses; to awaken to the error of their ways.

And yet such wickedness persists. Have these men no fear of the gibbet? The bodies of captured pirates now dangle from Dead Man's Cay, and yet the pirates of Port Royal look to this as a challenge, rather than a deterrent.

Have they no fear of the Lord's wrath? These people will be punished, there is no doubt in my mind. It will be a happy day when Port Royal is destroyed. Mark my words, dear sister, this town cannot stand, but will sink and be destroyed by the judgement of God.

---

7th June, 1692

Are you a superstitious man, Edward? I confess that I am, though I'm sure this will not surprise you, me being a seafarer and all.

An uneasiness has fallen over the city. People fear an attack from our enemy is imminent- they see French spies around every corner. But it is more than just the war that has us unsettled. The town was visited recently by a man who claimed to read the stars. Yes, I can imagine what you're saying. A charlatan. Witchcraft. But in the stars, he claimed to see a terrible end for Port Royal. A 'cataclysmic earthquake', he said.

The weather is not helping things. It is steamy and windless, the sea like glass. We've experienced this before, you see. And each time, the eerie stillness brings a shake of the earth.

Thanks to this man's prediction, the streets are now full of self-made prophets: arm-waving madmen with ragged clothes and flashing eyes. Fools, yes, and yet something stops me from casting their words aside.

Something is not right. Out of my window, I see a golden glow in the sky. It is otherworldly and unnatural. I am afraid, Edward. There, I've said it. Against enemy fire, I feel nothing but excitement, but I know I cannot hope to battle the will of a God I've long ignored. Do you think it is truly possible this man saw Port Royal's demise in the stars? Could this be the end?

Johanna Craven was born in Australia in 1981 and grew up in Melbourne. As she was finishing school, she agonised over whether to pursue a career in music or creative writing, before finally coming to the (painfully obvious in hindsight) realisation that she could do both. She ended up studying composition at uni, interspersed with writing classes in which she began the story that would become her first novel, Music From Standing Waves.

After uni, she worked a ridiculous number of jobs in order to move to Los Angeles and study film scoring. She loved the energy of L.A. and the incredible experiences it provided: the chance to learn from some of the world's best teachers, a lecture by David Lynch, the chance to conduct an ensemble who had come straight from recording a John Williams score...

After returning to Australia in 2007, she worked steadily as a composer for several years, writing for film, theatre and television both in Melbourne and abroad. 

She moved to London in 2011 with her partner and immediately fell in love with the place. She continued work in film scoring, but also began to feel a strong desire to share her own stories with the world, as opposed to helping other people tell theirs. She pulled Music From Standing Waves out of my bottom drawer and self-published it in 2015, before signing with Endeavour Press for her second novel The Devil and the Deep Blue Sea.

When not working, Johanna loves to travel, cook (and eat...) and is passionate about environmental issues, particularly the conservation of the Great Barrier Reef. She loves ghost hunting, dance meditation and is learning to play the fiddle!

Find Johanna Craven: Website | Facebook | Twitter | Instagram

​Book Blurb:

1692. The Atlantis, captained by veteran seaman Benjamin Archer, flies the colours of an English merchantman on the high seas between the English Channel and the Caribbean.But she also runs up the ‘jolie rouge’ – the Jolly Roger – whenever the prospect of plundering a Spanish treasure ship presents itself.
Nipping at Spain’s empire is common practice for state-sponsored privateers like the Atlantis at a time when lesser European powers dare not directly make war on Spain.

But when those governments abandon the practice of issuing letters of marque to privateers against the Spanish galleons, many of the crews turn pirate.
Such is the fate of Archer’s men.

The crew is forced to sign the ship’s articles consenting to their new piratical ways, thereby placing their heads in a noose. Unless, that is, they can stage a mutiny and turn Archer over to the authorities in the Caribbean city of Port Royal, a popular homeport for privateers – and notorious for its gaudy displays of wealth and loose morals, the ‘wickedest city on earth’.

But superstition is rife among seamen and the presence on board the Atlantis of two women – one a high-born French stowaway Catherine and the other a Jamaican slave-born ‘cabin boy’ Serafine – will only be a bad omen if they are discovered.

Worse, the runaway is thought by her family to possess the powers of a witch while the ‘boy’ worships voodoo gods who rule life from beneath the waves.
Will the mutiny succeed? What is the secret bond between Archer and Serafine?

And can Catherine escape the captain’s determination to make her his after she has fallen for another young officer?

Is some unstoppable divine force slowly gathering to punish the profane?

Beyond the power and control of man lies what …?

Buy the Book: Amazon

Copyright © 2017 by The Maiden’s Court

Two Sides to Every Story: The Gunpowder Plot

Today I have the opportunity to welcome Tony Morgan, author of Remember, Remember the 6th of November to The Maiden's Court with a timely contribution to the Two Sides to Every Story series.  Today we are treated to a piece about the Gunpowder Plot of 1605.  I hope you will enjoy it - I certainly did!

Guy Fawkes – Terrorist or Freedom Fighter?

On November 5^th in 1605 a major terrorist atrocity was prevented in England. If this had not happened, King James I would have been killed, his government devastated and the English Parliament destroyed. The modern world we live in would now be a different place.

In the UK, we celebrate the failure of this Gunpowder Plot every November 5^th with fireworks. We call it Bonfire Night or Guy Fawkes Night but what was it about?

