Monthly Archives: October 2011

10/30/11

Is Your Life Whispering to You?

Cheryl Shireman invited me to join her in the Indie Chicks Anthology. What an amazing group of inspiring women!  Cheryl is here today to talk about the book.  Welcome Cheryl!

_____________

I believe life whispers to you and provides direction. I call that life force God. You can call it whatever you want, but there is no escaping it. If we are open, and brave enough to say yes, life will take us in directions we never expected, and you will live a life beyond your wildest dreams.

Those whisperings often come in the form of a “crazy” idea or a nudge to move into a certain direction that seems odd or silly or daring. Then there is that moment when you think, Well, that’s weird. Where in the world did that come from?

And then there’s the second moment, when you have to make a choice. You can dismiss the crazy notion, and probably even come up with a dozen reasons why it’s a bad idea. You don’t have the time, the money, or the resources. Besides, who are you to do such a thing? What in the world were you thinking? So, you dismiss the idea. We always have that option – to say No.

But it comes back – that whisper. Sometimes again and again. But if we are practical, and safe, we can squash the notion until it is almost forgotten. Almost.

Such a notion came to me a couple of months ago. I began to think of an anthology composed of women writers. An anthology that would be published before the rapidly approaching holiday season. The title came to me almost immediately – Indie Chicks. It was a crazy notion. I was working with an editor who was editing my first two novels, and was also in the middle of writing a third novel. Working on three books seemed to be a pretty full plate. Adding a fourth was insane.

But the crazy notion kept coming back to me. It simply refused to be dismissed. So I sent out a “feeler” email to another writer, Michelle Muto. She loved the idea. I sent out another email to my writing buddy, J. Carson Black. She loved the idea, too, but couldn’t make the time commitment. She had just signed with Thomas & Mercer and was knee deep in writing. I took it as a sign. I didn’t have the time for the project either. Perhaps after the first of the year, when final edits were done on my own novels. I dismissed it, at least for the present time. I’d think about it again in another couple of months, when the timing made more sense.

A week later I surrendered, started developing a marketing plan for Indie Chicks, and began sending out emails to various indie writers – some I knew, but most were strangers. I contacted a little over thirty women. Every one of them responded with enthusiasm. Most said yes immediately, and those who could not, due to time commitments, wished us well and asked me to let them know when the book when the book was published so they could be part of promoting it.

One of the first writers I contacted was Heather Marie Adkins. Earlier this year, while I was browsing the internet, I came across an interview with Heather. The interviewer (oddly enough, Michelle Muto) asked Heather, When did you decide to become an indie author? Heather’s answer was:  About a month ago. My dad had been trying to talk me into self-publishing for some time, but I was hesitant. One night, I sat down and ran a Google search. I discovered Amanda Hocking, JA Konrath, Victorine Lieski; but it was Cheryl Shireman that convinced me. This is the field to be in. I was shocked (Astonished! Flabbergasted!). I had no idea that I had ever inspired anyone! To be honest, it was a bit humbling. And,okay, yes – it made me cry. So, of course, I had to invite Heather to be a part of the anthology. Heather not only said yes, but she also volunteered to format the project – a task I was dreading.

As Heather and I exchanged emails, I told her about how I had been similarly inspired to become an indie writer by Karen McQuestion. My husband bought me a Kindle for Christmas of 2010. Honestly, the present angered me. I didn’t want a Kindle. I wanted nothing to do with reading a book on an electronic device! I love books; the feel of them, the smell of them. But, very quickly, I started filling up that Kindle with novels.

One day, while looking for a new book on Amazon, I came across a title by Karen McQuestion. I learned that McQuestion had published her novels through Amazon straight to Kindle. Immediately, I began doing research on her and how to publish through Kindle. I had just completed a novel and was ready to submit it through traditional routes. Within 48 hours of first reading about McQuestion, I submitted my novel, Life Is But A Dream: On The Lake. Twenty four hours later, it was published as an eBook on Amazon. Within another couple of weeks it was available as a paperback and through Nook. Did I jump into this venture fearlessly? No! I was scared to death, and I almost talked myself out of it. Almost. The novel went on to sell over 10,000 copies within the first seven months of release.

As I shared that story with Heather, another crazy notion whispered in my ear – Ask Karen McQuestion to write the foreword for Indie Chicks. Of course, I dismissed it. We had exchanged a couple of tweets on Twitter, but other than that, I had never corresponded with McQuestion. It was nonsense to think she would write the foreword. I was embarrassed to even ask her. Surely, she would think I was some sort of nut. But, the idea kept whispering to me and, with great trepidation, I emailed her. She said yes! Kindly, enthusiastically, and whole-heartedly, she said yes. Karen McQuestion had inspired me to try indie publishing. I had inspired Heather Adkins. And now the three of us were participating in Indie Chicks, that crazy whisper I had been unable to dismiss.

The book began to develop, and as it did, a theme began to form. This was to be a book full of personal stories from women. As women, one of our most powerful gifts is our ability to encourage one another. This book became our effort to encourage women across the world. Twenty-five women sharing stories that will make you laugh, inspire you, and maybe even make you cry. We began to dream that these stories would inspire other women to live the life they were meant to live.

