The Lady Macbeth Interview: Part One

Ladymacbeth_newAn interview with Susan Fraser King by Susan/Miranda

By now most readers of the WordWenches will know that Wench Susan/Sarah, known to the outside world as Susan Fraser King, has taken her career to new heights with the publication this month of Lady Macbeth: A Novel.  This is Susan’s first historical novel, and it’s already gathering well-deserved praise everywhere from Glamour to Entertainment Weekly to Library Journal — not to mention a prominent place in the front of bookstores everywhere.  A fascinating new take on a notorious literary character, a richly textured story, and history in glorious detail: what’s not for readers to love?

Or, in the words of Susan/Sarah’s newest-favoritest-quote-from-a-fellow-writer, Lani Diane Rich (A LIttle Ray of Sunshine): "Lady Macbeth! I feel smarter just owning it!"

A recent "meeting of the Susans" between Susan Fraser King (aka  Wench Susan/Sarah) and Susan Holloway Scott (aka Wench Susan/Miranda) discussed Lady Macbeth (never named Susan, as far as I know) in all her delicious detail.  Part One appears today, with Part Two to follow on Wednesday.  As always, please feel free to ask additional questions that you may have. 

SHS: How did you choose Lady Macbeth as your heroine? Have you wanted to tell “her” story for a long time, or did you come across the idea while researching another book?

SFK: I’ve known for a long time that the historical Lady Macbeth, an 11th c. Scottish queen, was probably very different than the ambitious harridan of Shakespeare’s play, but she didn’t start blipping on my story radar until about three years ago. I was researching another medieval Scottish story and kept seeing references to Macbeth and Queen Gruoch. I got curious and followed the breadcrumbs, and realized that a few facts hid a story with real substance. Macbeth was treated by Dunnett and Tranter decades ago, and Lady Macbeth was a strong character in those stories, but I wanted to focus on her story and base it on updated history and what was possible for a Scottish woman in an age of Celts, Vikings and Saxons. The facts and possibilities were fascinating, and once I started to research and put ideas together, it developed pretty steadily from there.

SHS:  You chose authentic Celtic names for your characters that will be unfamiliar to many readers.  CanTriskele you tell us a bit about them, beginning with Gruadh, Lady Macbeth?

SFK: Some of the names were determined by historical record, so I had no choice, and I did my best to simplify the Celtic and Gaelic names while retaining authenticity. For instance, Lady Macbeth’s father in historical accounts is Boite, Boete, Bode or Bodhe. The modern equivalent is “Boyd” … um, no thanks! So I settled for Bodhe.

Macbeth’s queen is identified in a Latin document as "Gruoch filia Bodhe," or Gruoch, daughter of Bodhe, and she is also identified as Queen of Scots, and equal to Macbeth, and not a consort (a big clue to her lineage and rank). But “Gruoch” is not a known Gaelic female name, and appears only for this woman. It’s possibly a cleric’s phonetic attempt at a Gaelic name. Although Gruoch is used by historians, I looked for a better alternative (besides, I kept typing “Grouch”).

Some genealogy charts listed her great-granddaughter as Gruaith or Gruadh, which is a legitimate Irish female name. Since it’s possible the child was named for her great-grandmother, a Queen of Scots, I used that for my Lady Macbeth. Though it could have been her actual name, no one seems to have made this connection before. I also gave Gruadh the nickname Rue, to spare the reader as well as the author.

Celtic_circleSHS:  Any novel written in the first person needs a strong “storyteller” to carry the weight of the book.  Yet because Lady Macbeth is set in such an early historical time period, you didn’t have the letters, diaries, or journals that often inspire first-person writers.  How did you research and develop Gruadh’s strong narrative voice?

SFK: While you were writing your 17th century novels (your next one will be The King’s Favorite, about Nell Gwyn, from NAL in July 2008 — Susan/Sarah’s plug for Susan/Miranda!) I was a bit envious of the fabulous, detailed sources you had for each woman—journals, diaries, letters, accounts of all kinds. Sigh!! The historical Lady Macbeth has one direct document to back her up. We don’t know a thing about her personally, and whatever historians and novelists come up with has to be inferred from evidence of the political circumstances around her, what is factually known of the men in her life, and what we know of the traditions of the Celtic society, women in particular; even things like what is known of the environment (the warming of a small ice age, the introduction of new crops, the trade routes, the structure of wooden fortresses, etc.) was very helpful to creating a picture of the woman.

The woman needed a strong voice to carry the book, and she couldn’t sound too modern. So I read widely in Celtic myth, poetry, chants, charms, and songs. I’ve done that for years anyway out of natural interest, since I love that area of myth and literature. That, and years of medieval studies, taught me the general voice of the times.

Whenever you read extensively in whatever era you’re writing about, you’ll naturally absorb the voice. ByCeltic_kells_birds delving into Celtic lit, I absorbed cadence and phrasing, and little turns of phrase, all of which came in handy in creating Lady Gruadh’s voice. Years of work in medieval studies also helped me understand medieval phrasing and medieval opinions, which helped too. In the past few years I’ve also studied some Gaelic, which helped give me a sense of how the character might speak. I tried to keep in mind that whatever Lady Gruadh said would be “translated” into English for the modern reader.

SHS: Thank you, Susan (and thank you for the shout-out for Nell, too*g*)  I hope all of you will please join us again on Wednesday for Part Two.  And if you have any questions for Susan, please ask away!

90 thoughts on “The Lady Macbeth Interview: Part One”

  1. I purchased the book the day it was released and read it as quickly as my schedule would allow. I really enjoyed it. One of things that makes historical novels so interesting is the window into time and culture that is unfamiliar. Basic human nature doesn’t change but our understanding of the world and social processes does lead to different behaviors. I appreciate all the research for “world building”. To me, that’s where the rubber meets the road. Even a riveting story that that of Macbeth and his Lady would be flat without the authentic background.

    Reply
  2. I purchased the book the day it was released and read it as quickly as my schedule would allow. I really enjoyed it. One of things that makes historical novels so interesting is the window into time and culture that is unfamiliar. Basic human nature doesn’t change but our understanding of the world and social processes does lead to different behaviors. I appreciate all the research for “world building”. To me, that’s where the rubber meets the road. Even a riveting story that that of Macbeth and his Lady would be flat without the authentic background.

    Reply
  3. I purchased the book the day it was released and read it as quickly as my schedule would allow. I really enjoyed it. One of things that makes historical novels so interesting is the window into time and culture that is unfamiliar. Basic human nature doesn’t change but our understanding of the world and social processes does lead to different behaviors. I appreciate all the research for “world building”. To me, that’s where the rubber meets the road. Even a riveting story that that of Macbeth and his Lady would be flat without the authentic background.

    Reply
  4. I purchased the book the day it was released and read it as quickly as my schedule would allow. I really enjoyed it. One of things that makes historical novels so interesting is the window into time and culture that is unfamiliar. Basic human nature doesn’t change but our understanding of the world and social processes does lead to different behaviors. I appreciate all the research for “world building”. To me, that’s where the rubber meets the road. Even a riveting story that that of Macbeth and his Lady would be flat without the authentic background.

    Reply
  5. I purchased the book the day it was released and read it as quickly as my schedule would allow. I really enjoyed it. One of things that makes historical novels so interesting is the window into time and culture that is unfamiliar. Basic human nature doesn’t change but our understanding of the world and social processes does lead to different behaviors. I appreciate all the research for “world building”. To me, that’s where the rubber meets the road. Even a riveting story that that of Macbeth and his Lady would be flat without the authentic background.

    Reply
  6. fascinating.
    i liked the term ‘following a trail of breadcrumbs’ – a charming way of saying ‘incredibly difficult research and translation process’.
    i will seek out your book next time i’m at the bookstore to have a better look at the breadcrumb trail!

    Reply
  7. fascinating.
    i liked the term ‘following a trail of breadcrumbs’ – a charming way of saying ‘incredibly difficult research and translation process’.
    i will seek out your book next time i’m at the bookstore to have a better look at the breadcrumb trail!

    Reply
  8. fascinating.
    i liked the term ‘following a trail of breadcrumbs’ – a charming way of saying ‘incredibly difficult research and translation process’.
    i will seek out your book next time i’m at the bookstore to have a better look at the breadcrumb trail!

    Reply
  9. fascinating.
    i liked the term ‘following a trail of breadcrumbs’ – a charming way of saying ‘incredibly difficult research and translation process’.
    i will seek out your book next time i’m at the bookstore to have a better look at the breadcrumb trail!

    Reply
  10. fascinating.
    i liked the term ‘following a trail of breadcrumbs’ – a charming way of saying ‘incredibly difficult research and translation process’.
    i will seek out your book next time i’m at the bookstore to have a better look at the breadcrumb trail!

    Reply
  11. Lady Macbeth has always fascinated me, Susan, because I enjoy stories of the women who found power in the past and what they did with it.
    Do you have any opinion on why Shakespeare portrayed her the way he did?
    Jo

    Reply
  12. Lady Macbeth has always fascinated me, Susan, because I enjoy stories of the women who found power in the past and what they did with it.
    Do you have any opinion on why Shakespeare portrayed her the way he did?
    Jo

    Reply
  13. Lady Macbeth has always fascinated me, Susan, because I enjoy stories of the women who found power in the past and what they did with it.
    Do you have any opinion on why Shakespeare portrayed her the way he did?
    Jo

    Reply
  14. Lady Macbeth has always fascinated me, Susan, because I enjoy stories of the women who found power in the past and what they did with it.
    Do you have any opinion on why Shakespeare portrayed her the way he did?
    Jo

    Reply
  15. Lady Macbeth has always fascinated me, Susan, because I enjoy stories of the women who found power in the past and what they did with it.
    Do you have any opinion on why Shakespeare portrayed her the way he did?
    Jo

    Reply
  16. Thanks, Kathy, I appreciate that, and you’re so right, historical fiction requires as much world building as fantasy, sometimes!
    Maya- the breadcrumbs grew into a pretty big loaf of bread! *g*
    Maggie, the name Gruadh is pronounced “Groo-ath.” Easier to just call her Rue!
    I agree, Jo, it’s interesting to look at the kind of power that women had in the past. Celtic society (and early Irish and Scottish societies) accorded women fairly equal rights and a level of gender respect that is surprising when compared to other medieval European cultures, though not so surprising in a northern Celtic context.
    Shakespeare’s interpretation of Lady Macbeth and Macbeth had two main motivations, I think. One was a political statement, using the Macbeths as an example of earlier Scottish rulers in an age of brute force–but that was in part a 16th c. interpretation of the barbarian nature of the Scots. That played into the need to prove King James a civilized king, since he had just come to the throne of England after his cousin Elizabeth’s death. The English may have been a bit worried–James was a Scotsman, and they were believed to be a savage, ruthless, crude lot. A good way to show Jamie as a good sort was to show how bad an earlier Scottish king was. Macbeth came in handy for that.
    I think another dominant interest for Shakespeare as a writer was the juicy character development he could explore in both Macbeths, playing with themes of greedy ambition and the madness that might result. Shakespeare’s Lady Macbeth is particularly a dramatic creation, a study of the dark side of a lofty goal (becoming monarchs) run amok, even in the female character, normally full of “the milk of human kindness.”
    And there’s a million layers in between, but those are two thoughts on it.
    In Shakespeare’s time they were not too concerned with historical accuracy anyway, with early historians freely fictionalizing. And it’s a fair bet that the smear campaign for the Macbeths began with Malcolm Canmore, who would have wasted no time in condemning his predecessors in order to win support from the powerful lords who had supported Macbeth’s long, fairly peaceful reign. In an age when kings sometimes lasted a few months, mowed down by the next one coming in, a 17 year reign was nothing to sneeze at, and said a lot about the leadership ability of Macbeth and his queen.
    Susan 🙂

    Reply
  17. Thanks, Kathy, I appreciate that, and you’re so right, historical fiction requires as much world building as fantasy, sometimes!
    Maya- the breadcrumbs grew into a pretty big loaf of bread! *g*
    Maggie, the name Gruadh is pronounced “Groo-ath.” Easier to just call her Rue!
    I agree, Jo, it’s interesting to look at the kind of power that women had in the past. Celtic society (and early Irish and Scottish societies) accorded women fairly equal rights and a level of gender respect that is surprising when compared to other medieval European cultures, though not so surprising in a northern Celtic context.
    Shakespeare’s interpretation of Lady Macbeth and Macbeth had two main motivations, I think. One was a political statement, using the Macbeths as an example of earlier Scottish rulers in an age of brute force–but that was in part a 16th c. interpretation of the barbarian nature of the Scots. That played into the need to prove King James a civilized king, since he had just come to the throne of England after his cousin Elizabeth’s death. The English may have been a bit worried–James was a Scotsman, and they were believed to be a savage, ruthless, crude lot. A good way to show Jamie as a good sort was to show how bad an earlier Scottish king was. Macbeth came in handy for that.
    I think another dominant interest for Shakespeare as a writer was the juicy character development he could explore in both Macbeths, playing with themes of greedy ambition and the madness that might result. Shakespeare’s Lady Macbeth is particularly a dramatic creation, a study of the dark side of a lofty goal (becoming monarchs) run amok, even in the female character, normally full of “the milk of human kindness.”
    And there’s a million layers in between, but those are two thoughts on it.
    In Shakespeare’s time they were not too concerned with historical accuracy anyway, with early historians freely fictionalizing. And it’s a fair bet that the smear campaign for the Macbeths began with Malcolm Canmore, who would have wasted no time in condemning his predecessors in order to win support from the powerful lords who had supported Macbeth’s long, fairly peaceful reign. In an age when kings sometimes lasted a few months, mowed down by the next one coming in, a 17 year reign was nothing to sneeze at, and said a lot about the leadership ability of Macbeth and his queen.
    Susan 🙂

    Reply
  18. Thanks, Kathy, I appreciate that, and you’re so right, historical fiction requires as much world building as fantasy, sometimes!
    Maya- the breadcrumbs grew into a pretty big loaf of bread! *g*
    Maggie, the name Gruadh is pronounced “Groo-ath.” Easier to just call her Rue!
    I agree, Jo, it’s interesting to look at the kind of power that women had in the past. Celtic society (and early Irish and Scottish societies) accorded women fairly equal rights and a level of gender respect that is surprising when compared to other medieval European cultures, though not so surprising in a northern Celtic context.
    Shakespeare’s interpretation of Lady Macbeth and Macbeth had two main motivations, I think. One was a political statement, using the Macbeths as an example of earlier Scottish rulers in an age of brute force–but that was in part a 16th c. interpretation of the barbarian nature of the Scots. That played into the need to prove King James a civilized king, since he had just come to the throne of England after his cousin Elizabeth’s death. The English may have been a bit worried–James was a Scotsman, and they were believed to be a savage, ruthless, crude lot. A good way to show Jamie as a good sort was to show how bad an earlier Scottish king was. Macbeth came in handy for that.
    I think another dominant interest for Shakespeare as a writer was the juicy character development he could explore in both Macbeths, playing with themes of greedy ambition and the madness that might result. Shakespeare’s Lady Macbeth is particularly a dramatic creation, a study of the dark side of a lofty goal (becoming monarchs) run amok, even in the female character, normally full of “the milk of human kindness.”
    And there’s a million layers in between, but those are two thoughts on it.
    In Shakespeare’s time they were not too concerned with historical accuracy anyway, with early historians freely fictionalizing. And it’s a fair bet that the smear campaign for the Macbeths began with Malcolm Canmore, who would have wasted no time in condemning his predecessors in order to win support from the powerful lords who had supported Macbeth’s long, fairly peaceful reign. In an age when kings sometimes lasted a few months, mowed down by the next one coming in, a 17 year reign was nothing to sneeze at, and said a lot about the leadership ability of Macbeth and his queen.
    Susan 🙂

    Reply
  19. Thanks, Kathy, I appreciate that, and you’re so right, historical fiction requires as much world building as fantasy, sometimes!
    Maya- the breadcrumbs grew into a pretty big loaf of bread! *g*
    Maggie, the name Gruadh is pronounced “Groo-ath.” Easier to just call her Rue!
    I agree, Jo, it’s interesting to look at the kind of power that women had in the past. Celtic society (and early Irish and Scottish societies) accorded women fairly equal rights and a level of gender respect that is surprising when compared to other medieval European cultures, though not so surprising in a northern Celtic context.
    Shakespeare’s interpretation of Lady Macbeth and Macbeth had two main motivations, I think. One was a political statement, using the Macbeths as an example of earlier Scottish rulers in an age of brute force–but that was in part a 16th c. interpretation of the barbarian nature of the Scots. That played into the need to prove King James a civilized king, since he had just come to the throne of England after his cousin Elizabeth’s death. The English may have been a bit worried–James was a Scotsman, and they were believed to be a savage, ruthless, crude lot. A good way to show Jamie as a good sort was to show how bad an earlier Scottish king was. Macbeth came in handy for that.
    I think another dominant interest for Shakespeare as a writer was the juicy character development he could explore in both Macbeths, playing with themes of greedy ambition and the madness that might result. Shakespeare’s Lady Macbeth is particularly a dramatic creation, a study of the dark side of a lofty goal (becoming monarchs) run amok, even in the female character, normally full of “the milk of human kindness.”
    And there’s a million layers in between, but those are two thoughts on it.
    In Shakespeare’s time they were not too concerned with historical accuracy anyway, with early historians freely fictionalizing. And it’s a fair bet that the smear campaign for the Macbeths began with Malcolm Canmore, who would have wasted no time in condemning his predecessors in order to win support from the powerful lords who had supported Macbeth’s long, fairly peaceful reign. In an age when kings sometimes lasted a few months, mowed down by the next one coming in, a 17 year reign was nothing to sneeze at, and said a lot about the leadership ability of Macbeth and his queen.
    Susan 🙂

    Reply
  20. Thanks, Kathy, I appreciate that, and you’re so right, historical fiction requires as much world building as fantasy, sometimes!
    Maya- the breadcrumbs grew into a pretty big loaf of bread! *g*
    Maggie, the name Gruadh is pronounced “Groo-ath.” Easier to just call her Rue!
    I agree, Jo, it’s interesting to look at the kind of power that women had in the past. Celtic society (and early Irish and Scottish societies) accorded women fairly equal rights and a level of gender respect that is surprising when compared to other medieval European cultures, though not so surprising in a northern Celtic context.
    Shakespeare’s interpretation of Lady Macbeth and Macbeth had two main motivations, I think. One was a political statement, using the Macbeths as an example of earlier Scottish rulers in an age of brute force–but that was in part a 16th c. interpretation of the barbarian nature of the Scots. That played into the need to prove King James a civilized king, since he had just come to the throne of England after his cousin Elizabeth’s death. The English may have been a bit worried–James was a Scotsman, and they were believed to be a savage, ruthless, crude lot. A good way to show Jamie as a good sort was to show how bad an earlier Scottish king was. Macbeth came in handy for that.
    I think another dominant interest for Shakespeare as a writer was the juicy character development he could explore in both Macbeths, playing with themes of greedy ambition and the madness that might result. Shakespeare’s Lady Macbeth is particularly a dramatic creation, a study of the dark side of a lofty goal (becoming monarchs) run amok, even in the female character, normally full of “the milk of human kindness.”
    And there’s a million layers in between, but those are two thoughts on it.
    In Shakespeare’s time they were not too concerned with historical accuracy anyway, with early historians freely fictionalizing. And it’s a fair bet that the smear campaign for the Macbeths began with Malcolm Canmore, who would have wasted no time in condemning his predecessors in order to win support from the powerful lords who had supported Macbeth’s long, fairly peaceful reign. In an age when kings sometimes lasted a few months, mowed down by the next one coming in, a 17 year reign was nothing to sneeze at, and said a lot about the leadership ability of Macbeth and his queen.
    Susan 🙂

    Reply
  21. Since most of us only know Lady Macbeth through Shakespeare, it will be interesting to see this new take on her.
    Oh, and I *loved* the Lani Diane Rich quote, “I feel smarter just owning it.” This is the type of book you want lying about in a conspicuous place so that company will see it and be impresssed by the quality of your reading preferences. *g*

    Reply
  22. Since most of us only know Lady Macbeth through Shakespeare, it will be interesting to see this new take on her.
    Oh, and I *loved* the Lani Diane Rich quote, “I feel smarter just owning it.” This is the type of book you want lying about in a conspicuous place so that company will see it and be impresssed by the quality of your reading preferences. *g*

    Reply
  23. Since most of us only know Lady Macbeth through Shakespeare, it will be interesting to see this new take on her.
    Oh, and I *loved* the Lani Diane Rich quote, “I feel smarter just owning it.” This is the type of book you want lying about in a conspicuous place so that company will see it and be impresssed by the quality of your reading preferences. *g*

    Reply
  24. Since most of us only know Lady Macbeth through Shakespeare, it will be interesting to see this new take on her.
    Oh, and I *loved* the Lani Diane Rich quote, “I feel smarter just owning it.” This is the type of book you want lying about in a conspicuous place so that company will see it and be impresssed by the quality of your reading preferences. *g*

    Reply
  25. Since most of us only know Lady Macbeth through Shakespeare, it will be interesting to see this new take on her.
    Oh, and I *loved* the Lani Diane Rich quote, “I feel smarter just owning it.” This is the type of book you want lying about in a conspicuous place so that company will see it and be impresssed by the quality of your reading preferences. *g*

    Reply
  26. As for Shakespeare’s motivations, I think that he also wanted to show that those who usurped a rightful king were the bad guys. Whether Macbeth actually had a right to the crown or whether or not he was a good ruler was beside the point, as either case would be hard to prove, and he and his wife could therefore easily be portrayed as villains. After all the turmoil of the 15th and 16 C, I think it was politic to portray those who murdered kings as subject to both divine and human retribution.

    Reply
  27. As for Shakespeare’s motivations, I think that he also wanted to show that those who usurped a rightful king were the bad guys. Whether Macbeth actually had a right to the crown or whether or not he was a good ruler was beside the point, as either case would be hard to prove, and he and his wife could therefore easily be portrayed as villains. After all the turmoil of the 15th and 16 C, I think it was politic to portray those who murdered kings as subject to both divine and human retribution.

    Reply
  28. As for Shakespeare’s motivations, I think that he also wanted to show that those who usurped a rightful king were the bad guys. Whether Macbeth actually had a right to the crown or whether or not he was a good ruler was beside the point, as either case would be hard to prove, and he and his wife could therefore easily be portrayed as villains. After all the turmoil of the 15th and 16 C, I think it was politic to portray those who murdered kings as subject to both divine and human retribution.

    Reply
  29. As for Shakespeare’s motivations, I think that he also wanted to show that those who usurped a rightful king were the bad guys. Whether Macbeth actually had a right to the crown or whether or not he was a good ruler was beside the point, as either case would be hard to prove, and he and his wife could therefore easily be portrayed as villains. After all the turmoil of the 15th and 16 C, I think it was politic to portray those who murdered kings as subject to both divine and human retribution.

    Reply
  30. As for Shakespeare’s motivations, I think that he also wanted to show that those who usurped a rightful king were the bad guys. Whether Macbeth actually had a right to the crown or whether or not he was a good ruler was beside the point, as either case would be hard to prove, and he and his wife could therefore easily be portrayed as villains. After all the turmoil of the 15th and 16 C, I think it was politic to portray those who murdered kings as subject to both divine and human retribution.

    Reply
  31. Just signing in to see how our new comment feed feature works. It seems to only be at the top of the comments where no one can see it.
    Anyway, great blog and fantastic book. Rue was just too wonderful a character to put down.

    Reply
  32. Just signing in to see how our new comment feed feature works. It seems to only be at the top of the comments where no one can see it.
    Anyway, great blog and fantastic book. Rue was just too wonderful a character to put down.

    Reply
  33. Just signing in to see how our new comment feed feature works. It seems to only be at the top of the comments where no one can see it.
    Anyway, great blog and fantastic book. Rue was just too wonderful a character to put down.

    Reply
  34. Just signing in to see how our new comment feed feature works. It seems to only be at the top of the comments where no one can see it.
    Anyway, great blog and fantastic book. Rue was just too wonderful a character to put down.

    Reply
  35. Just signing in to see how our new comment feed feature works. It seems to only be at the top of the comments where no one can see it.
    Anyway, great blog and fantastic book. Rue was just too wonderful a character to put down.

    Reply
  36. “And if you have any questions for Susan, please ask away!”
    Susan/Sarah, during your research, did you come across any bits of info that surprised you about Lady Macbeth?
    I was also curious about the “updated history” that’s apparently come out about her. Did this updated history contradict previous concepts of the queen, or at least paint a clearer picture?

    Reply
  37. “And if you have any questions for Susan, please ask away!”
    Susan/Sarah, during your research, did you come across any bits of info that surprised you about Lady Macbeth?
    I was also curious about the “updated history” that’s apparently come out about her. Did this updated history contradict previous concepts of the queen, or at least paint a clearer picture?

    Reply
  38. “And if you have any questions for Susan, please ask away!”
    Susan/Sarah, during your research, did you come across any bits of info that surprised you about Lady Macbeth?
    I was also curious about the “updated history” that’s apparently come out about her. Did this updated history contradict previous concepts of the queen, or at least paint a clearer picture?

    Reply
  39. “And if you have any questions for Susan, please ask away!”
    Susan/Sarah, during your research, did you come across any bits of info that surprised you about Lady Macbeth?
    I was also curious about the “updated history” that’s apparently come out about her. Did this updated history contradict previous concepts of the queen, or at least paint a clearer picture?

    Reply
  40. “And if you have any questions for Susan, please ask away!”
    Susan/Sarah, during your research, did you come across any bits of info that surprised you about Lady Macbeth?
    I was also curious about the “updated history” that’s apparently come out about her. Did this updated history contradict previous concepts of the queen, or at least paint a clearer picture?

    Reply
  41. I can’t wait to read this book! I wanted to ask both “Susans” if I can have permission to reprint some of this interview, parts one and two, in my own blog, because I plan to pitch this book to my blog readers as soon as I read it myself. I will, of course, credit Word Wenches and both Susans with anything I quote. Please let me know asap.
    Thanks!

    Reply
  42. I can’t wait to read this book! I wanted to ask both “Susans” if I can have permission to reprint some of this interview, parts one and two, in my own blog, because I plan to pitch this book to my blog readers as soon as I read it myself. I will, of course, credit Word Wenches and both Susans with anything I quote. Please let me know asap.
    Thanks!

    Reply
  43. I can’t wait to read this book! I wanted to ask both “Susans” if I can have permission to reprint some of this interview, parts one and two, in my own blog, because I plan to pitch this book to my blog readers as soon as I read it myself. I will, of course, credit Word Wenches and both Susans with anything I quote. Please let me know asap.
    Thanks!

    Reply
  44. I can’t wait to read this book! I wanted to ask both “Susans” if I can have permission to reprint some of this interview, parts one and two, in my own blog, because I plan to pitch this book to my blog readers as soon as I read it myself. I will, of course, credit Word Wenches and both Susans with anything I quote. Please let me know asap.
    Thanks!

    Reply
  45. I can’t wait to read this book! I wanted to ask both “Susans” if I can have permission to reprint some of this interview, parts one and two, in my own blog, because I plan to pitch this book to my blog readers as soon as I read it myself. I will, of course, credit Word Wenches and both Susans with anything I quote. Please let me know asap.
    Thanks!

    Reply
  46. I just came across this web site and learned about the book I will have to get it.
    I have read both the Dunnet and Tranter MacBeth books. I could not stand the Dunnet, as she had the genealogy so confused, I could not enjoy the story!
    I do have, however, all 65 of the historical novels written Nigel Tranter, an indication of the esteem in which I hold his works. He was an author who tried to novelize history, and not an author who used historical novels for settings.
    I am of Scots descent and in fact of the four major male characters in the MacBeth story, I’m descended from Duncan I, Malcom III, Canmore and MacDuff, as well as going back to Scotland on other lines, so I have a great interest in Scots history.
    The reason Gruoch filia Bodhe had so much power goes back to when king Kenneth MacAlpine united the Dalriadic Scots and the Picts.
    While heritance in the Dalriadic Scots line was through the Male line, but NOT primogenre, when the king died the next eldest brother became king and then the next and only when all the males siblings of that particular generation died did the eldest sone of the eldest brother become king.
    The Picts or Caladonians used a different system as the heritance passed through the female line, whoever married the eldest daughter of the king became king.
    Kenneth MacAlpine, the King of the Dalriadic Scots, married the daughter of the King of the Picts, making himself the legitimate heir of both kingdoms.
    Therefore, under Celtic law, the husband of Gruoch filia Bodhe would have also had right to being king.
    Unfortunately, Gillecomgan was most probably murdered by or at the bequest of Malcolm II ‘Destroyer’ who tried to wipe out an entire generation so Duncan I’s grandson, Malcolm III Canmore could be king. There is some evidence that he tried to have MacBeth murdered as well.
    Duncan I was actually killed in battle near Elgin in the northeast of Scotland. It is uncertain whether it was actually MacBeth who killed him or not. Elgin is about as far away from the castle where you can be shown the ‘room where MacBeth murdered Duncan as you can get and still stay in Scotland!

    Reply
  47. I just came across this web site and learned about the book I will have to get it.
    I have read both the Dunnet and Tranter MacBeth books. I could not stand the Dunnet, as she had the genealogy so confused, I could not enjoy the story!
    I do have, however, all 65 of the historical novels written Nigel Tranter, an indication of the esteem in which I hold his works. He was an author who tried to novelize history, and not an author who used historical novels for settings.
    I am of Scots descent and in fact of the four major male characters in the MacBeth story, I’m descended from Duncan I, Malcom III, Canmore and MacDuff, as well as going back to Scotland on other lines, so I have a great interest in Scots history.
    The reason Gruoch filia Bodhe had so much power goes back to when king Kenneth MacAlpine united the Dalriadic Scots and the Picts.
    While heritance in the Dalriadic Scots line was through the Male line, but NOT primogenre, when the king died the next eldest brother became king and then the next and only when all the males siblings of that particular generation died did the eldest sone of the eldest brother become king.
    The Picts or Caladonians used a different system as the heritance passed through the female line, whoever married the eldest daughter of the king became king.
    Kenneth MacAlpine, the King of the Dalriadic Scots, married the daughter of the King of the Picts, making himself the legitimate heir of both kingdoms.
    Therefore, under Celtic law, the husband of Gruoch filia Bodhe would have also had right to being king.
    Unfortunately, Gillecomgan was most probably murdered by or at the bequest of Malcolm II ‘Destroyer’ who tried to wipe out an entire generation so Duncan I’s grandson, Malcolm III Canmore could be king. There is some evidence that he tried to have MacBeth murdered as well.
    Duncan I was actually killed in battle near Elgin in the northeast of Scotland. It is uncertain whether it was actually MacBeth who killed him or not. Elgin is about as far away from the castle where you can be shown the ‘room where MacBeth murdered Duncan as you can get and still stay in Scotland!