In 2015, I asked myself this question. The more I read, the more fascinated I became. The parallels with our own time were acute. For example, economic instability, religious persecution and government surveillance. I felt compelled to write. The outcome was the novel, REMEMBER, REMEMBER, THE 6^TH OF NOVEMBER, a blend of historical novel, alternate history and contemporary thriller.

The most intriguing thing for me about 1605 was the men and women involved. My story focuses on these, including Robert Cecil and his lover Katherine of Suffolk, King James and Queen Anne of Denmark, Guy Fawkes, Isabella Fawkes and Robert Catesby. I asked myself could things have turned out differently?

This blog looks at one aspect of the story. Were Guy Fawkes, Robert Catesby and the other Gunpowder Plotters freedom fighters or terrorists? There is a strong argument for both points of view.

Photo credit: sgwarnog2010 via VisualHunt / CC BY-NC-SA

In 1605, the Scots Protestant King, James Stuart led a renewed clampdown on England’s Catholics, despite earlier promises to the contrary. At James’s side stood the man who’d engineered his route to the throne, Robert Cecil, the Earl of Salisbury, Secretary of State and Spymaster General. Cecil had led previous persecutions against the Catholics, on behalf of the last Tudor monarch, Queen Elizabeth I.

Elizabeth had reigned for 45 years. England was now a Protestant country. The minority Catholic population were fined, barred from holding high office and sometimes imprisoned or even executed. James came to the throne in 1603. Catholics believed he would adopt a more tolerant approach. Perhaps he would have but two failed Catholic led plots against him changed his mind. By 1605, his views had hardened.

The Catholic population were worried but most favoured peaceful sufferance over any action, fearing savage retribution. Most but not all. Charismatic Robert Catesby believed the only way forward was regime change. King James would have to die. Catesby developed a plan to assassinate James (and most likely his two sons), blow up the Opening of Parliament, kidnap the nine-year-old Princess Elizabeth, convert her to Catholicism and place her on the throne.

Over a number of months, Catesby developed a cell of a dozen or more conspirators, each committed to the cause. These included Yorkshireman Guy Fawkes, selected both for his military expertise and anonymity in London.

The plotters bought gunpowder, rented a house next to Parliament and an under-croft cellar beneath it. Secretly, they shipped thirty-six barrels filled with explosives across the Thames. Fawkes was chosen as the man to light the fuse and make his escape. When Parliament opened on 5^th November, he would be ready, armed with a slow fuse.

But a week previously, Lord Monteagle, a man with Catholic sympathies and connected to several of the plotters, received an anonymous letter warning him not to attend. He’d handed this to Robert Cecil, who used the information. Or had Cecil, through his spies, known of the plot all along and written the letter? Security around Parliament was tightened. Fawkes and the gunpowder were discovered and he was tortured. Catesby and the others were killed or brought back to London for show trial and later hung, drawn and quartered. A number of priests who were not involved were also executed. Attitudes to, and actions against, the Catholic population hardened, as many had feared.

Were Guy Fawkes, Robert Catesby and the others brave freedom fighters, with no choice but to combat a system which persecuted them? They’d seen their families and friends fined, goods confiscated from them and worse. They’d been betrayed by a King who’d promised tolerance to smooth his route to the crown but practiced persecution when it was on his head. Equally, their Spanish allies had let them down, dropping overt support for their cause in favour of a trade deal with England. With no hope for change coming from internal or external forces and worse to come, what else could they do?

Or were they simply terrorists, men who refused to listen to the advice of senior Catholic priests who urged restraint and patience? They could have made a case for change, endured and waited or simply, as most had the means, left the country like many other Catholics to live in Spain, France, the Low Countries or Italy, or even in the new world of the Americas. They had choices but made the decision to kill.

It is possible to see both points of view. Perhaps the most damning thing against them is their method. By planning to destroy Parliament, they would have not only have killed the King and the key leaders of Catholic persecution but also many others. Catesby had looked into this and determined the death of innocents was acceptable, when the cause was just in the eyes of God and there were no practical alternative approaches. The priest who’d given him this information had been talking in the context of war though rather than a civic ceremony, packed with non-combatants.

In my book I tried to see the point of view from both sides and asked the question of whether there was a third way, one in which Robert Cecil, a Protestant man, and Katherine of Suffolk, a Catholic woman, both would have major parts to play. I hope you enjoy the results – Remember, Remember the 6^th of November.

Tony Morgan is a Welshman living in Yorkshire in the UK. He has taken a gap year off work to write and publish his debut novel, and write the first draft of a sequel.

The book is available as an e-book on Amazon, with all profits in 2016 being shared equally between Save the Children and a small local flood support charity.

Buy the Book: Amazon | Amazon UK

Book Blurb:

England in 1605 is a country concerned about Europe, terrorism and government surveillance – this may sound familiar.

King James is looking to drive a renewed clampdown on England's Catholics. In response, a small group of conspirators, led by charismatic Robert Catesby and Guy Fawkes, plan regime change. Their plans include blowing up Parliament, assassinating the King and kidnapping nine year old Princess Elizabeth.

Spymaster Robert Cecil and Katherine of Suffolk disagree with the King and the plotters. When Cecil receives an anonymous letter warning of an attack on Parliament, a race begins, featuring treachery, intrigue and torture, to find the author and prevent the country from lurching into all-out civil war.

The story is based upon the real life events of the Gunpowder Plot, mixed in with a number of twists along the way. Based upon reader requests, the book includes a handy What Really Happened appendix to allow readers to filter the fact from fiction after reading.

 

Copyright © 2016 by The Maiden’s Court

Two Sides to Every Story: Madame de Montespan, Guilty or Innocent?

Today I have the opportunity to welcome Kate Braithwaite, author of Charlatan, to The Maiden’s Court with another contribution to the Two Sides to Every Story sseries.  Today we travel to the world fo the French court of Louis XIV and Madame de Montespan.  I hope you will enjoy this as much as I have!

Fully-Fledged Poisoner or Dabbler in Love Potions? Madame de Montespan, Guilty or Innocent?

In 1680, a prisoner in the Château de Vincennes, on the outskirts of Paris, alleged that Athénaïs, Madame de Montespan, the long-time mistress of Louis XIV had used her connections to an underworld of fortune-tellers and poisoners to attempt to poison the King and his new mistress Angélique de Fontanges. The informant was Marie Montvoisin, daughter of Catherine Montvoisin, a woman suspected of involvement in several poisonings, an illegal abortion business and even of using black magic and satanic rituals to satisfy the demands of her wealthy clientele.

Marie Montvoisin was not the only one to accuse Athénaïs. Other prisoners – part of the scandal known as the Affair of the Poisons – joined in, describing infant sacrifice, plots to kill the king with poisoned parchment or murder Angélique with poisoned gloves. Marie claimed that Athénaïs had been her mother’s client for years and trial records showed that she had been named as a client of another fortune-teller, a man called Lesage, as far back as 1668.

Angélique de Fontanges died in on June 28^th, 1681 aged only nineteen. Poison was immediately suspected although autopsy records suggest she may have suffered from lung disease or possibly from complications from a miscarriage. Versailles was rife with whispers about which courtiers were involved with the prisoners in the Château de Vincennes and several noblewomen were arrested and tried for their connections to Catherine Montvoisin, Lesage and many others.

Athénaïs, Madame de Montespan, however, was never arrested or interrogated. Louis XIV instructed his investigators to record any mention of his famous lover separately. All the papers related to their investigation of her were hidden from the public record. Whatever rumors there were of her involvement with the Affair of the Poisons, gradually dissipated over the years. In 1709, Louis requested that all the records of that investigation be brought to him and he burned them one by one. He did not know, however, that his investigator, La Reynie, had kept another copy of the documents and in the 1870’s these papers were published by François Ravaisson in Les Archives de la Bastille.

Athénaïs’ guilt or innocence has been a subject of debate ever since.

Madame de Montespan
Photo Credit: Pierre Mignard [Public Domain, via Wikimedia Commons]

Who was Athénaïs?

Athénaïs, Madame de Montespan, the famously beautiful and witty maîtresse-en-titre of the Sun King Louis XIV, was born in Lussac in 1640. She was the third child of the Duc and Duchesse de Mortemart, one of France’s most noble families.

At the age of twenty, Athénaïs arrived at court to take up a position within the household of Queen Marie-Thérèse where she became known for her beauty, intelligence and virtue. Although highly marriageable, it wasn’t until three years later, in 1663, that she married the Marquis de Montespan. Together they had two children, but the marriage, arranged in haste only a week after Athénaïs’ previous fiancée was forced to leave Paris after a duel, did not last. Montespan was a gambler. His family connections weakened Athénaïs at court and they quickly found it impossible to live the lavish life she demanded – and needed – to succeed in the Queen’s household.

That the marriage ended bitterly is evidenced by the fact that Montespan tried to attack her at the Château de St Germain and threatened to visit brothels with the express purpose of contracting a disease he could pass on to his wife. Eventually he was forced by the King to retire to his estates in Gascony with their two children where he held a full-blown mock funeral for his wife.

Of course the King’s intervention was self-motivated. Athénaïs’ relationship with Louis most likely began in 1667 as he tired of his then mistress, Louise de la Vallière. Louise had to remain at court, however, and provide cover for her friend Athénaïs even as she supplanted her. The double adultery (as both parties were married) was considered far more scandalous than Louis’ affair with the unmarried Louise, and as a result, they were separated by the Church for a year in 1675.

In the hey-day of their love affair though, Athénaïs and Louis appeared to be the perfect match in wit, beauty and creativity. They both loved ballet and theatre and loved to perform themselves, as well as support artists like Racine and Molière. It was during this period that Versailles was developed as the center of Louis’ court. Athénaïs and the King made love and bathed in the Appartement des Bains, held gondola parties, built fountains, designed gardens and filled Versailles with the baroque paintings and sculptures for which it is famous. In 1676, the now divorced Athénaïs’ suite at Versailles comprised of twenty rooms on the second floor, right next to the King’s. The Queen, in comparison, only had eleven rooms. Between 1669 and 1678, Athénaïs gave birth to seven of Louis’ children.

But maintaining the attention of the King through seven pregnancies was not easy. Louis had notable dalliances with other women including the Princesse de Soubise (until she fell and knocked out a tooth and much of her charm with it) and Isabelle La Ludres who may have feigned a pregnancy to try to prologue her affair with Louis. For nearly ten years, Athénaïs saw off all challengers but, in 1678, a beautiful young woman called Angélique de Fontanges arrived at Versailles and Louis, aged 40, was instantly smitten. Although he still visited her every day, Athénaïs as a lover was clearly put to one side in favor of Angélique who soon fell pregnant. Unfortunately for Angélique, her child died at birth and she never recovered physically. She died in 1681 and at the time many observers believed she had been poisoned - by Athénaïs, Madame de Montespan.

Was she guilty?

The most commonly held view of modern historians is that Athénaïs was guilty of extensive use of love potions in her attempts to maintain her position with Louis, but not guilty of the wilder accusations made against her by the prisoners in the Château de Vincennes. Louis’ behavior towards her, after the Affair of the Poisons was concluded in 1682, is held to be the best indicator of her innocence. Although their love affair was over, the King continued to visit his former mistress and the mother of so many of his children. She was promoted to the post of Superintendent to the Queen’s household, a high honor, and she remained at court until 1691 when, in a fit of temper over not being consulted about her children’s education, she asked for permission to retire. Before she could change her mind, Athénaïs’ apartments at Versailles were re-allocated. Athénaïs spent the next sixteen years travelling and doing charitable works, until her death in 1707.

Further Reading/Sources

The Affair of the Poisons, Murder, Infanticide and Satanism at the Court of Louis XIV, Anne Somerset, 2003.

Love & Louis XIV, The women in the life of the Sun King, Antonia Fraser, 2006.

The Real Queen of France, Athénaïs & Louis XIV, Lisa Hilton, 2002.

Kate Braithwaite is the author of Charlatan, a historical thriller about the Affair of the Poisons that sent shockwaves through the court of Louis XIV at Versailles. Charlatan was long-listed for the Mslexia New Novel Award and the Historical Novel Award in 2015.  You can find her on her website, Facebook, Goodreads, and Twitter.

Buy the Book: Amazon

Book Blurb:

1676. In a hovel in the centre of Paris, the fortune-teller La Voisin holds a black mass, summoning the devil to help an unnamed client keep the love of Louis XIV.

Three years later, Athanais, Madame de Montespan, the King’s glamourous mistress, is nearly forty.  She has borne Louis seven children, but now seethes with rage as he falls for eighteen-year old Angelique de Fontanges.

At the same time, police chief La Reynie and his young assistant Bezons have uncovered a network of fortune-tellers and prisoners operating in the city.  Athenais does not know it, but she is about to be named as a favoured client of the infamous La Voisin.

 

So, what do you think about Madame de Montespan?  Have you read any good books about her?  I would love to hear your thoughts!!

 

Copyright © 2016 by The Maiden’s Court

Two Sides to Every Story: The Clash of Two Civilizations, The Plantation System in Ireland

Today I have the opportunity to welcome Nancy Blanton, author of Sharavogue and the recently released The Prince of Glencurragh to The Maiden's Court with an awesome contribution to the Two Sides to Every Story series.   Today we are talking about the clash between the Irish and the English over the plantation system.  I know I say this almost every time, but I know nothing about this subject and I am truly excited to be able to share this guest post with you!

The Clash of Two Civilizations, The Plantation System in Ireland

At the start of the 17^th century, the English plantation of Ireland was a major thrust of British colonialism. Plantations in the province of Munster, and later Ulster, pitted English settlers against traditional Irish landholders to a bloody, sometimes deadly result, and often ruining the very lands for which they fought.

On one side, England had “owned” Ireland since King Henry II conquered the island in the 12^th century. Henry awarded vast tracts of land to noblemen to protect England’s claim and to exploit Ireland’s fertile ground for marketable products. When organized plantation of Ireland began in the 16^th century, England was Protestant under Henry VIII’s Church of England.

On the other side were the Irish, both the native Irish who descended from the ancient Milesians, the Firbolg, and the Tuatha De Danaan a thousand years before Christ; and the English nobles who now ruled their own fiefdoms throughout Ireland, had married into the ancient Irish families, and in many cases had adopted Irish culture. They were mostly Roman Catholic.

Perhaps at first, the plantations were conceived with reasonable intent—the development of efficient agriculture to increase yield and generate prosperity in Ireland, and to teach the native Irish how to employ modern farming practices. This was the same European plantation complex that had been a means of generating income since the Crusades in the 11^th century.

But, in the words of historian and biographer C.V. Wedgwood, “The clash of two civilizations, exacerbated by the clash of two religions, culminated on bloody wars. The so-called pacifications of Ireland by the English government became suppression by massacre and confiscation.”

In Henry VIII’s case, he needed the plantation to generate money for the royal treasury. Much of Ireland already had been scoured of its forests to help build the royal navy. But also, England was fighting some expensive wars. He wanted greater control over Ireland’s resources to produce far more income, and he wanted the armed forces loyal to the king, not to their local lords.

At the same time, Henry had separated from the Catholic Church and established the Church of England. The Pope would like nothing better than to assemble an army in Ireland as a strategic launch point to invade England and overthrow or assassinate the king. Henry could not allow a papist population at his back door to welcome invaders and put England at risk. Ireland’s people would either convert or suffer the consequences.