From the beginning, I knew I wanted the proceeds of this charity to go to some sort of charity that would benefit other women. While we were in the process of compiling the anthology, the mother of one of the women was diagnosed with breast cancer. Almost immediately upon learning that, Michelle Muto sent me an email. Hey, in light of *****’s mother having an aggressive form of breast cancer, can I nominate The Susan G. Komen foundation for breast cancer? I mean, one of our own is affected here, and other than heart disease (which took my own mother’s life), I can’t think of anything more worthy than to honor our sister in words and what she’s going through. A daughter’s love knows no bounds for her mother. Trust me. I know it’s a charity that already gets attention on its own. But, that’s not the point, is it? The point is there are 25 ‘sisters’ sticking together and supporting each other for this anthology. I say we put the money where the heart is. We had our inspiration. All proceeds would go to the Susan G. Komen foundation for breast cancer research. [note from Sarah--this is my mom she's talking about]

The stories started coming in. Some were light hearted and fun to read. But others were gut-wrenching and inspiring – stories of how women dealt with physical abuse, overwhelming grief, and a host of bad choices. It was clear; these women were not just sharing a story, but a piece of their heart. I felt as if I were no longer “organizing” this anthology, but just getting out of the way so that it could morph and evolve into its truest form.

Fast forward to just a few days before publication. Heather was almost done with the enormous task of formatting a book with twenty-five authors. We were very close to publishing and were on the homestretch. That’s when I received an email. An unlikely email from someone I didn’t really know. Beth Elisa Harris and I were involved in another indie project and Beth sent an email to all of the authors in that project, including me. She attached a journal to that email. For whatever reason, Beth had been inspired to share a journal she wrote a few years ago. She cautioned us to keep her confidence and not share the journal with anyone else. I tend toward privacy and don’t tend to trust easily. This is a HUGE step for me. I’ve only read it once since I wrote it. Intrigued, I opened the journal and began reading. It dealt with her diagnosis, a few years back, with breast cancer! Before I was even one third of the way through the journal, I felt I should ask Beth to include this journal in the Indie Chicks anthology. It was a crazy notion, especially when considering her words about privacy and trust. We didn’t even know each other, how could I ask her to go public with something so personal? I tried to dismiss the notion (are you noticing a pattern here?), but could not. I wrote the email, took a deep breath, and hit send. She answered immediately. Yes. Most definitely, yes.

Indie Chicks: 25 Women 25 Personal Stories, with foreword by Karen McQuestion and afterword by Beth Elise Harris, is now available through Barnes and Noble and Amazon. The book includes personal stories from each of the women, as well as excerpts from our novels. And it began as a whisper. A whisper I did my best to ignore.

What whisper are you ignoring? What crazy notion haunts you? What dream merely awaits your response? I urge you, say Yes. Live the life you were meant to live. Say yes today.

Stories included in Indie Chicks:

Foreword by Karen McQuestion

Knight in Shining Armor by Shea MacLeod

Latchkey Kid by Heather Marie Adkins

Write or Die by Danielle Blanchard

The Phoenix and The Darkness by Lizzy Ford

Never Too Late by Linda Welch

Stepping Into the Light by Donna Fasano

One Fictionista’s Literary Bliss by Katherine Owen

I Burned My Bra For This? by Cheryl Shireman

Mrs. So Got It Wrong Agent by Prue Battten

Holes by Suzanne Tyrpak

Turning Medieval by Sarah Woodbury

A Kinky Adventure in Anglophilia by Anne R. Allen

Writing From a Flour Sack by Dani Amore

Just Me and James Dean by Cheryl Bradshaw

How a Big Yellow Truck Changed My Life by Christine DeMaio-Rice

From 200 Rejections to Amazon Top 200! by Sibel Hodge

Have You Ever Lost a Hat? by Barbara Silkstone

French Fancies! by Mel Comley

Life’s Little Gifts by Melissa Foster

Never Give Up On Your Dream by Christine Kersey

Self-taught Late Bloomer by Carol Davis Luce

Moving to The Middle East by Julia Crane

Paper, Pen, and Chocolate by Talia Jager

The Magic Within and The Little Book That Could by Michelle Muto

Write Out of Grief by Melissa Smith

Afterword by Beth Elisa Harris

Indie Chicks is available for your Kindle on Amazon and your Nook on Barnes and Noble. You may also read it on your computer or most mobile devices by downloading a free reader from those sites.

Stop by our Facebook page -  http://www.facebook.com/IndieChicksAnthology

Follow our Indie Chicks hash tag on Twitter!  #IndieChicksAnthology

10/27/11

Free Giveaway! Indie Chicks Anthology

I’m one of 25 women involved in this anthology and I’m gifting 10 free copies via Amazon when the book comes out on Nov. 1. If you’d like a free ebook, leave a comment below for the drawing.  We also have a facebook page … come ‘like’ us :)  https://www.facebook.com/IndieChicksAnthology

_______

As women, one of our most powerful “gifts” is the ability to encourage one another. This book is our effort to encourage women across the world. Twenty-five women share stories that will make you laugh, inspire you, and maybe even make you cry. It is our hope that our stories will inspire your independent spirit and allow you to live the life you were meant to live. All proceeds from this book will go to the Susan G. Komen Foudantion which fights breast cancer – a disease all too close to home for many of us.

