Introducing… Minerva Spencer
On Friday, I reviewed début author Minerva Spencer’s Dangerous, book one in her series, The Outcasts. I remember being a bit sceptical when the book first appeared on my radar; I’ve become increasingly wary of historical romances touting danger and adventure over the past couple of years, as so many of them have been disappointing – too full of plot, not enough focus on the characters and their relationship. Plus, a heroine kidnapped by pirates and sold to a sultan? Had we somehow gone Back to the Future and the 1980s bodice ripper when I wasn’t looking? For whatever reason, I decided to read the book and, as I said in my review, after the first few pages realised my preconceptions had been entirely misplaced, and, once I’d finished, that I wanted to know a bit more about the author and how she’d come up with this particular plotline. I asked her to visit us at All About Romance – so that she could set me straight!
Caz: Thanks for stopping by, Minerva
MS: Thanks so much for having me on AAR today! This is one of my favorite sources for romance recommendations and I love following your blog.
Caz: Thank you so much – it’s always good to know our recommendations are useful J Are you a long time reader of historical romance? Is it a genre that’s always interested you?
MS: I discovered Victoria Holt in 7th grade (Devil on Horseback was my first) and my junior high librarian was a fellow romance lover who helped me get my hands on every book Holt wrote. She also steered me toward similar authors like Mary Stewart and Phyllis A. Whitney.
Caz: OMG, we must have been twins in a former life or something – Holt and Whitney were two of the authors I read most in my late-teens and twenties.
MS: Really? :) Well, for whatever reason, I stopped reading romance after graduating high school. I didn’t pick up a romance novel again until 2013, almost thirty years later. I’d just closed my B&B and needed to regroup and recharge so I did a lot of comfort reading. Once I’d re-read my old favorites (like Holt) I went looking for new authors who wrote in a similar vein.
I got lucky and found a battered and coverless copy of The Convenient Marriage, by Georgette Heyer, in a giveaway box at my bridge club. I fell in love with her writing and inhaled her books. When I ran through Heyer I was terrified I wouldn’t find anyone else as enjoyable.
Thankfully, my digital library has a “if you like this, you might like this,” function and Tessa Dare’s name came up. That was the beginning of my love affair with “modern” romance writers. I went from Dare to Hunter, Hoyt, Thomas, Kleypas, and on and on.
And then I decided to write my own.
Caz: I’m a big Heyer fan, too. Dangerous has an unusual premise – the heroine is abducted by pirates when she’s fourteen and sold to a Sultan – which sounds very old-skool. Can you tell us a bit more about the premise for this novel – and the series, and what exactly was the appeal for you?
MS: The series is called The Outcasts because each book features heroes and heroines who are on society’s fringe, for one reason or another.
I’ll be honest with you, when I wrote this (early 2014), I had no idea there was a whole sub-sub genre of bodice rippers from the 70s that revolved around harems. It never occurred to me that being sold into a harem would be considered sexy – quite the opposite, in fact. I knew from my research that hundreds of thousands of women were captured and sold in the slave markets of North Africa and it doesn’t take a genius to figure out what happened to a lot of them.
Anyhow, Mia, my heroine, played a minor but critical role in Barbarous, which is the second book in The Outcasts but the first book I wrote (that’s a different story . . . ).
Mia really leaped off the page and wouldn’t leave me alone so I gave her a book of her own.
I don’t know how other writers develop their stories and characters, but when I have a secondary character, no matter how minor, I like to imagine their life before, during, and after the story. How did they get to that moment in time? Why are they there? What will they do later, when they step off the pages? I often write pages and pages of background that I’m pretty sure I will have to cut later. Some people might view that as a waste of time, but I find that I end up really knowing the characters and understanding their role. The same goes for historical background, which, unfortunately, often hits the cutting room floor due to editorial constraints.
But to answer your question (finally) I didn’t pick Mia’s harem background specifically; Mia came to me a fully-formed character who’d been captured by corsairs along with the hero in Barbarous, Hugh Redvers.
Mia is a pragmatic character with a lot of experience when it comes to surviving harsh conditions. I think people expected me to dwell on her life in the harem, but I chose to leave that part of her past to the reader’s imagination. I wanted the most impressive characteristic about her not to be that she’d been in a harem, but that she’d survived the harem without being broken. What must it have been like for her? She didn’t speak the language or know the customs and she must have been terrified. But who could she rely on in that situation other than herself?
Anyhow, I figured an early nineteenth-century woman would be forced to draw on inner strength to get through her harrowing experience. People didn’t put their psyches on display in 1811, they lived with their pasts and dealt with problems the best way they could.
