Black History Month

 In order to celebrate history recognizing the influence of Black Americans, I want to share this list of 150 Black-owned businesses in North America!

Get Your Neat Stuff Here!

Also to help create a more equal society, here are my  posts on writing inclusive fiction.

 Don't Surf in Sewage

Okay, You Screwed Up. 

How to be More Diverse in Your Writing 

Behind the Character: Valerie Tate

 

Many years ago, I had a nightmare about the Napoleonic Wars (if you have ever studied the Napoleonic Wars, you will understand. They were dreadful). One part of this nightmare was amazing, though. A dark woman, one full of secrets and violence, came into the tent where the generals were planning the Peninsular Campaign (Napoleon's disastrous invasion of Spain). She gave the best tactical advice but the men dismissed her. She left the tent, returned in men's clothing, and they thought she was a genius.

I knew this woman was Vlad Tepes, the vampire Dracula. This dream stuck with me. I was fascinated by this idea. Naturally, I did a little research. There are very few primary resources about Vlad (see here, here, and here). Most of the literature talked about the alleged atrocities she committed. If I looked at these stories through a feminist lens, I could see how these fictions could be seen as acts of a furious woman (impaling, especially. How Freudian of her!).

This began the long process of writing the Blood Wings series. Who was she? Why would her family hid her born gender? How could that be done? What motivated her? Did she have secret dreams? What were her wounds?

The series took many drafts and lots of brainstorming. I had to learn what kind of lovers she had, who she thought she was. 

I have been honored to share this journey with you. With the final revision being released on May 6, 2021, I feel like Valerie Tate has finally found a place of happiness.

Good Ol' Dracula

This year marks the 8th anniversary of the first printing of my first book, Dracula's Secret! As a result, I'm revisiting some early blog posts about my process.

Even the most cursory look at the secondary and tertiary sources on Vlad Dracula shows a stunning (or tedious, depending on your personality) number of resources on how bloodthirsty and cruel this particular historical figure was.

To find out where they got their information, I did what every self-respecting historian does. I checked their bibliographies for their primary sources. This is what I found.

Vlad Dracul II lived from 1431-1476.

No sources survive from Vlad himself (despite it being commonly reported that he was highly educated and literate). This includes any of his legislative acts.

No sources survive from his brothers, father, wives, other relatives, or even friends.

The only primary source that is contemporary to Vlad's life is in the Monastery of St. Gall, in Switzerland. It was written by an unknown author in 1462. The manuscript gives a number of anecdotes about Vlad (thirty-two, according to the translation I read). The translator claims that six of those thirty-two stories are confirmed by other sources, but does not name those sources.

The stories discussing Vlad's crimes against humanity were not verified by other contemporary sources.

The Russian and German documents that discuss Vlad's preference for disemboweling animals, etc., etc., etc., date from 1490 at the earliest.

The woodcut portraits of Vlad date from 1488 and 1491. The famous oil portrait comes from the second half of the 17th century. Which, I might point out, is nearly 200 years after Vlad died.

Many scholars make much of the oral transmissions of the folk tales of Romania. Unfortunately, I was unable to find any analysis of these stories by anthropologists or historians that would confirm the accuracy. Folk tales often are multipurpose stories - they could be cautionary tales or money makers to fleece the unsuspecting. I've not seen any studies done of where the folktales agree with the primary sources.

For example, contemplate the relationship people in the United States have with George Washington. The old cherry tree tale has been discredited, but how many of us still remember it and tell it?

What all this boils down to is very simple:

We don't know that much about this historical figure.


So as a result, I felt like I could play with this person, bring my own interpretation to the story of Dracula. After all, my outrageous ideas seem to fit right in with the rest. :)

I'm sure that I've missed a lot of information on the historical Dracula. I look forward to hearing from others who want to share their research with me.

Shi'a and Sunni - what's the difference? Part One

Ali

Misinformation about Islam, Islamic countries, and the history of the Middle East runs like a river of sewage through modern life. I would like, in my own small way, to increase understanding of between people.