My mother was diagnosed with breast cancer in September, so it is particularly meaningful for me to have the privilege of being involved in this.  Thank you for your support!  And don’t forget to leave a comment for a chance for a free copy when it comes out on November 1!

Links:    Amazon   Amazon UK   Barnes and Noble

10/23/11

The Eagle (movie review)

At last!  At long last!  A movie set in Roman Britain that I really quite liked!

Though …  I just looked The Eagle up on the tomato-meter which gives this movie a 39.  Wow. I thought it was way better than that and here’s why:

1)  The book.  The Eagle of the Ninth is a wonderful book by Rosemary Sutcliffe.  It was one of my mother’s favorite books and she gave it to me to read in one of those old hardback editions with fraying edges.  A story of a son trying to redeem his family’s honor after his father led the Ninth Legion to their doom in Scotland.  Great stuff.  The movie follows the book plot better than you might expect.

2)  The beginning.  It drew me in.  I felt for this guy.  I wanted to find out what happened next.  Always good in story-telling if your readers can find their feet right off (see my review of Ironclad, where I didn’t:  http://www.sarahwoodbury.com/?p=3371).

3)  There was no fake romance in this movie.  In fact, I think the only women in this entire movie are a few bedraggled Picts.  But that was good because it was much better than having either screaming naked women fighting in battle (e.g. Keira Knightly) or blood-thirsty, all-knowing Pict women (e.g. Centurion).

4)  I couldn’t predict what was going to happen.  My husband had seen this movie, described it in vivid detail at midnight after staying up late to watch it, and I was still not sure how it was going to end.

5)  The relationship between the two main characters, Marcus and Esca.  Esca, in fact, was really great.  Marcus’ performance has been described as ‘wooden’, and maybe he wasn’t terrific, but he was stoically Roman, which is what I suspect he was aiming for.  He does strongly resemble a college quarterback.  That’s not necessarily a bad thing :)  Donald Sutherland also has a wonderful performance as Marcus’ uncle.

6)  Movies set in this time period are really hard to get right, but this movie didn’t blatantly alter history for its own purposes.  Rome conquered Britain.  Bad stuff happened.  It had consequences.  I still find it amazing that Romans really wore togas in the middle of a British winter, but at least Marcus wasn’t running around half-naked in the snow (e.g. Centurion).  Sandals strike me as really impractical fighting gear, but whatever . . . apparently the Romans wore them anyway.  The ‘seal people’ were rather Native American in their gear and cultural attributes, but I can go with that too.  From the director:  ”They were a more indigenous folk than the Celts, who were from farther south … They were probably small and dark, like the Inuit, living off seals and dressed in sealskins. We are going to create a culture about which no one knows much, but which we will make as convincing as possible. We are basing it on clues gained from places like Skara Brae and the Tomb of the Eagles in Orkney, so that we will have them worshipping pagan symbols, like the seal and the eagle. The reason they have seized the emblem of the Roman eagle from the legion is because to them it [was] a sacred symbol.”  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Eagle_(2011_film)

This is a less violent movie than Kingdom of Heaven and Ironclad.  Hard to believe. Four stars.

 

10/18/11

Dafydd ap Llywelyn, Prince of Wales (d. 1246)

Dafydd, the only legitimate son of Llywelyn Fawr (Llywelyn ap Iowerth) was stuck between a rock and a hard place.  His father was determined that he become the Prince of Wales and hold the country together upon Llywelyn’s death, but at the same time, his illegitimate older brother, Gruffydd, by Welsh law had an equal claim to the throne.  The possibility that Gruffydd was erratic and temperamental and perhaps not as suited to ruling a princedom as Dafydd was irrelevant.

Even had Gruffydd been all that Llywelyn wanted in a son, he was not legitimate.  Among the Welsh, any child was reckoned legitimate if his father acknowledged him, which Llywelyn had.  But the Church did not and the powers-that-were in England believed that the Welsh were barbaric for allowing a illegitimate child to inherit anything.  Much less the crown of Wales.  So Gruffydd was out.

This conflict meant that when Llywelyn Fawr died in 1240, Dafydd was at an immediate disadvantage in his relationship with England.  On one hand, he hadn’t the personality of his father and was living proof that Wales had bowed to the English crown and church, and on the other, his own brother seethed with resentment and worked with allies to unseat him.

Dafydd proceeded to lock up his brother and his brother’s eldest son, Owain, in Criccieth Castle. Gruffydd had already spent four years imprisoned by the King of England (as a way to contain Llywelyn Fawr), and six more years in his own father’s prison for wreaking havoc on the lands his father had given him.   When Senana, Gruffydd’s wife, appealed to King Henry of England, he agreed to intervene.  Unfortunately for Gruffydd, it just meant trading Criccieth Castle for the Tower of London.  Ultimately, Gruffydd died in 1244, trying to escape from the tower on a rope that broke.  He fell to his death.  See my post on Senana:  http://www.sarahwoodbury.com/?p=536

With Gruffydd’s death, Dafydd was free to restart his father’s campaign to control all of Wales, which he did.  Unfortunately, just after a victory over King Henry and the potential start of a new era in Wales, he died on 25 February 1246 of an unknown illness.

(much of this comes from J. Beverly Smith’s definite work on Dafydd’s nephew Llywelyn ap Gruffudd, 1998).

Highlights:

–Born around 1215 to Llywelyn Fawr and his wife, Joanna, illegitimate daughter of King John of England.

–May have died from an illness that caused him to lose the nails on his hands and feet.

–Married Isabella de Braose, whose father David’s father had hung at Garth Celyn for having an affair with David’s mother.

–Had no children.

–Was excommunicated by the Archbishop of Canterbury for not bowing to the English crown.

–Under the terms of the Treaty of Gwerneigron (1241), he had to give up all his lands outside Gwynedd, and also to hand over to the King his half brother Gruffydd whom he had been keeping a prisoner.

–Reconciled with Llywelyn ap Gruffydd, Gruffydd second son, before he died.  Thus, Llywelyn ap Gruffydd was on hand when Dafydd died unexpectedly in 1246 and assumed the throne of Gwynedd.

10/16/11

Medieval Swords and Armor were NOT Heavy

That medieval swords and armor were ‘heavy’ is one of the strangest misconceptions of medieval life.  These people’s LIVES depended on their agility and ability to survive a fight.  Why would they be wielding 20 pound swords and wearing armor so heavy if they fell of their horse, they’d find themselves as helpless as upturned turtles?

One reason for the confusion comes from the fact that ornamental swords and armor that remain to us often ARE heavier than ones used in battle, secondly, the sport of ‘fencing’ has greatly confused people as to what sword fighting really entailed (the purpose of fencing is to poke your opponent with the tip; the purpose of sword fighting is to get your opponent on the ground and shove your 2 lb. sword through his midsection to kill him), and thirdly, that in the late middle ages, the plate armor knights used specifically for jousting WERE heavier than normal so they could survive a straight shot to the chest from a lance.  I have a children’s book that actually claims that a knight had to be helped onto his horse by two servants and a ladder.

No, no, no, no.

“Perhaps the most infamous example is the notion that “knights had to be hoisted into their saddles with a crane,” which is as absurd as it is persistent even among many historians. In other instances, certain technical details that escape an obvious explanation have become the focus of lurid and fantastically imaginative attempts to explain their original function. Among these, the lance rest, an object protruding from the proper right side of many breastplates, probably holds first place.”  http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/aams/hd_aams.htm

“From ordinary hands-on experience we know full well that swords were not excessively heavy nor did they weigh 10 or 15 pounds and more. There is only so many ways we can repeat how these weapons were not at all heavy or ungainly. Remarkably, while one would think a crucial piece of information as the weight of swords would be of great interest to arms curators and arms historians, there is no major reference book that actually lists the weights of different types. Perhaps this vacuum of documented evidence is part of the very problem surrounding the issue. However, there are a few respected sources that do give some valuable statistics. For example, the lengthy catalog of swords from the famed Wallace Collection Museum in London readily lists dozens of fine specimens among which it is difficult to find any weighing in excess of 4 pounds. Indeed, the majority of specimens, from arming swords to two-handers to rapiers, weigh much less than three pounds.

Despite frequent claims to the contrary, Medieval swords were indeed light, manageable, and on average weighed less than four pounds. As leading sword expert Ewart Oakeshott unequivocally stated: “Medieval Swords are neither unwieldably heavy nor all alike – the average weight of any one of normal size is between 2.5 lb. and 3.5 lbs. Even the big hand-and-a-half ‘war’ swords rarely weigh more than 4.5 lbs. Such weights, to men who were trained to use the sword from the age of seven (and who had to be tough specimens to survive that age) , were by no means too great to be practical.”(Oakeshott, Sword in Hand, p. 13). Oakeshott, the 20th century’s leading author and researcher of European swords would certainly know.”  http://www.thearma.org/essays/weights.htm

A major league baseball bat weighs less than a pound–10 ounces or so–and so in comparison, swords are ‘heavy’.  But no knight is planning on hitting a baseball 200 yards either.  Around the world, the new/old practice of ‘European martial arts’ is springing up, because knights were martial artists, with all the maneuvers and kicks and elbow-to-the-nose of Asian martial arts.  I have post about this here:  http://www.sarahwoodbury.com/european-martial-arts/

If you’re interested in Dark Age and Medieval Armor, here’s another post:  http://www.sarahwoodbury.com/darkageandmedievalarmor/ (Wow!  This was my first post ever!)

Mail is very flexible (which meant that while it was effective against slashes and thrusts from swords, was far less so against forceful blows), and relatively light, with a hauberk weighing roughly twenty pounds.  Plate is heavier, more like 45 pounds for a full suit, but with more evenly distributed weight.  When properly fitted, a knight could move easily and fully in either mail or plate.

http://historymedren.about.com/library/weekly/aa041500b.htm

“An entire suit of field armor (that is, armor for battle) usually weighs between 45 and 55 lbs. (20 to 25 kg), with the helmet weighing between 4 and 8 lbs. (2 to 4 kg)—less than the full equipment of a fireman with oxygen gear, or what most modern soldiers have carried into battle since the nineteenth century. Moreover, while most modern equipment is chiefly suspended from the shoulders or waist, the weight of a well-fitted armor is distributed all over the body. It was not until the seventeenth century that the weight of field armor was greatly increased in order to render it bulletproof against ever more accurate firearms. At the same time, however, full armor became increasingly rare and only vital parts of the body, such as the head, torso, and hands, remained protected by metal plate.

