PART 2: WHEN FACTS AREN’T FACTS Historical Writing Pitfalls and What to Do

As a child, I saw Frog legs listed on the menu. Horrified, I could only imagine the little frog’s pain from having the legs torn off. Mother comforted me by saying, “They grow back.”

Truly? No way. But to this day I’ve never looked this up. I want to believe in that “truth”. Isn’t that what we all want, to believe in our truths?

Many say the truth is out there. Hmmm? Here’s a challenge for you. I needed a birth date for a character in my latest book The Spinster, the Rebel, and the Governor: Margaret Brent: Pre-Colonial Maryland 1638-1648. Go on, just Google Giles Brent and find his date of birth. Be careful you don’t get his grandfather or his son. This Giles immigrated to the New World in 1638.

Maryland State Archives, First Families of Maryland, Royal Ancestry Vol. I, and Wickipedea list Giles Brent’s date of birth as 1600 or at best, 1600-ca (the ca means around-approximately).

Several genealogy websites list him as being born in 1600, 1604, or 1606. Yet, Timothy Riordan, a foremost historian/author of Maryland for that time period list Giles Brent’s birth date as 1607-ca.

I’m curious to know where Riordan found his date. Still, I can’t help wonder if others found the 1600 date on Wikipedia or someone’s genealogy site and without further question, used that date as their data of truth? This promotes the continuation of errors, if the 1600 date is in fact an error.

What to do about this? Check out as many different resources as possible.

Why does this all matter? Maybe it doesn’t, but for my book, I needed historical accuracy along with a compelling story line. When I looked closely at the Brent family, history shows thirteen children, with Fulke being the eldest, born in 1595 and Margaret in 1601. Genealogist who deal with unknown birth dates usually space the births out logical, with a nine month gestation and probably a year or two of breast feeding. According to this logic, Margaret probably was the third child. It makes sense that Giles was born sometime after 1601.

When researching, be warned, facts you trust may not be the true facts. In PART 3, I’ll tell of a curious, but important (and probably secret) document that helped the second Lord Baltimore convince adventurers to sail the ocean and settle pre-colonial Maryland. However, I believe the authors listed as having written this little book are not the true authors who wrote the book.

What have you considered to be a truth, then later found out wasn’t?

References:–161.html Richardson, Douglas. Royal Ancestry. ed. Everingham, Salt Lake City, Utah, 2013 Vol. I pp 519-521. Vol. II pp 64-64. Vol. III pp118-119 Riordan, Timothy.Plundering-Time-Maryland-English-1645-1646

Posted in Pen Points | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

WHEN FACTS AREN’T FACTS AND ASSUMPTIONS ARE FAULTY Historical Writing Pitfalls and What to Do: Part I


I write historical stories and constantly worry I’ve overlooked something. Most likely, I have. Anachronistic traps hide everywhere. I hadn’t realized pre-colonial Maryland indentured servants went barefooted because shoes costs too much, or Governor Calvert didn’t call his courts to session with a gavel because gavels used in meetings didn’t happen until the 1800s. Most of us take for granted common items and actions and assume they’ve always been around.

Replica of the Dove, a pinnace, in Maryland 1634


Only our own diligence, and asking other eyes to search our writing, will prevent us from inserting out of time or place items into our writing.


Another, somewhat larger, historical-writing issue comes from a lack of primary source materials.While writing my newest book, The Spinster, the Rebel, and the Governor: Margaret Brent, Pre-Colonial Maryland 1638-1648, a suspenseful historical biography, I faced unending research challenges. Margaret Brent, the protagonist, left no letters, diaries, journals, or primary source information except her 124 documented cases she tried in the courts of pre-colonial Maryland. Thankfully, Dr. Lois Carr organized and recorded this information now stored in the Maryland State Archives. Yet, her study of Margaret Brent caused her to make a list of items left to question. These unanswered problems stuck in my mind, further motivating me to write this book.


My research happened in three different levels. I did an overview of the historical characters, social events, and places. Still much more needed to be uncovered, so I started my story and honed in on specific research topics for each chapter. Not satisfied, I started back at the beginning of all my researching (groan) and examined everything for a deeper leveling of meaning. With little primary source material, I studied the political-social time, the environment, and any information I could find about Margaret Brent’s neighbors, along with the prominent men around her. Remember, men ruled and their deeds ended up in the records. Spending those diligent hours revisiting and enhancing what I’d already studied brought me many rewarding “Aha!” moments.

Even without primary source information from my protagonist, pre-colonial life with individual accomplishments and difficulties became clear. This knowledge pointed to many probable deep-emotional conflicts. Dr. Lois Carr’s questions now have some logical answers.

Join me when I discuss FACTS THAT AREN’T in Part II.


-Facts that aren’t

-Snap Assumptions – Logical Assumptions

-Perpetuating erroneous information

What are some research stumbling blocks you’ve found, and did you climb over them?