Caz: I certainly appreciated the direction you took in the story. I know, from our email chats before we commenced this interview, that you came across some interesting – and rather startling – facts while doing your research for the book, that prove truth really is stranger than fiction. Can you tell us more?
MS: One of the themes of the series – that of piracy in the Mediterranean and how it impacted those it touched – was something I’d been interested in since my graduate days studying American history. Of course back then I’d looked at piracy as it related to the origin of the US Navy.
What really stuck with me over the years was the sheer number of people who’d been kidnapped between the 1500s and early 1800s in the Mediterranean. These numbers are astounding.
How many people do you think? (go ahead…guess!)
Just like the slave trade, there are no exact statistics. But, based on similar types of data, historians estimate the numbers are somewhere from 800,000 to as high as 1.25 million by 1800.
That is a LOT of stories.
Just how were they taking so many captives? And from where?
First off, Corsair pirates didn’t limit their depredations to water.
They hit the coasts of Spain and Portugal so often and so hard there were huge stretches of coastline that were simply abandoned for decades. When the pirates came ashore they often took every person in a village, leaving ghost towns that people were hesitant to repopulate.
And they didn’t stop with the countries that bordered the Mediterranean, either. They free-ranged to anyplace they could find easy pickings. Places like the British Isles during the seventeenth century, especially during the tumultuous Civil War period when the threat of piracy took a backseat to domestic chaos.
During the mid-sixteenth century dozens of corsair vessels cruised the waters of southern Britain and preyed on Cornish villages. They forayed into Cornwall repeatedly, sometimes cleaning out entire towns. One documented raid lists over two hundred people captured. Just imagine the state of mind of the average coastal dweller! It wasn’t just famine, death, war, and disease these people had to worry about: it was pirates, and with good reason.
So, what did the corsair pirates do with the people they kidnapped?
Not surprisingly poor men became slave labor; poor women became slave labor, prostitutes, or concubines; and the well-off might be ransomed if their family was able to muster the funds.
Caz: You’re right – those numbers really are astounding. And I had no idea that the pirates actually raided coastal towns and abducted entire villages. Mind. Blown.
The second book in the series comes out later this year – can you give us a sneek peek?
MS: Sure! The second book, Barbarous, features a character you’ll meet in Dangerous, privateer Hugh Redvers.
Hugh (also known as One-Eyed Standish) was presumed dead at the hands of pirates almost twenty years earlier. Very much alive, Hugh has returned to Britain to pay some old debts. He plans to return to his life at sea just as soon as he has finished what he came to do – but his uncle’s beautiful young widow makes it very difficult for Hugh to do the right thing….
Dangerous and Barbarous take place contemporaneously, so you’ll see some of the same characters popping up in each.
Caz: What are you working on now? Do you have any future plans you’d care to share?
MS: I just finished book four of The Outcasts and started two new series. I always work on a couple of books at the same time and right now I’m working on a contemporary detective trilogy and a Regency Era quintet.
Caz: With all that going on, do you get time to read for pleasure?
MS: I read anything and everything. I’m a huge fan of BookBub and the sales they offer have really made me more adventurous with new authors. After all, .99 or 1.99 for a book is less than a latte. Recently I’ve read a fantastic post-apocalyptic book called The Postmortal by Drew Magary and I’ve also been revisiting the works of Mary Roberts Rinehart, a woman who has often been called America’s Agatha Christie.
Caz: Thanks so much for chatting with me, Minerva, it’s been a pleasure, and I wish you the very best of luck with the book and future projects.
MS: Thanks so much for inviting me here to chat today. I’m glad the subject of piracy in the Mediterranean piqued your interest, and it’s great to be able to share some historical facts that don’t always make it into the finished novel.
I’m always happy to answer either questions about my books or historical research questions from readers if I have the answers. Happy reading!
Minerva Spencer is a Canadian transplant who now lives in the mountains of New Mexico. She began writing in 2013 after closing her 8-room bed and breakfast (a subject she will never write about. . . ) Minerva has been a criminal prosecutor, college history professor, and bartender, among many other things.
She currently writes full-time and operates a small poultry rescue on her four-acre hobby farm, where she lives with her wonderful, tolerant husband and many animals.
When Minerva isn’t writing or editing she’s playing with birds and dogs or doing a little DIY.
Dangerous, Minerva’s first book in her Regency Era series, The Outcasts, will be published by Kensington Press June 26, 2018, and Barbarous, October 30, 2018.
Keep an eye out for Scandalous and Notorious in 2019!