The notion that the development of plate armor (completed by about 1420–30) greatly impaired a wearer’s mobility is also untrue. A harness of plate armor was made up of individual elements for each limb. Each element in turn consisted of lames (strips of metal) and plates, linked by movable rivets and leather straps, and thus allowing practically all of the body’s movements without any impairment due to rigidity of material. The widely held view that a man in armor could hardly move, and, once he had fallen to the ground, was unable to rise again, is also without foundation. On the contrary, historical sources tell us of the famous French knight Jean de Maingre (ca. 1366–1421), known as Maréchal Boucicault, who, in full armor, was able to climb up the underside of a ladder using only his hands. Furthermore, there are several illustrations from the Middle Ages and the Renaissance depicting men-at-arms, squires, or knights, all in full armor, mounting horses without help or instruments such as ladders or cranes. Modern experiments with genuine fifteenth- and sixteenth-century armor as well as with accurate copies have shown that even an untrained man in a properly fitted armor can mount and dismount a horse, sit or lie on the ground, get up again, run, and generally move his limbs freely and without discomfort.”  http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/aams/hd_aams.htm

(update 12/07/12)  My 19 year old son informs me that he downloaded a patch for a game–Skyrim–making weapons and armor the proper weight.  Apparently, the original game had swords weighing 10 pounds!

10/13/11

Did Cancer Exist in the Middle Ages?

My dad was diagnosed with prostate cancer in 2001, a few months after my mom had a hysterectomy for uterine cancer.  In 2007, my dad was diagnosed with a second (unrelated) cancer–something horrible called lyposarcoma with a 15 pound tumor in his abdomen.  Two weeks ago, my mother was diagnosed with her second (unrelated) cancer:  breast cancer, for which she had a mastectomy on Monday.

How common was cancer in the past?  If cancer is more common now than before it could be because:

1)  we’ve polluted our environment

2)  we live longer than in the past, so we die from things we wouldn’t have had the chance to die from in the Middle Ages

3)  we’ve circumvented natural selection with our advances in medicine so we are frailer than in the past (my entire family might have died from appendicitis before reproducing, for example)

I can’t answer whether or not cancer is more common, but it was common enough in the past to be remarked upon and studied:

“Since the earliest medical records were kept, cancer as a disease has been described in the history of medicine. The earliest known descriptions of cancer appear in seven papyri, discovered and deciphered late in the 19th century. They provided the first direct knowledge of Egyptian medical practice. Two of them, known as the “Edwin Smith” and “George Ebers” papyri, contain descriptions of cancer written around 1600 B.C., and are believed to date from sources as early as 2500 B.C. The Smith papyrus describes surgery, while the Ebers’ papyrus outlines pharmacological, mechanical, and magical treatments.

Based on the information recorded on papyri and hieroglyphic inscriptions, ancient Egyptians were able to distinguish benign tumors from malignant tumors. They were also able to use different treatments, including surgery, and other various modes of medicine.”  http://training.seer.cancer.gov/disease/history/

A recent article reports on the discovery of a 2250 year old mummy who had prostate cancer: “It is the oldest known case of prostate cancer in ancient Egypt and the second-oldest case in history … The earliest diagnosis of metastasizing prostate carcinoma came in 2007, when researchers investigated the skeleton of a 2,700-year-old Scythian king who died, aged 40-50, in the steppe of Southern Siberia, Russia.”  http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45126192/ns/technology_and_science-science/

No matter how slow and painful a cancer death might be, surgery didn’t sound like a great option:  ”The Edwin Smith Papyrus, describes 8 cases of tumors or ulcers of the breast. The document acknowledged that there is no treatment for this condition and recommended cauterization (the fire drill) as a palliative measure. ”  http://medicineworld.org/cancer/history.html

“Hippocrates believed that the body had 4 humors (body fluids): blood, phlegm, yellow bile, and black bile. When the humors were balanced, a person was healthy. Too much or too little of any of the humors caused disease. An excess of black bile in various body sites was thought to cause cancer. This theory of cancer was passed on by the Romans and was embraced by the influential doctor Galen’s medical teaching, which remained the unchallenged standard through the Middle Ages for over 1,300 years. During this period, the study of the body, including autopsies, was prohibited for religious reasons, which limited progress of medical knowledge.”