Part of the problem about understanding a different religion and different cultures lies in the nature of American media. Reporters and commentators are under pressure to dispense to enormous amounts of information very quickly. Also, when once the news was seen as a service for the public good on behalf of the stations, information is now seen as a chance for ratings. As a result, careful, nuanced, and accurate data often gets shoved aside.

I hope I can bring some of the nuance back to the discussion of Islam!

One of the questions I get from people is: What *is* the difference between Sunni Muslims and Shi'a Muslims?

As always, the history is everything.
As always, the history is very long.

Let's start with the simplest answer.  The split began in 632 CE, when the Prophet Muhammad died. Despite the Prophet's many accomplishments, he did not think to arrange an order of succession for temporal leadership.

And whenever there is a vacuum for leadership, people get angry and confused. Some of the Muslims wanted Muhammad's cousin and son-in-law, Ali, to succeed. Others wanted Abu Baker, M's father-in-law, to lead them.

A whole bunch of really unpleasant battles, murders, and other horrible things then followed. I'll get into the details of these examples of human nastiness if anyone wants to read them. I find them fascinating and important, but I understand that not everyone does. :)

So, let's get down to how this shakes out to the modern split.

Sunni's are the majority of Muslims. Shi'as are a minority - about 10-20% of the world's Muslim population. As is usual with minorities, the Shi'a live in greater poverty and are persecuted under many governments.

The Shi'a believe that the Imam (the one who leads prayers) is both the spiritual and political leader of the Muslims. The Imam is supposed to be the keeper of justice and the interpreter/keeper of the Divine laws. As a result, Sunni can see the Shi'a as serious challenges to their spiritual and temporal authority.

My wrists are starting to hurt! I'm going to stop here. If you have any questions or thoughts, let me know!


Useful Links:
BBC
The Economist
The Independent 
Muslim Vibe

Tidbits from the Roman Forum.

Flowers on the mound.

 I've been putting off my blogging. I was going to get "serious" and write about my writing process.

But I wasn't ready to leave Italy behind! Back to Rome for an exploration of death and rebirth.

The mound to the right is the altar of the Temple of Caesar. Augustus began construction of the temple in 42 BC after Julius was assassinated. All that remains is the mound above.

Below is the entrance to the Umbilicus Urbis (Navel of the City). I found myself fascinated by the small, unassuming structure. It had been used as a reference point for center point of the city and was considered an entrance to the Underworld.

The sign at the Umbilicus Urbis.

Augustus Caesar as the Pontifex Maximus.

The remains of a colossus of Constantine.

The Roman emphasis on realism in their portraiture proves that you don't need to be a big, brawny guy to rule the world.

The statue from the Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus, originally built around 509 BC. Wow!

Things I love: Part III

I love Nike of Samothrace. Even with no head and no arms, she is the very image of a powerful woman. In postcards and pictures on the Internet, she is eye-catching. In person, she is life changing.

Writing exercises!

Every writer, pro or amateur, likes to play with ideas. Writing exercises such as writing to a timer, journaling, or engaging in microdescription (such as describing a single leaf on plant, etc.) can create huge amounts of joy and playfulness.

I found this writing exercise in my horoscope, of all places. Rob Breszny, author of the world's most delightful horoscopes, gave this as a prompt:

[An] exercise that's likely to energize you in just the right way is to picture yourself at age 77. I suggest you create a detailed vision of who you'll be at that time. See yourself drinking a cup of tea as you gaze out over a verdant valley on a sunny afternoon in June. What are you wearing? What kind of tea is it? What birds do you see? What are your favorite memories of the last 30 years?

Well! Who could resist such a delicious dream? Certainly not I! So I grabbed some paper and this is what I got.

I'm in the south of Spain, drinking peppermint tea with honey as I sit in a comfortable cushioned lounge chair. I'm wearing loose, cool pants and an ice-blue blouse that reveals my still magnificent bosom and nipped in waist. (Admitting my vanity is not comfortable for me. Oh, well. Might as well stay truthful, eh?)