You can find Minerva at: www.minervaspencer.com: Facebook, Goodreads and Twitter
Dangerous is available now: Amazon/Barnes & Noble/iBooks/Kobo
Barbarous is available for pre-order: Amazon/Barnes & Noble/iBooks/Kobo
Did you read the page Janine supplied from Wikipedia? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_slave_trade
The one you are linking to cites ONE historian’s work–Davis’s. That work is SPECIFICALLY challenged by other historians who are named in the article Janine cited as well as in the Guardian article: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_slave_trade
Bottom line: I think it’s substantially overstating the case to say that these figures are “widely accepted.” It would be more accurate to say that they are speculative based on a methodology that has some issues.
And I certainly hope we are all allies, but if that’s so, I don’t understand your unwillingness to allow the possibility that the figure is not, in fact, “widely accepted” when multiple sources showing just that have been cited.
I completely allow for that possibility. And I’ve learned a lot from this thread. Thanks.
I have read all the above links and what I’ve taken away from them is that there isn’t a number that historians agree on. I’ve read this book and, from my perspective, Spencer doesn’t demonize anyone because of their culture or ethnicity. Those who are portrayed in a negative light are done so due to their individual behavior. As Blackjack has pointed out, white European males are every bit as horrible as the Arabic villain.
The concern here isn’t about the content of the book itself. I haven’t read it, so I can’t fairly comment. The *only* thing that worried Janine (and that got her jumped on by other commenters) and me was the absolute willingness to accept the unsourced claim that hundreds of thousands of Europeans were enslaved by Muslims in a 300-year period. That is an astonishingly large number and, if it were broadly accepted as accurate, one would expect it to be common knowledge. The fact that it isn’t common knowledge is a reason to be suspicious of its veracity. And it’s the *lack* of suspicion of that truly astonishing number that smacks of Islamophobia.
I think it is widely accepted. It’s certainly arguable, but it is widely accepted. I am willing to give everyone the benefit of the doubt–including all who have posted on this piece. We are all, I believe, allies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_slave_trade
Arabic is a language, not an origin/identity- does your definition of allyship not include accuracy?
Thank you.
I didn’t know that. I see I should have just used Arab. Thanks–I’ll not make that mistake again.
Excuse me for rolling my eyes when I see islamaphobia and Minerva Spencer used in the same sentence. If nothing else, your pro bono work with amnesty and asylum law belies their snide comments.
Nobody’s saying she is personally and consciously islamophobic. But the implicit biases these kinds of orientalist narratives reinforce are dangerous. Nobody should ever presume themselves to be above reproach just because they mean well and aren’t intentionally causing harm. Look closer.
I’m not sure why this wouldn’t post earlier. This book features a heroine who is an adult and sexually experienced – she’s had a child, and is still a sexual being. Whether she lived in a harem or was in an arranged marriage in England, she was denied bodily autonomy by the patriarchy. In this novel, she finds and embraces sexual fulfillment. This is what readers want to know about. Whether one of the sources in Minerva’s research has been criticized for population number extrapolation based on the historical record of four hundred years ago – numbers she doesn’t even quote in the book – is irrelevant to reviewing her super hot, engaging and well-written romance novel.
Thanks for posting this! I’m starting this book tonight and I am looking forward to reading a book that features a heroine with these characteristics.
Great interview! I love that you dug out some of the fascinating historical research behind a book that I just flat-out gobbled up. :D
Joanne Renaud dug up this blog post about the flawed methodology that historian Robert Davis used to arrive at the numbers Ms. Spencer cites as to the Barbary pirates and the prevalence of their kidnappings. The blogger suggests that Davis, the historian, had a racist agenda.. I hope people here read this post, and the Wikipedia page I posted earlier, before they take what Ms. Spencer said about the corsairs as fact.
https://technoracism.wordpress.com/2014/09/10/the-barbary-pirates-white-slaves-and-racist-agendas/
Did you just use Wikipedia and a random blog post from someone who doesn’t offer his academic credentials to discount numbers that were described by Ms. Spencer as “estimated” in her joyful and passionate conversation about her first release with Caz? It’s a review of an historical romance, not a peer-reviewed paper up for publication, nor is this an academic conference, which is good for you, because no historian worth her credentials would take your evidence seriously. Ugh. Troll.
Perhaps you would accept The Guardian as a more reputable source?
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2004/mar/11/highereducation.books
All I am doing is suggesting that readers do a little investigating of their own and decide for themselves. Since this is a controversial subject and has the potential to incite racism, at a time when the government has tried to institute a Muslim ban and is separating immigrants from their children, it behooves all of us to be careful.
