by 1203 they were changing
Illustration by Glen McBeth
History is an account, mostly false, of events, mostly unimportant, which are brought about by rulers, mostly knaves, and soldiers, mostly fools. ~ Ambrose Bierce
I am writing a historical MG novel.
The setting has been easiest to piece together because there are many sources full of the details -as long as what I want to know is what the great men of the day were doing.
Even in 1203, most people were getting on with the basics - survival. I looked for the wonder, and the joy, in living in those times: food, weaponry, warmth and friendships.
During research for one of my secondary characters, I found a person who, if he hadn't been murdered, possibly at the hands of the king, would have changed British history. I want to thread him into my tale. I'm having a problem. I want to use him but - if he'd lived - why wouldn't he have asserted his claim to the throne when he was old enough?
IS THERE A STRONG ENOUGH REASON FOR SOMEONE TO TURN THEIR BACK ON THEIR DESTINY?