I'm over looking the valley that leads to an open, golden beach below. The Charming Man and I are staying at a beautifully restored house with a lush, green garden. Hummingbirds and bees sing an early morning melody and share their amazing colors with the flowers and plants. The Charming Man is still asleep as I enjoy my tea and take notes for my next book.

I remember the first time I hit the Best Seller List. I enjoy knowing that I started scholarships for women who study history and that I support a non-profit that helps women start businesses.

I get up and do a few belly dance moves to express my happiness at reaching this moment in my life.

Now!

YOU tell me what you want to have happen when you are 77.

My universe is constantly expanding.

There seems to be a stereotype that writers can only work in one genre for one audience, forever. We are amazed when a mystery writer attempts a foray into action-adventure. We applaud when Nora Roberts takes on the futuristic police procedural as J.D. Robb.

And one never, never crosses over from fiction to non-fiction.

Frankly, I don't do well with rules. I started off with non-fiction writing until I was hijacked by my wonderful Valerie, Lance, and John for Dracula's Secret. Sophia is running amok in my brain in Sister of God. But my passion for history is not letting me go.

There aren't a lot of American women who study Middle Eastern history. As a Western feminist who is familiar with various cultural mores, I have insight into the forces that create the image of Islam that Americans struggle with. I have things to say about how events in the 1600s still effect what everyone experiences now. As a fiction writer, I can say them in an interesting and vibrant way.

Someday, I'm sure I'll need to create a second blog for my history work and how that is going. I don't think many publishers want the author of a popular history posing in a cocktail dress with a wine glass. After all, serious writer r serious, you know. *makes serious face*

Of course, the field just might need an author who wears rhinestones. It certainly would make book talks more interesting....

I can't give up my beautiful boys and girls who search for love and passion while saving the world. I'm going to write them until I die. :)

I'm just going to add more excitement into my life. This is going to be fun!

Primary source research and other wacky hijinks.

Over the holiday weekend (and I hoped yours rocked, too), I got sidetracked by some research. I was figuring out how modern Berlin differed in layout from World War II Berlin, especially what happened to the land where the final bunker was.

(It's an apartment block and playground now. How very cool!)

In the course of looking that up, I found a book called In the Bunker with Hitler by Bernd Freytag von  Loringhoven.

Von L, as I started to call him, was a Captain in the regular Army, and was aide-de-camp to the Army chiefs of staff- Guderian and Krebs. He describes his experiences in the Bunker from July 23, 1944 to April 29, 1945.

It's a fast,  fascinating read, and I suddenly wanted to do a paper on Group Think and the Third Reich. Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes, by Irving L. Janis is one of my favorite books. This would be an amazing study, full of footnotes and quotes (and parenthetical statements).


But alas, there is only so much time in the world. So instead, I'm going to use In the Bunker... as a primary source on Hitler's behavior and personality in the last days of World War II. Some of my notes:

1. Never underestimate the power of charismatic, motivated, deluded idiot.
2. As much as it sucks, it really does help to listen to people who disagree with you.
3. As nice as it is in your own little world where your soldiers are at full strength with plenty of food, ammunition, fuel, and not being killed by your enemy, you might want to maybe, just maybe try playing make-believe.
4. The regular Army really didn't know about the war atrocities. I never understood that before, but after hearing how Hitler ran things, I see how he did it, and why. (Secret meetings with the Nazi party because he didn't trust or like the regular Army men).

This is why primary source research is the most fun of all.

Travel picture of the day.

Amsterdam has some of the world's most intriguing architecture. Most of what we saw dated from the 17th Century, during the Netherland's time as the world's major trading power.  Designed to act as both homes and warehouses for goods, the narrow but tall buildings sport hoisting beams to pulley heavy bundles into the attics.  Then the merchants could bring their wares downstairs to show to purchasers.

To maximize space, they used a lot of spiraling staircases.

