How to Kiss...and Other Musings.

“A lover should not hold his bride by the ears in kissing her...”  

Henry Theophilus Finck. 1887

Kissing is not, as you might suppose, something that has happened since the evolution of man. Instead the historian St Pierius Wensemius claims it was ‘invented’ by a Friesian Princess. According to Wensemius kissing was;

“Unpracticed and unknown in England until the fair Princess Rowena, daughter of King Hengist of Friesland, pressed the beaker with her lips and saluted the amorous Vortigen with a little kiss.”

However it seems that kissing soon caught on in a big way since the scholar and monk Erasmus writes in 1499;

“If you go any place in Britain you are received with a kiss; if you depart …your are dismissed with a kiss; you return and kisses are exchanged…whenever you move, nothing but kisses.”

Apparently it was a practice Erasmus was fully in favour of;

“On my honour you would not want to reside here for ten years, but for life.”

However, the kissing was not always done well as the American writer; Henry Theophilus Finck writes in his book ‘Romantic Love and Personal Beauty.’ 1887.

“Kissing comes by instinct and yet it is an art which few understand properly.”

He goes on to write,

“A lover should not hold his bride by the ears, as appears to have been customary in Scotch weddings of the last century (1700’s)”

He offers some helpful advice;

“A more graceful way, and as effective at preventing the bride from getting away, is to put your right arm round her neck, your fingers under her chin, raise the chin and gently but firmly press you lips to hers.”

Then the ever thoughtful Theophilus offers some words of reassurance.

“After a few repetitions she will find out it doesn’t hurt and will become as gentle as a lamb.”

If Theophilus married, am I alone in feeling sorry for his wife?

The Kissing Camels rocks, Colorado.

Wife Selling in the 18th Century.

In 1553, clergyman Thomas Snowdell sold his wife to a butcher. After a decree by Queen Mary I, that any clergy who married during the period of Protestantism in the preceding reign, would be put out of their living, it was a straight choice for Thomas, once in which his wife lost out.

Indeed since a wife was her husband’s property and there were no laws against selling a spouse, it was not an uncommon occurrence (as described in Thomas Hardy’s ‘The Mayor of Casterbridge.’)

One shilling was an average price for a wife in the 18^th century, as recorded on 31^st August 1773 in the toll book of the Bell Inn, Birmingham where it is written;

‘Samuel Whitehouse….this day sold his wife, Mary Whitehouse, in the open market to Thomas Griffiths…value 1 shilling. Taken with all her faults.’



Smithfield Market as it appeared in the 18th century.

It was even noted with some alarm (or sarcasm?) in the Times on 22^nd July 1797:

‘The increasing value of the fair sex is esteemed by several eminent writers to the certain criterion of increasing civilization…and refined improvement as the price of wives has risen at that market [Smithfield] from half a guinea to three guineas and a half [GBP 294 today!].’

Smithfield Market in the modern day.

However it seems some husbands were a little too honest when trying to sell their wives, as was the case in 1832 of farmer Joseph Thomson and his wife of 3 years. He offered her for auction in Carlisle, listing her bad points as

‘Born serpent’ and ‘his tormentor.’

Amongst her better features he lists;

‘She can read novels, milk cows, makes butter and scold the maid…she is a good judge of the quality of rum, gin or whisky from long experience of tasting it.’

Thomson wanted 50 shillings (GBP 160 today) but accepted the knock down price of 20 shillings and a Newfoundland dog, which apparently all parties were happy with!

A Newfoundland dog - a good exchange for a wife?

So, if you were going to trade in your spouse - what would you consider a good deal? Leave a comment below and let us know (if you dare!)

Why Black Cats are Lucky....

As the owner of a black cat, I think they are lucky, but over the centuries their reputation has run the full gamut from being sacred in ancient Egypt, to satanic in medieval Europe.

So where did it all start? How did black cats first get their reputation for bringing good luck?

Firstly, let’s go back four millennia, to 2,000 BC, and consider how rare black cats were. Wild cats were striped or spotted, to match the dappled sunlight. They originated either in forest environments as existed in the early history of North Africa, or Savannah type environment, which lead to more tawny colored coats. It was only a mutant allele, or gene, that led to the first solid coat colour such as pure black or white, and as they started to appear, in Egypt, black cats became associated with the goddess Isis.

Isis was the goddess of earth’s fertility and all living things (also the goddess of ships and sailors but more of this shortly.) She wore a black cloak, to symbolize night – which at the time was associated with calm and gentle love, rather than something demonic. The rare black cats were said to be the re-incarnation of Isis and became revered as sacred.

In Isis’ role as protector of ships and sailors, it was a logical step that black cats became the essential good luck charm on a sea voyage. Not only did they control the rodent population, but also invoked Isis’ good will on the voyage. To bring even more good luck images of cats were carved near the ship’s prow to please Isis. This superstition gained such strength that even as late as the 20^th century, it was considered bad luck to sail without a ship’s cat, and a ship’s cat was mandatory on British Royal Naval vessels until 1975!