Hippocrates was also the person to coin the term ‘cancer’ from “the Greek words, carcinos and carcinoma  . . . thus calling cancer “karkinos.” The Greek terms actually were words to describe a crab, which Hippocrates thought a tumor resembled.”  http://cancer.about.com/od/historyofcancer/a/cancerhistory.htm

“The oldest available specimen of a human cancer is found in the remains of skull of a female who lived during the Bronze Age (1900-1600 BC) The tumor in the womens skull was suggestive of head and neck cancer. The mummified skeletal remains of Peruvian Incas, dating back 2400 years ago, contained abnormalities suggestive of involvement with malignant melanoma. Cancer was also found in fossilized bones recovered from ancient Egypt. Louis Leakey found the oldest possible hominid malignant tumor in 1932 from the remains of a body, which could be either that of Homo erectus or an Australopithecus. This tumor had features suggestive of a Burkitts lymphoma.”  http://medicineworld.org/cancer/history.html

Throughout, doctors have tried to get a handle on it:

“Zacutus Lusitani (1575-1642) and Nicholas Tulp (1593-1674), 2 doctors in Holland, concluded at almost the same time that cancer was contagious. They made this conclusion based on their experiences with breast cancer in members of the same household. Lusitani and Tulp publicized the contagion theory in 1649 and 1652, respectively. They proposed that cancer patients should be isolated, preferably outside of cities and towns, in order to prevent the spread of cancer.”   http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/CancerBasics/TheHistoryofCancer/the-history-of-cancer-cancer-causes-theories-throughout-history

There were treatments too, not that they necessarily worked:

“Paul of Aegina (~625 – 690 AD)
Paul of Aegina was a most prominent Byzantine physician who believed cancer of the breast and uterus were most common, and he wrote that surgery of uterine cancer was useless. He recommended removal of breast cancer instead of cauterization.

Moses Maimonides (1135 – 1204 AD)
The treatment of large tumors suggested by Moses Maimonides involves ‘excis[ing] the tumor and uproots the entire tumor and its surroundings up to the point of healthy tissue, except if the tumor contains large vessels…[or] the tumor happens to be situated in close proximity to any major organ, excision is dangerous.’”  http://knol.google.com/k/history-of-cancer-treatment#

 

10/11/11

Religious Noncomformity in Wales

“I returned to  Bristol. I have seen no part of England so pleasant for sixty or seventy miles together as those parts of Wales I have been in. And most of the inhabitants are indeed ripe for the gospel.”

These are the words of John Wesley in 1739, preaching to the Welsh about the extent to which the Church of England had strayed, and how his view, Methodism, was a return to what had been good in the Church.

http://www.visionofbritain.org.uk/text/chap_page.jsp?t_id=J_Wesley&c_id=3

But Methodism was hardly the first non-conformist religious view to gain a foothold in Wales.  Unlike some other travel writers (e.g. Daniel Defoe, Gerald of Wales), Wesley spoke favorably of the Welsh–probably because they were more open to his teachings–but without the usual ramblings about them being poor, uncouth, and undisciplined.

Wesley’s Methodism was only the latest in a long line of religious movements that found a foothold in Wales.  Since the time of the Romans, the Welsh had found themselves on the wrong side of the power structure, and used religion as a way to oppose the ruling force in England–whomever that was at the time.  This trend began with their continued adherence to druidism, even after the Romans attempted to wipe it out, through Pelagianism and other ‘heresies’ opposed by the Roman Church, to the Cistercian religious order, which defied the Pope in order to support the aspirations and independence of the Welsh princes.  In a sense, it culminated in the 1600s with the puritan movement that brought so many  Welsh across the Atlantic to Massachusetts, while their co-religionists attempted to reform the Church in Wales.

Unbelievably, there was no common Welsh translation of the Bible until 1588.  To the dismay of the prevailing religious order (The Church of England), with the translation came an increase in noncomformity and once again the willingness to embrace a different religious tradition.

http://www.cymmrodorion1751.org.uk/pages/publications/religious.html

http://www.britannia.com/wales/lit/lit11.html

John Davies talks of religion in Wales, saying:  “Much of what I’ve seen specifically in New England- seems very familiar, but the familiarity is deceptive. I come from a country where it is axiomatic that Puritan, Nonconformist, Dissenting beliefs were the weapon with which to attack the High and Mighty. Wandering round Boston, I came to realize that there the Puritan, Nonconformist, Dissenting beliefs were the beliefs of the High and Mighty.”

http://www.flint.umich.edu/~ellisjs/Davies.PDF

10/9/11

Razing Castles in the 14th Century

Welcome today to N. Gemini Sasson, talking about the Scottish practice of razing their own castles in the 14th century, as well as her new book, The Honor Due a King, the third book in her Bruce Trilogy.  Welcome Gemini!

_____________

It’s impossible to write a historical novel without delving into the ‘why’ of certain events and how they unfolded the way they did. When I began to write about Robert the Bruce what amazed me was how he secured his kingdom’s independence despite the fact that he was fighting an army that was far bigger and better armed than his. To do so, he adopted some rather unorthodox tactics for his time.

When Robert the Bruce claimed Scotland’s crown in 1306, he knew that if he could not outnumber the English in battle, the only way he could defeat them was to outwit them. One way of undermining the effectiveness of the English army was the Scottish practice of ‘razing’ castles, including such pivotal strongholds as Edinburgh and Roxburgh. James Douglas even re-captured his ancestral home, Castle Douglas, on three different occasions and razed it the last time so that the English would never take it again. Sir Walter Scott later dubbed it ‘Castle Dangerous’ in his book by that name, because any Englishman at the time who took it upon himself to accept the governorship of that fortress had as good as signed his death warrant.