Scheme Stalkers site

Posted in Pen Points | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment


A rare unopened example of a locked letter, with red crayon marking the postage cost (Credit: Unlocking History Research Group)
A rare unopened example of a locked letter, with red crayon marking the postage cost.
(Credit: Unlocking History Research Group)

Richard Fisher (16 June 2021) posted a terrific article giving insight as to how a postal-free delivery system in the 1200-1850s kept correspondence from prying eyes. This task required ingenuity and adept eye-hand coordination.

In my newest book (working title: The Spinster, the Rebel, and the Governor) about pre-colonial Maryland (1638-1648), the Brent family receives packets of correspondence from home, but the father keeps his correspondence from snoopy eyes by sealing his folded letters with wax and stamped with his seal.

If you try any of these, please come back to this page and let me know. How fun!

Posted in Pen Points | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

What You Don’t Say Tells Another Story: The Power of Subtext in Writing

Facial expression, misdirection, avoidance, double meaning, body language, and quips, are some of the ways to use subtext. How fun for your readers when you let them take part in writing your story. Think about it. If you haven’t spelled everything out for them in black and white dialogue, then they get to guess, and that has its own reward. If your readers predict what really going on, they pat themselves on the back. “Good job!” If they’re wrong, then they get the excitement of surprise.

“Where are you going?” asked her husband.

“To the bar to get drunk.” Lila slammed the door.


“Where are you going?” asked her husband.

Lila gave him a smirk as she slammed the door.

Now which conversation engages you more? Which one brings you in close and makes you imagine? See how subtext works?

Here’s another example from my current historical biography set in England in 1638. Not only do the readers experience the subtext of this unspoken conversation, but the protagonist, Margaret, also wonders what’s going on behind her brothers’ unspoken words. She’s not about to ask, but will just leave instead.

The brothers glanced at each other, telling Margaret she must have been a topic of some unpleasant discussion.

“May I have my book? I shall leave now.”

We’ve all experienced unspoken conversations. How many times do parents engaged in coded conversations to keep something private from their children?

Don’t overlook the use of humor. In my last book, The Scientist, the Psychic, and the Nut the protagonist and her husband, on vacation, had just left the hotel and were about to board a ferry to go to stay on another island. Her husband, a worrisome guy, asks if she had checked the bathroom.

She could had said, “Yes.” or “I thought you did.” or “Dammit, quit worrying.” This is what’s called on-the-nose dialogue. Instead, she says, “I left all our toiletries along with my nightie for the maid.”

Subtext in writing brings your readers up close and into the minds of your characters, giving readers an opportunity to stretch the imagination. Finding ways to not put everything in your readers’ face helps them become more engaged and adds power to your writing.

What ways do you find to incorporate subtext into your writing?

Posted in Pen Points | Tagged , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

TRIBUTE TO A FRIEND- Judith Van Gieson

Judith Van Gieson passed away unexpectedly in Albuquerque, NM in January. I took these photos of her at what I expect was her last public appearance. Here she is holding the manuscript of her book that had been adopted for the screen.

Judith Van Gieson, Keynote Speaker, at the Albuquerque Press Women’s Conference, 2019, entranced the audience by describing how several of her books were discovered and optioned for adaptation to the screen. Judith’s books have been published by Harper Collins, UNM Press, and Signet. Several of her thirteen books have earned the Kirkus Starred Review. She often assisted authors and created her own publishing business, ABQ PRESS.

Keynote Speaker, Judith Van Gieson

As the president of the NM Sisters in Crime Chapter, Croak and Dagger, it tickled me to see some of our members up front and center at the NM Press Women 2019 Conference. Judith Van Gieson, a Croak and Dagger member, and I often had lunch together. She would entertain me with “How publishing used to be.” Sigh! I wonder if anyone in the future will dream about the good old publishing days of 2019.

The world will miss this talented and intelligent woman. I certainly will.

Posted in Pen Points | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments


Left-overs from my historical-biography novel research.

The year, 1637: Poor John Briant, lies there crumpled in the dirt, bleeding with cuts and scratches. His body has become a broken bulk. Poor, poor John is now quite dead.

Who killed John?

Who shall pay? 

The place, Mattanient, Maryland: A jury of twelve men upon their oath swore a falling tree had killed John.  Therefore the tree must pay.

Deodand is a thing that has caused a death and must be offered to God.

The sacrificing of inanimate killers of humans, probably steeped in superstition, dates back to at least the 1200s.  English Common Law continued on in pre-colonial Maryland, including this ancient statute of deodand. Inanimate killers of humans, or their worth, must be handed over to the authorities.

 Sir William Blackstone, an English Jurist in the eighteenth century who was noted for his commentaries on English Law, questioned how much of the object must be sacrificed.

For example: If a person is crushed by a wagon wheel, is only the wheel given up or does the law of deodand require the whole wagon?  If it is the whole wagon, what about the horse? What about the objects within the wagon?

The courts finally abolished the ancient English statute of deodand  in 1846.  I had never heard of this most unusual practice, but I love obscure or ancient words. What do you think about this little piece of trivia?  Have you heard of deodand before this? Please, leave me a comment below.





Posted in Pen Points | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment