Historical fiction is the weaving together of two colorful strands—historical fact and imaginative fiction; the finished product, if the author is successful, is a narrative tapestry depicting scenes of life from a previous age. In this type of work the question inevitably arises as to how much of each strand the author used. How much of the tale is fact, and how much is fiction? Of course, the amount of each strand and its placement in the overall tapestry is the creative task of the author. For those who are interested in this author’s use of these two strands, I offer the following paragraphs.
In general, the life and times of the men and women in seventeenth century England is based on historical research. From this research, I attempted to recreate the physical, emotional, and spiritual setting of the era. Then, having identified the paramount conflicts and interests of that day, I chose characters that would portray the various sides, some historical and some fictional.
Historically, I selected Bishop William Laud, King Charles I, and John Winthrop to portray interests on each side of the conflict. Other historical characters making minor appearances include Rev. John Cotton, Roger Williams, Rev. Francis Higginson, Rev. Skelton, and Governor Endecott. The families Morgan, Matthews, Cooper, and Chesterfield are fictitious as are Eliot Venner, and Marshall and Mary Ramsden. The story is carried along by the fictitious Drew Morgan. Through his eyes we see the controlling desires of the English church and crown, the awakening evangelical faith of the Puritans, the emptiness of the vast wealth of the class of country gentlemen, and the riches of spiritual life through Jesus Christ in the midst of persecution and poverty.
Actual settings—Windsor Castle, the city of London, the Tower of London, Winchester, Cambridge, and Massachusetts Bay Colony—were depicted using information from historical documents. Maps, drawings, journals, and records of these places were employed in an attempt to recreate how they appeared to the people living at that time.
The conflict between Bishop Laud and the Puritans is based on fact. Laud’s relentless determination to force the Puritans to conform to the authority of the church is a matter of history. His consuming hatred, persecution, and punishment of Puritan ministers and pamphleteers is based on fact, as is his insistence on the positioning and railing off of the altar, the wearing of the surplice, and his opposition to preaching.
Laud’s personality is sketched from his own writings as well as descriptions of him by various primary sources. I made two notable exceptions to his recorded personality, in that I gave him a sense of humor and a desire for a close confidant. From all accounts Bishop Laud was a humorless man who had no close friends. He despised women—he would not allow women in his London residence—preferring male companionship. His journal implies agonizing struggles with homosexual tendencies, so I imply them also. He was also a man driven to make the entire realm subservient to the Church of England. In this he underestimated his opposition both in England and in Scotland. As history records, he was tried and beheaded.
The sea battle of 1588, resulting in the defeat of the great Spanish Armada and the battle of San Juan de Ulua, is based on historical accounts. John Hawkins, Sir Francis Drake, the Minion and the Judith are historical, as is Hawkins’ redesign of the English fighting ship. Amos Morgan’s part in the refit is fictitious.
Morgan Hall is a sixteenth and seventeenth century country home. The King Alfred Inn is based on inns and inn customs of the time. The Matthews’ house is a typical example of living quarters in small towns in Devonshire.
The writings of the pamphleteer Justin for the most part are mine. In some of the writing I used the dichotomous form of pamphleteer Peter Ramus and some phrases from Thomas Cartwright. I refrained from using the vitriolic personal attack on Bishop Laud, a common practice among pamphleteers, notably William Prynne. The sermons of Christopher Matthews are the product of my pen.
Bearbaiting was a popular event in the seventeenth century, not only for commoners but for King James I as well. The king enjoyed throwing dogs to wild animals at the Tower of London’s menagerie. The people of that day were crude and bloodthirsty as reflected in their gruesome entertainment. Public executions were regarded as midweek holidays.
Lord Chesterfield’s hunt is based on the account of a royal hunting party and hunting procedures as described in Tubervile’s Booke of Hunting printed in 1576.
The accidental death of Lord Chesterfield’s son and Laud’s use of it to frame Christopher Matthews is fiction. In this event I portrayed Bishop Laud’s Machiavellian approach to his work. He was a man driven to employ anything at his disposal to achieve his desired end. One note in his defense: I’m convinced that despite his ruthless methods, he sincerely believed he was doing the best for England, the church, and God.
The use of the Bible to transmit coded messages is my own invention.
The town of Edenford is also fictional. If you travel to County Devon today, you will not find it on the west side of the Exe River south of Tiverton. However, in creating Edenford, I drew heavily upon accounts of the region for that general time period. One especially helpful source in this regard was Early Tours in Devon and Cornwall, R. Pearse Chope, ed., Newton Abbot (Devon): David and Charles, 1967, which published the journal entries of Devonshire travelers in 1540 and 1695.
Drew’s entrance into Edenford and his subsequent arrest are based on a true account of the period: History of the Life of Thomas Ellwood by his own hand, 1661. And Christopher Matthews’ parable about the downfall of Bishop Laud is a historical tale recorded in Abraham de la Pryme’s Diary of that same period. Both accounts portray the danger of traveling in England in those days.
King James’ Book of Sports, which not only authorized but also promoted recreational activities on the Sabbath, is history. Laws were passed by King James I and his son Charles I forcing Puritans to read the book aloud from the pulpit.
The Puritans’ preference for the Geneva Bible over the King James Version is fact. Actually, the Puritans preferred two Bibles—the Geneva Bible and the Bishops’ Bible. The king’s response was to license the printing of his version only, which hastened its acceptance among Bible reading Englishmen. The Scripture passages used by Nell and Christopher Matthews are quotes from the Geneva Bible, a facsimile of the 1560 edition; I modernized the spelling for easier reading.
The wool industry and the methods of producing serges are based on historical descriptions, as is the production and popularity of punto a groppo, bone lace.
Bishop Laud’s free use of the Star Chamber to advance his personal agenda is a matter of record. After the death of the duke of Buckingham, Laud was without doubt the second most powerful man in the kingdom and King Charles’ closest adviser. The Star Chamber punishments described in this work are based on court records. The death penalty was not an option for a Star Chamber trial; that sentence had to come from a common-law court.
The names of the ships sailing to America and most of the highlights of the crossing are based on real events as recorded in John Winthrop’s journal—the delay in sailing, the breakfast on board the Arbella with Captain Burleigh of Yarmouth Castle, Winthrop’s personal testimony, the presence of Lady Arbella, the feared attack by the Dunkirkers, the ships’ order of arrival and the dates they arrived, the frequent soundings as they neared their destination, the first impressions of the newly arrived colonists, and the first dwelling places are all based on his firsthand account.
Rev. John Cotton’s sermon to the departing settlers is a condensation, a mixture of direct quote and paraphrase arranged to give the gist of the message in a short space. When John Winthrop addresses the disgruntled, newly arrived settlers by reading paragraphs of his thoughts while crossing the Atlantic, I’m quoting portions of his work, “A Model of Christian Charity.” Winthrop actually shared these thoughts with the settlers while they were still at sea. I imagined he would have used many of the same thoughts during his attempt to convince them to stay, so I placed the reading of the text later than it actually occurred in history.
The early difficulties with the Pequot Indians are based on fact. The Pequot tribe grew increasingly concerned over the rapid growth of the colonies and the settlers’ burgeoning intrusion upon their territory. Tensions escalated when a Boston trader was murdered in 1636, presumably by a Pequot Indian. A punitive expedition of settlers was sent to avenge the killing. The result was the destruction of the Pequot settlement. Between five and six hundred Indians were killed or burned to death in the fires, effectively destroying the entire tribe. This was one of the first major conflicts between the bay settlers and native Americans.
Jack Cavanaugh
San Diego, California
1993