To raze a castle means to level it to the ground, stone by stone. This is the medieval version of whole-building demolition.  Keep in mind that many of these castles (many of them built by the English to serve as seats of government and military bases) took decades to build and were improved upon by substantial editions even centuries after the first course was laid for the foundation.

But why destroy something that had such incredible value and strategic importance? The Bruce’s reasoning was simple: if the English had no access to strongholds within Scotland—in which the English could store arms and supplies and then strike out from—then their reach and power would be severely limited. A long march from England, with supplies in tow, would compromise their speed, power and effectiveness.

In addition to razing castles, the Scots burned their own crops ahead of advancing English armies and drove off cattle, depriving the invaders of additional food sources. The Scots were also skilled at the ambush, lying in wait until the English had entered a glen before attacking. Very seldom did they ever meet the English in battle across an open field – Bannockburn, of course, being one of the notable exceptions. Although King Edward II of England launched several campaigns into Scotland to try to win back what his father had worked so hard to gain, those campaigns nearly bankrupted England.

Unable to fund further campaigns, the English at last agreed to a peace treaty and acknowledged Robert the Bruce as ‘King of Scots’.

*****

The Honor Due a King (The Bruce Trilogy: Book III)

In the dawn of a kingdom, loyalties and lies collide.

 The truth will change England and Scotland forever.

 In the triumphant aftermath of Bannockburn, Robert the Bruce faces unfamiliar battles. His wife Elizabeth, held captive in England for eight long years, has finally returned home to Scotland. With his marriage in ruin and hopes for an heir quickly fading, Robert vows to fulfill an oath from long ago—one which will not only bind his daughter to a man she does not love, but challenge the honor of his most trusted knight, James Douglas.

 While Ireland falls to the Scots, King Edward II of England must contend with quarrelsome barons. Hugh Despenser is the one man who can give him both the loyalty and love he so desperately craves. War with France looms and Edward’s only chance at peace rests with his queen, Isabella—a woman who has every reason to seek her own revenge.

 Tormented by his past, James returns to a solitary, ruthless life of raiding into the north of England. When a bewitching spy promises him the ultimate victory, James must weigh whether to unveil the truth and risk losing her love—or guard his secrets and forever preserve Robert’s faith in him.

****

The Honor Due a King is available at Amazon.com, Amazon.co.uk and Smashwords.

 

10/6/11

Excalibur (Caledfwlch)

“Excalibur” was first used for King Arthur’s sword in the embellishment of the King Arthur legend by the French.  Contrary to present-day myth, Excalibur was not the famous “Sword in the Stone” (which broke in battle), but a second sword acquired by the King
through the intercession of Myrddin (Merlin). Worried that Arthur would fall in battle, “Merlin took the King to a magical lake where a mysterious hand thrust itself up from the water, holding aloft a magnificent sword. It was the Lady of the Lake, offering Arthur a magic unbreakable blade, fashioned by an Avalonian elf smith, along with a scabbard which would protect him as long as he wore it . . .”  http://www.britannia.com/history/arthur/excalibur.html

The Welsh name for King Arthur’s sword was ‘Caledfwlch’, which means ‘cleaving what is hard’.  (from Celtic Culture:  A Historical Encyclopedia).  It later developed to become the Caliburn in the story by Geoffrey of Monmouth and finally the Frenchified Excalibur that we know today.

Caledfwlch first appears in Culhwch and Olwen, a Welsh tale dating perhaps to the 11th century (Geoffrey wrote the History of the Kings of Britain in the 12th century).  From Celtic Culture:  “Culhwch arrives at his kinsman Arthur’s court in Celliwig, seeking assistance in wooing the giant’s daughter, Olwen.  Arthur’s speech to Culhwch includes a list of precious items that the young man may not request . . . ’You shall have what your head and tongue may seek, as long as the wind dries, the rain wets, the sun moves, as far as land and sea encompass, except my ship and my mantle, Caledfwlch my sword, Rhongomiant my spear, Wyneb-Gwrthucher my shield, Carnwennan my knife, and Gwenhywfar my wife . . .’”

This is the full extent of the Welsh discussion of Excalibur, though swords held an almost ritualistic place in medieval/dark age culture.  “Along with the spear, they were the ever-present symbol of the warrior class. The weapons of the warrior were not simply tools but deeply important spiritual symbols that stood for the ideal qualities of the warrior. The makers of weapons were highly regarded artisans, metalworkers whose skills were literally perceived as a gift of the gods. As a consequence, a sword was not simply an implement but an emblem of a higher spiritual truth, an emulation of the attributes of the gods.”  http://www.netplaces.com/celtic-wisdom/the-tuatha-d-danann/the-sword-of-light.htm

 

10/4/11

Rewriting the Dark Ages

A new theory has been working it’s way through the archaeological literature that there was no Saxon ‘invasion’ of Britain after the fall of Rome.  The theory states that “9th century Anglo-Saxon propaganda distort [ed] the records for the turbulent 5th and 6th centuries. . . . Rather than Briton versus Anglo-Saxon – as in the myth of Arthur – was it simply a murderous struggle between rival British warlords?”

http://www.archaeology.co.uk/articles/rewriting-the-age-of-arthur.htm

The theory, at least in this article, is based on a lack of primary sources of the era.  This is an interesting argument, but there are a number of sources that suggest it isn’t accurate.