Very narrow, very steep spiral staircases.

For example, the staircase in the Hotel Brouwer, where The Charming Man and I stayed (by the way, this hotel was *lovely* and we highly recommend it).

I do believe these staircases are why the Dutch are such ridiculously good looking people.

Aha!

Remember how I said that the sources for Vlad Dracula really really suck?

Other people think so, too.

"Vlad Dracula was doubtlessly cruel, but not more so than other princes of his time," said Margot Rauch, the Austrian curator of the exhibition, entitled "Dracula - Voivode and Vampire".

Jennifer Crusie rocks my socks.

For those who aren't familiar with the romance genre, a little back story.

Here's part of what Wikipedia says about Ms. Crusie:

Crusie was graduated from Wapakoneta High School, and then earned a bachelor's degree in Art Education from Bowling Green State University in Bowling Green, Ohio.^[1] She has two Master's degrees. For her first, from Wright State University in Professional Writing and Women's Literature,^[1] Crusie wrote a thesis on the role of women in mystery fiction.^[2] Her second master's degree is an MFA in Fiction from Ohio State University.^[1] She has also completed work towards a Ph.D. in feminist criticism and nineteenth century British and American literature at Ohio State University.

So we know we're dealing with a driven, intelligent woman who loves romance and who can discourse intelligently on the themes and motifs of romance fiction. On her website, Ms. Crusie discusses her writing process and analysis of genre fiction.


I have to recommend this one, if only cheer about someone mentioning V. Propp's and Claud Levi-Strauss' theories on literature and myth.

This Is Not Your Mother's Cinderella: The Romance Novel as Feminist Fairy Tale.

Oh, yeah - just to explain.

Mostly, I'm posting my old poetry because I'm too busy revising Dracula's Secret to come up with anything new for this blog.

Emergency Surgery's first line came to me about three years ago when I had to end nearly thirty-year (fairly loose) friendship. I didn't realize how much of me this person had become until it was over. I felt empty and hollow, and it surprised me how much I missed our interactions.

Oh, Please, Aeneas was a response to the most irritating section of the Aeneid. Can you believe that some old white guy scholars call the scene where he sails away from Carthage to be Aeneas' most heroic moment? Disgusting. I think that part ruins an otherwise fantastic read. I think Virgil must have had some bad dormice in honey that day.

(The Romans had a strange view of yummy food)

So, more poetry to come!

Feminism for the day!

A new blog, Contestations: Dialogues on Women's Empowerment, has a fabulous first issue about feminism and Islam. Rock on!!

Also dealing with feminism and Islam -a Saudi woman literally strikes back against the Hai'a, the virtue police. Time to remind Saudi Arabia that their limitations against women are unjust and against the basic Islamic tenets of mercy and justice.


Note: I have to mention that I'm not Muslim - just someone with a background in Middle Eastern history.

Getting Cynical on Vlad Dracula.

Even the most cursory look at the secondary and tertiary sources on Vlad Dracula shows a stunning (or tedious, depending on your personality) number of resources on how bloodthirsty and cruel this particular historical figure was.

To find out where they got their information, I did what every self-respecting historian does. I checked their bibliographies for their primary sources. This is what I found.

Vlad Dracul II lived from 1431-1476.

No sources survive from Vlad himself (despite it being commonly reported that he was highly educated and literate). This includes any of his legislative acts.

No sources survive from his brothers, father, wives, other relatives, or even friends.

The only primary source that is contemporary to Vlad's life is in the Monastery of St. Gall, in Switzerland. It was written by an unknown author in 1462. The manuscript gives a number of anecdotes about Vlad (thirty-two, according to the translation I read). The translator claims that six of those thirty-two stories are confirmed by other sources, but does not name those sources.

The stories discussing Vlad's crimes against humanity were not verified by other contemporary sources.

The Russian and German documents that discuss Vlad's preference for disemboweling animals, etc., etc., etc., date from 1490 at the earliest.