As the king sent in agents to take over administrative powers from the Irish lords, not surprisingly his advances met with resistance. Ireland’s landed gentry resented the threat to their long-term autonomy and their religion. There were many demands and many grievances, but it was the confiscation of land that cut deepest.

The Plantations of Ireland
Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons

 The king’s plantations desired the most fertile lands. If it could be determined that these lands had no title of ownership, or had a defective title, the lands would revert to the king. The Irish, however, had lived by Brehon law for centuries, in which properties were inherited by tanistry, handed down to the sons or heir-apparent of the deceased party. Often there was no requirement for a deed or title, and certainly nothing that would be recognized by English common law. Now entire families who had held these lands for generations were relocated to less desirable land, or left homeless with no place to go. Catholics landholders who would not convert were stripped of property and authority, penalized, or murdered.

Battles were fought in courts and argued in Parliament, while rebel bands grew in Ireland’s mountains and rocky coastlines. Nevertheless, the king would have his way. The conquest of Ireland continued under his daughter Mary and then Elizabeth I. During Elizabeth’s reign, there was a feud between the two dominant clans of southwest Ireland, the FitzGeralds (Desmond dynasty) and the Butlers (Ormonde dynasty). When Elizabeth seemed to side with her cousin, Black Tom Butler, the Desmond rebellion began.

There were two Desmond Rebellions, 1569 and 1579. The first rebellion was crushed through the tactics of Sir Humphrey Gilbert, who used bloody fighting, terror, random killings of civilians, corridors of severed heads, and scorched earth tactics. The second rebellion ended when the English turned Irish against Irish. For a payment in silver, the O’Moriarty family hunted down and killed the Earl of Desmond, and sent his head to the queen.

Then came the Nine Years War (1594-1603), led by the O’Neills and the O’Donnells, fought primarily in the Ulster region of Ireland. This was the largest conflict yet in Elizabeth’s reign. But England prevailed; the earls fled Ireland in hopes of finding foreign support, leaving devastation and starvation behind as the aftermath.

The penalty for rebellion was a vast English plantation of both Munster and Ulster. And under Elizabeth’ heir, James I, life for the Irish got even worse. The Penal Laws were imposed, banning Catholics from public office, from intermarriage with Protestants, and from legal and teaching professions. They could not own firearms, adopt an orphan, get a foreign education, or own a horse valued at more than £5.

By the time of Charles I, “land-hungry settlers flooded into the unexploited lands of Ireland, refused to accept Irish customs in the use and possession of land, staked out their claims, built farms, stored their surplus corn in barns, and introduced new kinds of agriculture which took the pasture away from the cattle,” Wedgwood wrote.

Despite professing to remain landless while administering for the king in Ireland, even the Lord Deputy Thomas Wentworth got in on the action, with manors in Wicklow and Kildare totaling nearly 59,000 acres.

And yet, for the Irish the fight was not over. In 1641, the simmering rebellion came to boil. The English Civil War had begun, pitting Parliament and its army against King Charles and his loyal subjects, fighting primarily over the king’s prerogative to rule without Parliament. England’s violent distraction became Ireland’s opportunity.

Mr. Roger (Rory) O’Moore, one of the principal organizers of the Great Rebellion, knew well the losses the Irish had suffered by the English insurgence. He descended from an ancient Irish family. His uncle had been known as “King of Laois,” (pronounced “Lay-oh-is) and had fought against the English during Queen Mary’s (aka Bloody Mary) reign. Englishmen with eyes for O’Moore land invited the clan to a feast, and then slaughtered all the leaders and more than 180 family members.

O’Moore’s father was later granted an estate by Queen Elizabeth, but fights, skirmishes and rages continued against the English settlers. Decades later, O’Moore tried every legal means to restore and retain Irish rights and properties. But his efforts in Parliament were fruitless, and eventually he realized Ireland had no recourse.

In pledging the Irish rebel forces to join with Royalist Confederate forces in Dublin, O’Moore said:

“My Lords, our sufferings are grown too heavy for us to bear. We are the sole subjects in Europe incapable of serving our Sovereign in places of honor, profit and trust. We are obstructed in ways of learning, so that our children cannot come to speak Latin without renouncing their dependence on the Church, and endangering their souls. These things we wished redressed in Parliament, and had they listened to us…we would have sat down contented. But the Lords Justices are merely bent on ruining our nation…”

The Great Rebellion of 1641 was a brave, passionate and bloody fight. Successful at first, many English settlers were turned out as the Irish retook their properties. But when the civil war ended, Parliament won, King Charles I was executed, and England turned its attention to Ireland. Under the brutal march of Oliver Cromwell and his army, 1649-1653, more than 600,000 native people were slaughtered, deported or died by disease or starvation, and entire villages were destroyed. Ireland was devastated.

It was not until 1918, again after a bloody rising, that the Irish Republic was declared at Dublin Castle.

 Nancy Blanton is the award-winning author of two novels set in 17^th century Ireland. Her second novel, The Prince of Glencurragh, has just been released.  You can find Nancy on her website, on Twitter, on Facebook, and on her blog.

Buy the Book: Amazon | Barnes & Noble | RJ Julia

Book Blurb:

As the son of a great Irish warrior, FaolAn Burke should have inherited vast lands and a beautiful castle, Glencurragh. But tensions grow in 1634 Ireland, as English plantation systems consume traditional clan properties, Irish families are made homeless, and Irish sons lose their inheritance. Encountering the beautiful heiress, Vivienne FitzGerald, FaolAn believes if she became his wife, together they could restore his stolen heritage and build a prosperous life. But, because the Earl of Cork protects her, abduction seems to be his only option.