Yes. I accept The Guardian as a better source than the anonymous Janus752. But I stand by my assertion that this was not the place air your concerns, even if you egregiously use the children separated from their parents at the border to shore up your position. It behooves all of us to be careful which data we quote, but more importantly, whose tragedies we co-opt for our own rhetorically specious, ego-driven purposes.
>Two articles that are each over a decade old
>At least one is a blog post that hasn’t been updated for years.
Next time you have a thought, let it go.
Says the person posting anonymously…
I’m going to go out on a limb here and say Wikipedia and a blog post that can be linked to are better sources than unnamed “historians” cited by the author. It’s interesting that you questioned Janine’s sources while having no issues at all with the completely unsourced claim in the interview. You’d think such a mind-bogglingly large number might have caused the interviewer to inquire as to which historians had made those estimates and by what methodology. Instead, she blithely accepted that as “true” and moved on.
And in case you still don’t get it, it’s that willingness to accept the unsourced “worst case” claim without doing any research of one’s own that screams Islamophobia.
Wikipedia can be edited by anyone with an account, which is why most academics won’t count it as a source in theses at most colleges. I think it’s fair to want well sourced academic research that isn’t from a site that isn’t vandalized nine days out of ten.
That’s why you use the bibliography at the bottom of the pages to check the primary sources. Wikipedia is a far better source than unnamed “historians” because you can actually check their names and find their research if you know who they are.
This book presents a heroine we don’t see often enough in HR – older, sexually experienced and confident, rather than “perky” or sweet. Whether in a harem or a typical marriage of the 1800’s, women’s bodies were not their own, and the story of a woman experiencing and owning her sexual pleasure is to be applauded. Disputes amongst academics regarding how numbers are extrapolated from the historical record dating back four hundred years are not relevant to reviewing this novel. In fact, the disputed numbers aren’t even in the novel. What is in the novel is well-written, fast-paced, super hot romance.
“Disputes amongst academics regarding how numbers are extrapolated from the historical record dating back four hundred years are not relevant to reviewing this novel.”
1. This isn’t a review. It’s an interview with the author.
2. The author brought up this utterly irrelevant fact in her interview and stated these numbers as though they were widely held to be accurate (that’s the implication of “historians”).
But sure, no one could possibly write a story about a woman owning her own sexual pleasure in the 1800s without trading on exaggerated fears of “white slavery.”
I’m only about 25% into the novel, but I do agree that Islamaphobia is present, unfortunately. I wish for more enlightened representation of Arabic and Muslim cultures in romances writing, and I do take Janine’s point that in our current moment, this is a particularly sensitive issue. It is for me, in any case, and I have become a pickier and more critical reader on these issues in my leisure reading.
On the other hand, white European male culture is not at all getting off with a pass in this book thus far, and it seems to me that international, cross-cultural patriarchy is under examination, at least in the first quarter of the book that I’ve read. The selling of female bodies takes place in London and in Oran and both are represented as quite horrid for women. I suppose there can be a case to be made that Mia’s Arabian enslavement is worse, but not by much when she returns home and is forced onto a dehumanizing marriage market filled with so many men looking at prospective wives as chattel. I’m looking forward to seeing how this issue holds up as I continue to read. But, a woman owning her sexuality in such extreme conditions – both – is powerful stuff, I think anyway.
Wow, I’ll admit to having my mind blown, too. I knew about Barbary pirates as they were involved with the War of 1812 and the history of the US Navy, but had no idea how long or wide spread such piracies were. Thanks for the information and a great interview.
I love this interview! I admit, I was curious about Mia’s time with the sultan. The woman we meet when the story opens is sexually adventurous, intelligent and has a very pronounced independent streak – and is nothing like typical historical romance heroines. I had some trouble catching up with who she is – and I would have liked more of her backstory. I understand now why Ms. Spencer decided not to include it – but I think her story could have used an end note detailing her research and reasons she opted to exclude the details of Mia’s servitude in this story. I know very little about the corsairs and their captives and frankly, as I was reading the novel, I thought perhaps this was a fictionalized history for our heroine. It’s horrible to discover not only could it have happened, it did happen – to a MILLION or so people. It’s awful.
I’m rethinking my opinion of this novel based on your interview and my grade (which was a B) is skewing slightly higher now! I wish I read this interview BEFORE the book!
With regard to the slave trade, the number of slaves taken that Ms. Spencer cites have been disputed. See this Wikipedia page for more information:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_slave_trade