The woodcut portraits of Vlad date from 1488 and 1491. The famous oil portrait comes from the second half of the 17th century. Which, I might point out, is nearly 200 years after Vlad died.

Many scholars make much of the oral transmissions of the folk tales of Romania. Unfortunately, I was unable to find any analysis of these stories by anthropologists or historians that would confirm the accuracy. Folk tales often are multipurpose stories - they could be cautionary tales or money makers to fleece the unsuspecting. I've not seen any studies done of where the folktales agree with the primary sources.

For example, contemplate the relationship people in the United States have with George Washington. The old cherry tree tale has been discredited, but how many of us still remember it and tell it?

What all this boils down to is very simple:

We don't know that much about this historical figure.


So as a result, I felt like I could play with this person, bring my own interpretation to the story of Dracula. After all, my outrageous ideas seem to fit right in with the rest. :)

I'm sure that I've missed a lot of information on the historical Dracula. I look forward to hearing from others who want to share their research with me.

The oil portrait image shamelessly www.dracula.info. Fabulous website and lots of fun.

Digging around in Primary Sources.

Now you have your sources, primary and otherwise, all laid out. Now what? What criteria do you use to select which ones you wish to consult?

For an example, I will use a famous case of really bad sources and a vicious historical hatchet job, namely, King John I of England (I know this blog is about Dracula's. This example does have relevance to Dracula. Be patient!).

The best structure for an evaluation uses the classic "who, what, when, where, and how" criteria. Here's how to apply these questions to a primary source.

Who?
Who created it? A monk? An adversary? A hagiographer? An admirer? A satirist - hey, are you taking a sarcastic book seriously? (I've done that. It's very embarrassing.) The only contemporary chronicles for King John for whom we know the authors are Gervase of Canterbury and Ralph of Coggeshall. There are scanty anonymous annals from monks from Dunstable, Worcester, and Tewkesbury, and the abbes in Margam in Glamorgan and Waverly in Surrey.

When?
When did they write it? Are they a contemporary of the person or action? Did they write it later using their memories or rumor? John of Wendover wrote his stories after 1226. Matthew Paris began plagiarizing Wendover's stories starting in 1235. King John died in October 1216. John's son, Henry, did not take the throne until September 1217. Does something about those sources look funny to you, too?

What?
What did they create? A book, artwork, or an object? What kind of condition is the item in now? What purpose did it serve? Roger of Wendover very honestly stated that his book was not a history; he wanted an effective foil for sermons against various sins.

Where?
Note that there are regional and temporal differences in climate of opinion. Also, different geographical climates preserve things better than others. So we have wonderful artifacts from dry climates like Egypt, but few from moist climates like SubSaharan Africa. Remember, books are destroyed in a particular pattern as are scrolls and pottery.

How?
Did the creator use eyewitnesses? Other accounts? Is the account littered with unsubstantiated rumor? A good question to ask is how good is the rest of the source. Roger of Wendover's "chronicle" of King John is full of stories that no-one would take seriously. He writes of a washerwoman who broke the Sabbath to work and was exsanguinated by a small black pig for punishment. He writes another story of a loaf bread that because it had been baked on Sunday, ran with blood when it was to be sliced.

"There is one, (it is eighteen pages long) about a peasant named Thurkill from the village of Twinstead in Essex, who, in 1206, was led through the realms of Purgatory by St. Julian. As Wendover tells it, the story has many realistic touches, from the man's name and place where he lived to precise details about the torture chambers of the underworld: in one, for example, stand cauldrons of inky water so bitter that if a piece of wood is thrown in the bark instantly peels off. It is a grim and lively story; but is it true? Wendover certainly seems to think it as authentic as his stories about John; and it is difficult to see on what grounds historians should reject the former while accepting the latter." Warren. P. 11

Now, what if don't have a smoking gun" like the King John example? What if you just feel uncomfortable about using that source? Many historians are nervous about basing a text on controversial "primary sources". Historians will tell you to do another search to see if you can find any sources to supplement, replace, or confirm the references you are using from these sources. The citation will have more authority if you are able to back up your point with multiple sources.