Best friend Aengus O'Daly narrates as he and the brothers Thomas and Sean Barry help FaolAn complete the deed, and hasten to the Earl of Barrymore, who has promised to negotiate the marriage settlement. But Vivienne clearly has a mind of her own, and the adventure that began as a lark takes a dark turn when one man is injured, another is killed, and their plans for Barrymore's support go awry.

Worse still, FaolAn now finds himself in the crossfire between the four most powerful men in Ireland--the earls of Clanricarde, Cork, Ormonde, and the aggressive new Lord Deputy of Ireland, Thomas Wentworth--men who use people like game pieces to be moved about for their own benefit. And other forces threaten their plans and even their lives. With the course of events now beyond their control, will FaolAn and Vivienne ever realize the dream of Glencurragh?

 


Copyright © 2016 by The Maiden’s Court

Two Sides to Every Story: The Battle of Bosworth Field, August 22, 1485

Today I have the opportunity to welcome Tony Riches, author of Owen and the more recently released, Jasper - books 1 and 2 of a trilogy on the Tudors , to The Maiden's Court with an awesome contribution to the Two Sides to Every Story series.  Today we are treated to the events of the Battle of Bosworth Field from the perspectives of both Jasper Tudor (fighting on the side of Henry Tudor) and King Richard III.  I hope you will enjoy it - I certainly did!

The Battle of Bosworth Field, August 22, 1485

Adapted from Jasper Book Two of The Tudor Trilogy:

Jasper Tudor leaned back in his saddle and muttered encouragement to steady his horse. He closed his eyes for a moment and said a prayer, not for himself but for his young nephew Henry. He felt strangely calm for someone facing death. All his worries slipped away with the certainty that, one way or another, he would meet his destiny at last.

He opened his eyes again. He had never seen so many men so still, so silent, as on that morning, on a broad field south of the market town of Bosworth, in Leicestershire, bordered by the River Tweed. Sir John de Vere, chosen as commander, had persuaded Henry to form his army in a wide line, archers to the front. Jasper glanced across at Henry, who decided to remain on foot with his guards.

Henry was old enough to be his own man, make his own decisions. Jasper fastened the thick leather strap under his helmet and pulled it tight, then pulled on the black leather gloves he’d chosen instead of steel gauntlets, in deference to the heat.

Across the field the deadly ranks of King Richard’s army shimmered with a dreamlike quality in the sunshine. Jasper shielded his eyes with his hand and made out Richard’s standard bearer, with the long pennant of the white boar. Richard could not be far away. He glanced across at Henry’s standard, the red dragon of Cadwallader, carried by William Brandon, surrounded by loyal mounted knights.

With a shout, Sir John de Vere committed them to battle. The air filled with arrows, spurring the enemy into action, as they returned an equally devastating volley and closed the ground between them with alarming speed. The clash of steel and cries of wounded and dying men brought deeply buried memories back for Jasper and he drew his sword. The blade flashed in the sun as he held it high, the signal for the next wave of men to attack.

From his position at the rear of the battlefield Jasper could see they were outnumbered by more than two to one. The ground under him vibrated then his ears rang with the booming thunder of Richard’s guns. With a jolt he realised they had been holding their fire until Sir John de Vere’s vanguard was at close range.

Cannonballs cut swathes through the ranks of Henry’s mercenaries. Men cried out and one gave a blood-curdling scream but the ranks closed and continued to press forward as if nothing had happened. The sun, which had been behind their enemy, moved overhead and the savage, hand-to-hand fighting ebbed and flowed like a tide as fighting men gained ground then lost it as others pressed forward.

Illustration of Richard III (2 October 1452 - 22 August 1485) at the Battle of Bosworth in August 1485, from a Chronicle of England by James Doyle, printed by Edmund Evans, 19th century.
Image Credit:  © CM Dixon via Heritage Images

Continued From the perspective of King Richard III:

Richard fought savagely through the knights around the rebel Henry Tudor’s standard, slashing with his sword at the standard bearer. The flowing banner with its proud red dragon fell to the ground as the man died without letting go of it to defend himself.

Fighting for his life, his throne and all he cared for, Richard shouted in fury as he charged onward into the rebel men-at-arms, unhorsing one knight and thrusting at another. He spurred his horse to higher ground and looked back to see he’d been cut off from his men. He cursed their failure to follow him and knew he must turn back, but then he saw his enemy, the man who had dared to challenge his crown.

In a flash of insight Richard understood. The banner had been a ruse, as Henry Tudor watched the fighting from a safe distance. Surrounded by foot soldiers wearing the blue and gold fleur-de-lis surcoats of France, it was unmistakably his challenger, Henry Tudor, looking surprisingly young and thin, his face pale.

Richard heard an order shouted in a confident voice over the noise of battle, and turned in time to recognise the tall, bearded figure of Henry’s uncle, Jasper Tudor.

‘Pikemen, take position!’

The Frenchmen moved with swift precision, forming a circle around Henry, their long sharpened pikes linked in an impenetrable forest. As Richard closed the ground between them he saw Henry draw his sword, his lips moving as if in silent prayer.

Then with pounding hooves, and a fierce battle cry, mounted knights carrying the banner of the black raven surrounded Richard. The thought of surrender flashed through his mind, then he cursed and raised his sword defiantly, charging the man nearest to him. On a shouted command from their commander the Welshmen attacked. Richard felt the blow as a sword clanged against his fine armour and lunged back as a halberd struck him deep in the temple. He felt the merciful release of unconsciousness as he fell from his horse.

Henry Tudor went on from his victory at Bosworth Field to found the Tudor dynasty – a story to be told in Henry – Book Three of The Tudor Trilogy, to be published in early 2017.

Tony Riches is a full time historical fiction author based in Pembrokeshire, Wales UK. For more information about Tony’s books please visit him at the following social media sites: The Writing Desk (personal blog), Website, Facebook, and Twitter.


Buy the Book: Amazon | Barnes & Noble | RJ Julia 
 

Book Blurb:

Following the best-selling historical fiction novel Owen – Book One of The Tudor Trilogy, this is the story, based on actual events, of Owen’s son Jasper Tudor, who changes the history of England forever.

England 1461: The young King Edward of York has taken the country by force from King Henry VI of Lancaster. Sir Jasper Tudor, Earl of Pembroke, flees the massacre of his Welsh army at the Battle of Mortimer’s Cross and plans a rebellion to return his half-brother King Henry to the throne.

When King Henry is imprisoned by Edward in the Tower of London and murdered, Jasper escapes to Brittany with his young nephew, Henry Tudor. Then after the sudden death of King Edward and the mysterious disappearance of his sons, a new king, Edward’s brother Richard III takes the English Throne. With nothing but his wits and charm, Jasper sees his chance to make young Henry Tudor king with a daring and reckless invasion of England.

Set in the often brutal world of fifteenth century England, Wales, Scotland, France, Burgundy and Brittany, during the Wars of the Roses, this fast-paced story is one of courage and adventure, love and belief in the destiny of the Tudors.

 



Copyright © 2016 by The Maiden’s Court

Two Sides to Every Story: The Butcher of Cawnpore: Hero or Villain?

Today I have the opportunity to welcome Tom Williams, author of Cawnpore , to The Maiden's Court with an awesome contribution to the Two Sides to Every Story series.  Williams, whose novel is set in India, brings us today a guest post about an event that occurred during British rule of that country.  I hope you will enjoy it - I learned a lot from reading it!

The Butcher of Cawnpore: Hero or Villain?

In 1857, British rule in India was challenged by an uprising across the north west of the country. Even today, opinions as to exactly what happened and how we should view it are polarised. To most British people who have any interest in it at all, it was the Indian Mutiny. To many Indians, it was the 1st War of Independence.

British India in 1856
Photo Credit: http://www.ancestryimages.com/

The conflict was extremely brutal, with outrages committed by both sides. However, the most appalling single incident occurred at the end of the siege of Cawnpore.

Cawnpore was not a major military centre and in 1857 there were not that many troops based there. Many of those who were in the lines at Cawnpore were sick men recuperating away from their regiments. When the Indians rose against them, General Wheeler, commanding the British forces, took those troops he considered would be loyal (mainly European, as opposed to locally recruited Indians) together with the civilians in the station into what became known as the Entrenchment. This was a few buildings surrounded by a low earth wall, which offered only minimal protection to those inside.

At the start of the siege on 6 June 1857 the Entrenchment offered some sort of shelter to around 60 European artillerymen, 84 infantrymen, and about 200 unattached officers and civilians and 40 Indian military musicians. In addition there were 70 invalids who were convalescing in the barrack hospital and around 375 women and children. They were surrounded by thousands of Indians, who included cavalrymen and who were supported with significant amounts of artillery.

The British held out until 25 June when they were offered safe passage in return for their surrender. Wheeler considered that surrender was an honourable option, given the almost certain death of the women and children in the Entrenchment were the siege to continue.

The Indians agreed that the British should evacuate Cawnpore by water. The British therefore marched out of the camp to the nearby river, where a small fleet of boats was waiting for them. However, as the British started to board the boats, the Indians opened fire. Only four of the soldiers from the garrison escaped alive. Most of the women and children survived but were held captive until 15 July, when the decision was taken to kill them all. The killing was crudely and ineffectively carried out, with many apparently reliable accounts of women and children being still alive when they were thrown into the well which was used for the bodies.

When British troops arrived to lift the siege, they found the site of the massacre covered in blood. Their revenge was horrific. Indian prisoners were made to lick the blood from the floor before being executed. "Remember Cawnpore" became the battle cry of British troops engaged in putting down the uprising and in exacting retribution afterwards. Nobody is sure how many Indians were killed. In many villages that the British army marched through, any man who could not prove that he had not joined the uprising was hanged. I will not dwell on the details of what became known as 'The Devil's Wind', not because I want to gloss over the horror of the behaviour of British troops, but because the details are so appalling. (In fairness, I have rather glossed over the details of the massacres as well.)

The leader of the Indians at Cawnpore was a man called Nana Sahib. The British hunted him for years, but never caught him. It is widely believed that he died peacefully in Nepal. He was, if you like, the Osama bin Laden of the 19th century, yet today he is widely hailed as a hero of the Indian independence movement and his face has appeared on Indian stamps. This is his side of the story.

Nana Sahib
Photo Credit: Amit20081980~commonswiki (Own work) [CC BY-SA 4.0], via Wikimedia Commons

Nana Sahib’s Story

My father was the Peshwa of the Maratha Empire. He was a mighty lord who rose against the British who had come into his country and despoiled it. He fought valiantly against the invaders, but he was defeated and exiled from his own country to the miserable little village of Bithur, not far from Cawnpore. The British allowed him to retain his title and a small pension and he made his peace with them and lived alongside his enemy until he died in 1851.

I was an adopted son – a common practice in my country when a great lord has no sons of his own – but the British refused to recognise me as Peshwa and no longer paid the pension that they had paid to my father.

Despite the loss of my lands, my title and my pension, I tried to be a good friend to the British. They had ruled in India now for a hundred years and many Indians had accommodated to them. But their rule was becoming more harsh. Where once they had made honourable peace with men like my father, now they seized their lands, ignored their titles, and denied them the respect they were due in their own country. They began to send Christian missionaries who tried to tempt my people from their faith. They told us we must abandon our old customs.

Those Indians who served in their armies (for there is no disgrace in serving the army of any lord once he has proved himself a power in the land) were not accorded the respect they had been. Their officers, who had once loved this country, were replaced by arrogant fools who did not understand our ways. There were rumours that they might be sent overseas, where they would lose their caste. Then there was the terrible business of the new cartridges. The cartridges were greased with the fat of cattle and with the fat of pigs. This was an insult to all the Hindus in the Army and to their brothers who were Moslems.

Finally, the people of India rose up against these injustices. I was not sure what to do. I had been friends with the British and I hoped that things could be settled without violence, but it was soon apparent that there must be a war and that the British would finally be driven from our country. My people looked to me, for they still called me “Peshwa” and acknowledged me as their leader. Now that it had come to war, it was my duty to lead my people against the British in Cawnpore.

The British fought bravely: I will give them that. Hundreds of my troops died as we attacked their fort again and again. In the end, I agreed to lift the siege if they would go. They said they would and asked for boats to sail down the Ganges to rejoin their people. But this had to be a trick. The British were being defeated everywhere. Where could they hope to go? No, once they were on the boats they could set up a fort somewhere else and attack us from there. My generals told me I would be stupid to let this happen.

What was I to do? They had surrendered, but there was nowhere they could go. We had an army in our midst that could turn on us at any time. The British, we Indians had learned over the past hundred years, were liars. They had promised my father he could keep his title and then took it from me because I was adopted: a cheap trick. They had stolen the Kingdom of Oudh on the same pretence – that the new King was adopted, and therefore could not inherit. We could not trust them.

My general, Tatya Tope, told me what to do. He arranged to have artillery hidden across the river from the boats and for his men to conceal themselves along the banks. When the British came to the boats, we opened fire. They still had their muskets. It was war: these things happen. We tried not to kill the women and children, but we took them captive and kept them safe.

Contemporary Depiction of the Cawnpore Massacre
Photo Credit: Charles Ball [CC0], via Wikimedia Commons

Then news came that a British force was on its way to relieve the siege. Everybody was terrified. The British were killing people who they thought might have ever harmed any of their troops and they would kill us all if they heard what had happened by the river. It was essential that any of the British who might speak against my sad, but necessary, actions should be silenced. I had no choice: the women and children would speak against me. They had to die. So many Indians had died under British rule and the British always said that sometimes these things were necessary or that sometimes these things just happened. But would they have happened if the British had not stolen our country? Had we asked these women and children to come and live amongst us, ordering their Indian servants to do this and to do that as if they were slaves? Bringing their foreign ways, their terrible food, their arrogance and their ignorance? They looked down on us as savages and sneered at our ways. Well, they’re not sneering now.

The British beat us in 1857. I was driven into exile and watched as the white men tightened their grip on my country. But I know that our time will come. It is not right that the Indians should live under the rule of the British and one day we will rise up and we will defeat them and I will not be hated by the rulers of India, but loved by them as one of those who showed the way to regaining our own country.

Tom used to write books for business. Now he writes about love and adventure in the 19th century, which is much more fun. It also allows him to pretend that travelling in the Far East and South America is research. Tom lives in London. His main interest is avoiding doing any honest work and this leaves him with time to ski, skate and dance tango, all of which he does quite well.  You can find Tom Williams at the following social media sites: Blog | Facebook | Twitter


Buy the Book: Amazon | Barnes & Noble | RJ Julia

 

Book Blurb:

Distraught by tumultuous events in Borneo and separated from his lover, John Williamson comes to India to make his way with the East India Company in the frontier city of Cawnpore. Here, he struggles to fit in; a gay man in a straight society; a farm labourer’s son in a world of gentleman’s clubs and dinner parties. Yet he finds himself falling in love with the country, and in particular with a young nobleman in the court of a local lord, and begins to think he can make a good life for himself there. But whispers of mutiny and insurrection abound in the local populace, and when the country is plunged into war, Williamson must choose whose side he is really on.

Set against the bloody backdrop of the Indian Rebellion of 1857, Williamson’s adventures chronicle events which shocked the world and shaped the future of the Indian nation.

Copyright © 2016 by The Maiden’s Court