First:  written evidence, which the article claims to be scarce, is far more prevalent than at first appears–it’s just that the sources are not necessarily British.  This site on the ruin and conquest of Britain, details, in chronological order, some other sources that speak of the Saxon invasion:  http://www.cit.griffith.edu.au/~s285238/DECB/DECBps.html

——-

Claudian, 401 AD:

When I (Britain personified) too was about to succumb to the attack of neighbouring peoples — for the Scots had raised all Ireland against me, and the sea foamed under hostile oars — you, Stilicho, fortified me (c.398). This was to  such effect that I no longer fear the weapons of the Scots, nor tremble at the Pict, nor along my shore do I look for the approaching Saxon on each uncertain wind.

Prosper of Aquitane, 410 AD:

The multitude of the enemy so prevailed that the strength of the Romans was extremely diminished. Britain was devastated by an incursion of the Saxons. The Vandals and Alans wasted parts of Gaul; Constantine the usurper kept a hold on the remainder. … Finally, the very Rome, the head of the world, was horribly exposed to the depredation of the Goths.

Zosimus, 411 AD:

They (the barbarians) reduced the inhabitants of Britain and some parts of Gaul to such straits that they revolted from the Roman Empire, no longer submitted to Roman law, but reverted to their native customs. The Britons, therefore, armed themselves and ran many risks to ensure their own safety and free their cities from the attacking barbarians. The whole of Armorica and other Gallic provinces, in imitation of the Britons, freed themselves in the same way, by expelling the Roman magistrates and establishing the government they wanted. The revolt of the provinces of Britain and Gaul occurred during Constantine’s tyranny because the barbarians took advantage of his careless government. …

St. Patrick to Coroticus, 455 AD:

With my own hands I have written and composed these words to be … sent to the soldiers of Coroticus. I do not say my fellow citizens nor to fellow citizen the holy Romans, but to fellow citizens of the demons, because of their evil actions. Like the enemy they live in death as allies of the heathen Irish and Picts and apostates. These blood thirsty men are bloody with the blood of innocent Christians, whom I have begotten for God in countless numbers and have confirmed in Christ!

On the day after the neophytes, clothed in white, had received the chrism (its fragrance on their brows as they were butchered and put to the sword by those I have mentioned), I sent a letter with a holy priest whom I had taught from early childhood … the letter requested that they should grant us some of the booty and the baptized prisoners that they had captured; they roared with laughter at them. …

What should I do, Lord? I am very much despised. See, Your sheep are torn to pieces around me and are carried off, and by the raiders I have mentioned, on the aggressive orders of Coroticus. Far from God’s love is the man who delivers Christians into the hands of Irish and Picts….

… the church mourns and weeps for its sons and daughters who so far have not been put to the sword, but have been carried off and transported to distant lands …; and there freeborn men have been sold, Christians reduced to slavery — and what is more as slaves of the utterly iniquitous, evil and apostate Picts.

Sidonius to Namatius, 480 AD:

… the saxons give the impression that every member of the crew in their high-prowed ships is the captain, so accustomed are all of them both to issue and to obey orders, to teach and to learn piracy. … As an enemy they are unsurpassed in brutality. They attack without warning, but when sighted, slip away. They despise those who bar their way and destroy those they catch unaware; they are invariably successful in pursuit and in escaping. Shipwreck, far from terrifying them, is an exercise in seamanship. … They gladly endure the danger of a rock-bound coast if it enables them to achieve surprise. Moreover, when ready to unfurl their sails for the voyage home from the continent to set sail for home, it is their custom on the evening of their departure to sacrifice one in ten of their prisoners by drowning or crucifixion, performing a rite which is all the more tragic for being due to superstition, and distributing to the collected band of doomed men the iniquity of death by the equity of lot. Such is the nature of their religion.

———-

Second, there is no linguistic relationship between English and Welsh.  As I blogged a few days ago, the Britains of the Roman era and the Dark Age period spoke something similar to the Welsh we know today, with many words borrowed from the Latin.  Welsh has also borrowed many words from English.  But English has borrowed few if any words from Welsh.  If the Saxons really had advanced slowly into Britain, not laid it waste or conquered huge tracts of land wholesale, there would be linguistic evidence of it.  But there’s not.

http://pandora.cii.wwu.edu/vajda/ling201/test3materials/History_of_English.htm

Think of the Norman Conquest.  It was a group of Normans who spoke French, who never outnumbered the Anglo-Saxons.  They conquered them fully, however, over the course of less than 100 years.  Over the next several hundred years, the ruling class continued to speak French, until the 13th century.  At that point, there was a shift to adopt a modified English, heavily borrowing from the French, but still distinctly English.  If the Welsh had been more numerous than the Saxons, something similar should have happened.   What did happen was much more like the English subjugation of the New World, however, but with even fewer loan words from Native American languages than modern Americans use.