The historiography for this section is based on W.L. Warren's book, King John, published in London by Eyre & Spottiswoode c. 1961. I highly recommend it.

A slight diversion

Before I get on the promised topic of why I wanted to write about Dracula, I want to discuss how historical research gets done.

Historical research is mostly done from written sources. The three main classifications of sources are tertiary, secondary, and primary (historians are not known for creative classification names).


Tertiary sources are the most common and the most easily accessible. A tertiary source is one that is not written in the period in question. Tertiary sources discuss current research and current attitudes about that particular topic or time period. Tertiary sources include text books, book reviews, timelines, and encyclopedias. They are very useful places to start research.


Secondary sources are still written out of period, but refer to period sources. They are often specialized books, dissertations, or theses that look at available period evidence about a person, place, thing, or idea. They are a good place to grasp a complete view of a culture. They also vary greatly in quality, complexity, and scope (this is where you use the book reviews and abstracts to determine which one). This is King John by W.L. Warren, one of my very favorite secondary sources.


A primary source is a source created at the time you are studying by a contemporary of the action or person. They are more scarce and more difficult to understand, but a whole lot more fun to work from. Examples are coins, inscriptions, buildings, portraits.


Secondary and tertiary sources are often blended sources; they have pictures, quotes, graphics, and facsimiles of primary sources in them. This is extraordinarily helpful - you can get feel for a primary source without having to find it in its entirety.

Frequently, primary sources are published in collections or in thematic arrangements with introductions. Primary sources are not limited to written material; paintings, coins, carvings, artifacts (surviving physical evidence), tapestries, buildings, and photographs and photocopies of any of these are primary sources.

The best and hardest way to write history is from primary sources. The further away a text is from the original actions, recorded by contemporaries, the deeds and thoughts recorded lose their freshness and immediacy. Secondary and tertiary sources are often the cause behind the "history is boring" reputation. After all, novels are exciting for their attention to detail, their focus on action and consequence.

History is the story of murder, betrayal, love, greed, tenderness, and lofty dreams for humanity. Well- researched, well-written history is "edge of the seat" exciting and explains where modern attitudes and problems came from.

Next time, I promise, I'll talk about Dracula himself.

The s*** just got real.

History gives contexts for contemporary problems. How can we hope to overcome hatred and violence without knowing where that anger came from?

When you study history, you not only learn who you are. You learn how how the world works. And that is no small task, both for the student and the teacher.

Back in 1970, David Hackett Fischer demanded more from historians than what we had been doing for decades. This quote from his book, Historian's Fallacies, demands that we put ourselves out there for the world.

[N]othing is more necessary to the peace of the world. Let us have no romantic humbug about brotherhood and humanity. What is at stake is not goodness, but survival.

Men must learn to live in peace with other men if they are to live at all. The difficulties which humanity has experienced in this respect flow partly from failures of intellect and understanding. Historical knowledge may help as a remedy- not a panacea, but a partial remedy. And if this is to happen, professional historians must hold something more than a private conversation with themselves. They must reach millions...and they will never do so through monographs, lectures, and learned journals.

I doubt that they can hope to accomplish this object by literary history or by the present forms of popular history. Instead, they must begin to exploit the most effective media of mass communication - television, radio, motion pictures, newspapers, etc. They cannot assign this task to middlemen. If the message is left to communications specialists, it is sure to be garbled in transmission.
(p. 316)

No pressure, David. :)

This quote has guided how I felt about history since I first read it in graduate school. I hope it gives you some idea on why I like to write fiction with a strong historical bent and why I'm starting this series.

Next up:

Delving into Vlad Tepes, and why I wanted to write Dracula's Secret.


Photo of Dr. Fischer from www.historians.org.
Doesn't he look like he'd demand the best of you?

Opening quote shamelessly stolen from Hot Fuzz. Who stole it from other people.