“A black cat I’ve heard it said,

Can charm all ill away

And keep the house wherein she dwells,

From fever’s deadly sway.”
Old English folk poem.

Cats in Battle.

My midweek post is about ‘Cats in Battle’ and how cats helped the Eygptians win (and also lose!) a battle.

The first story is recorded by ancient historian, Herodotus. He writes about an attack on Egypt in 701 by the Assyrians. Now this invasion caught the Egyptians on the hop; they had become lazy and neglected to maintain a well-trained and armed fighting force. The pharaoh, Sethos, wept in despair at the very real fear that his country would be invaded and overrun. But one night he had a dream where the gods told him to be of good cheer and meet the enemy with courage.

            So Sethos did his best and raised a rag tag army of labourers, artisans and tradesmen. They marched to meet the Assyrian invaders and on the night before battle set up camp in fields close to the invading force. But during the night mice ate through the Assyarians bow strings and shield straps, such that in the morning and unable to defend themselves they fled. And the reason the Egyptian bow strings remained intact? They had taken cats with them to protect their food stores from vermin!

Modern day 'cat armour.'

           

            But in another story told by the military writer, Polyaenus, the outcome was very different. He writes of the Persian king, Cambyses, attacking Egypt in 525 BC. Now Cambyses knew that the Egyptians revered certain animals as sacred and so placed rows of cats, dogs and ibis in front of his advancing army. The superstitous Eygptian soldiers, feared to harm the sacred animals and refused to attack. In so doing Cambyses seized the advantage, and was able to take the city and then Egypt!

The Egyptian goddess, Bastet, nursing kittens.

"More Power by Tears" - women's rites within marriage.

I am an independent woman of the 21^st century; a veterinarian by day and author of historical romance by night. I married for love and carried on working, except for a short break when my two sons were born. But in Georgian England, until well into the Victorian era, things were very different and when a woman married she became her husband’s property. Any money or property she owned became her husband’s.

“…on marriage the husband and wife are one person in law….the very legal existence of the woman is suspended.”  Sir William Blackstone.

If they had children and the husband abused her such as the marriage broke up, it was the husband who had custody of the children. In law, a married woman was in the same legal category as wards, lunatics, idiots and outlaws!

Celeste Armitage, the heroine of my debut novel ‘A Dead Man’s Debt’ is determined not to marry for these very reasons. She longs to travel and determine her own future, which is impossible within the bonds of marriage; especially when it was the attitude of the day that parents decide on an advantageous husband for their daughter. Love had little, if anything to do with it as illustrated in Lord Halifax’s advice to his daughter:

“Marriage is too sacred to admit a liberty of objecting to it. You are therefore to make the best of what is settled by law and custom and not vainly imagine that it will be changed for your sake.”

Lord Halifax’s book ‘Advice to a Daughter’ first published in 1688, was so popular it ran to 25 editions, featuring other such gems as:

“Men…who are the law-givers…because they have the larger share of reason bestowed upon them.”

And

“Women…have more strength in your looks than we have in our laws, and more power by tears, than we have in our arguments.”

Is your blood boiling yet?

Best HISTORICAL ROMANCE 2010 - nomination!

VOTE! VOTE! VOTE!

As a new author it’s difficult to spread the word about your debut novel which is why I’m especially thrilled that “A Dead Man’s Debt” has just been nominated at The Romance Reviews in the category

Best HISTORICAL ROMANCE - of 2010.

I would really appreciate your votes –

Simply follow the link and scroll down to the ‘Historical Romance’ category.

‘A Dead Man’s Debt’ is at the head of the list – simply click ‘Vote.’

http://www.theromancereviews.com/bookvote.php

Thank you so much,

Grace x

The Matter of the Dead.

The English parish church and graveyard is a scene that sums up rural English life. Entered by a lych gate you walk along a narrow path with graves on either side, to enter the church by a porch. Around the church the ground rises gently around it, a bit like a weight placed on a cushion. But have you ever wondered why old English churches nestle into the landscape this way? Is it a matter of centuries of subsidence, or is there some other explanation?

In truth it is not the churches that are sinking but the ground that is rising up.

The reason?

The dead are rising!

In previous centuries the typical English parish had around 250 to 500 people listed in its records. So for each century that passed, this meant around 1,000 to 2,000 deaths, the vast majority of whom would be buried in the parish church yard (plus stillborn babies and children who died in infancy who wouldn’t have been counted amongst members of the parish) So for an average Norman church dating back to the 1100’s, that meant that a conservative estimate of the number of burials in the church yard would have been 10,000 to 20,000.

In fact what is happening is that the church is on the original ground level and all those buried bodies add matter to the graveyard and which over the centuries raises the earth.