I know I’ve posted about Katherine Swynford before- she even features in a chapter of Medieval Royal Mistresses. However, Kathrine by Anya Seton is one of my favourite historical novels, so the chances of me not writing about her again were slim. The novel dates from 1954 and has stood the test of time.
Katherine de Roet, the daughter of a minor Flemish knight, and her sister Philippa begin the tale as part of Philippa of Hainault’s household. It’s likely that their father came to England with the queen when she married Edward III. Philippa is married to Geoffrey Chaucer while Katherine is married to Sir Hugh Swynford, an impoverished knight from Lincolnshire. Seton, who is writing a novel, changes Katherine’s age to make her slightly older than she probably was in fact. What was acceptable in the fourteenth century is not something that is acceptable in modern times. A novelist can change ages – a historian has to provide the facts, and in Katherine’s case this involves potential ages and analysis of known facts both for Katherine and of known medieval averages to arrive at the most likely year for her birth and her marriage.
Swynford isn’t necessarily the most sympathetic of characters and that’s where fact and fiction part company. Quite simply we know very little about him – https://thehistoryjar.com/2017/07/14/sir-hugh-swynford/ or his relationship with Katherine. The historical record, unsurprisingly, is a blank. A novelist can fill in the blank – a historian cannot.
After Hugh’s death – and that’s where papal dispensations and account rolls provide us with historical evidence, Katherine, who is the governess to John of Gaunt’s daughters, begins an affair with the duke – although who started what is a matter of speculation rather than fact. Evidence of their relationship, explored in the non fiction work by Alison Weir, including the birth of four children, gifts, visits, monastic chronicles, court records, and the Peasant’s Revolt provide primary source evidence. The fact that Katherine married John in 1396 and that their children were subsequently legitimised provides a paper trail of evidence that would otherwise have been lacking. What makes Katherine remarkable, is that history knows as much about her as it does.
And just so we’re clear – Seton is able to develop the story of Katherine of John’s relationship because she is writing a work of fiction. The research is impeccable but while Alison Weir can only write about what the evidence provides, Seton can enhance the plot line; provide a narrative for what happened to Katherine while she was absent from the existing historical record; and use dialogue to develop character. Both writers make sound use of the sources and tell Katherine’s story but Seton does not have to rely on verifiable facts. A good historical novelist like Anya Seton does extensive research before putting pen to paper but no one should be quoting anything in a novel as historic fact, no matter how good it might be.
My favourite verifiable, historical fact is that on Valentine’s Day 1382, Gaunt issued Katherine with a legal document which said that neither of them owed each other anything. It was a formal renunciation of property rights. The quitclaim, to give the document its correct name, ended their ten year old affair. No one could now take away from Katherine anything that the duke had given to her. She was independent and safe. It’s an unusual Valentine – but John of Gaunt was a hated figure at this time. The Peasant’s Revolt of the previous year had seen his London residence at The Savoy burned to the ground. The Church was attacking him because of the protection he offered to John Wycliffe. Monastic chroniclers attacked Katherine in order to damage the duke. There was also the small matter of Gaunt’s second wife, Constanza of Castile and Gaunt’s desire to win himself a crown of his own.
And if you like to compare writers – Anne O’Brien’s The Scandalous Duchess is also about Katherine Swynford.