    Reply
  48. I just came across this web site and learned about the book I will have to get it.
    I have read both the Dunnet and Tranter MacBeth books. I could not stand the Dunnet, as she had the genealogy so confused, I could not enjoy the story!
    I do have, however, all 65 of the historical novels written Nigel Tranter, an indication of the esteem in which I hold his works. He was an author who tried to novelize history, and not an author who used historical novels for settings.
    I am of Scots descent and in fact of the four major male characters in the MacBeth story, I’m descended from Duncan I, Malcom III, Canmore and MacDuff, as well as going back to Scotland on other lines, so I have a great interest in Scots history.
    The reason Gruoch filia Bodhe had so much power goes back to when king Kenneth MacAlpine united the Dalriadic Scots and the Picts.
    While heritance in the Dalriadic Scots line was through the Male line, but NOT primogenre, when the king died the next eldest brother became king and then the next and only when all the males siblings of that particular generation died did the eldest sone of the eldest brother become king.
    The Picts or Caladonians used a different system as the heritance passed through the female line, whoever married the eldest daughter of the king became king.
    Kenneth MacAlpine, the King of the Dalriadic Scots, married the daughter of the King of the Picts, making himself the legitimate heir of both kingdoms.
    Therefore, under Celtic law, the husband of Gruoch filia Bodhe would have also had right to being king.
    Unfortunately, Gillecomgan was most probably murdered by or at the bequest of Malcolm II ‘Destroyer’ who tried to wipe out an entire generation so Duncan I’s grandson, Malcolm III Canmore could be king. There is some evidence that he tried to have MacBeth murdered as well.
    Duncan I was actually killed in battle near Elgin in the northeast of Scotland. It is uncertain whether it was actually MacBeth who killed him or not. Elgin is about as far away from the castle where you can be shown the ‘room where MacBeth murdered Duncan as you can get and still stay in Scotland!

    Reply
  49. I just came across this web site and learned about the book I will have to get it.
    I have read both the Dunnet and Tranter MacBeth books. I could not stand the Dunnet, as she had the genealogy so confused, I could not enjoy the story!
    I do have, however, all 65 of the historical novels written Nigel Tranter, an indication of the esteem in which I hold his works. He was an author who tried to novelize history, and not an author who used historical novels for settings.
    I am of Scots descent and in fact of the four major male characters in the MacBeth story, I’m descended from Duncan I, Malcom III, Canmore and MacDuff, as well as going back to Scotland on other lines, so I have a great interest in Scots history.
    The reason Gruoch filia Bodhe had so much power goes back to when king Kenneth MacAlpine united the Dalriadic Scots and the Picts.
    While heritance in the Dalriadic Scots line was through the Male line, but NOT primogenre, when the king died the next eldest brother became king and then the next and only when all the males siblings of that particular generation died did the eldest sone of the eldest brother become king.
    The Picts or Caladonians used a different system as the heritance passed through the female line, whoever married the eldest daughter of the king became king.
    Kenneth MacAlpine, the King of the Dalriadic Scots, married the daughter of the King of the Picts, making himself the legitimate heir of both kingdoms.
    Therefore, under Celtic law, the husband of Gruoch filia Bodhe would have also had right to being king.
    Unfortunately, Gillecomgan was most probably murdered by or at the bequest of Malcolm II ‘Destroyer’ who tried to wipe out an entire generation so Duncan I’s grandson, Malcolm III Canmore could be king. There is some evidence that he tried to have MacBeth murdered as well.
    Duncan I was actually killed in battle near Elgin in the northeast of Scotland. It is uncertain whether it was actually MacBeth who killed him or not. Elgin is about as far away from the castle where you can be shown the ‘room where MacBeth murdered Duncan as you can get and still stay in Scotland!

    Reply
  50. I just came across this web site and learned about the book I will have to get it.
    I have read both the Dunnet and Tranter MacBeth books. I could not stand the Dunnet, as she had the genealogy so confused, I could not enjoy the story!
    I do have, however, all 65 of the historical novels written Nigel Tranter, an indication of the esteem in which I hold his works. He was an author who tried to novelize history, and not an author who used historical novels for settings.
    I am of Scots descent and in fact of the four major male characters in the MacBeth story, I’m descended from Duncan I, Malcom III, Canmore and MacDuff, as well as going back to Scotland on other lines, so I have a great interest in Scots history.
    The reason Gruoch filia Bodhe had so much power goes back to when king Kenneth MacAlpine united the Dalriadic Scots and the Picts.
    While heritance in the Dalriadic Scots line was through the Male line, but NOT primogenre, when the king died the next eldest brother became king and then the next and only when all the males siblings of that particular generation died did the eldest sone of the eldest brother become king.
    The Picts or Caladonians used a different system as the heritance passed through the female line, whoever married the eldest daughter of the king became king.
    Kenneth MacAlpine, the King of the Dalriadic Scots, married the daughter of the King of the Picts, making himself the legitimate heir of both kingdoms.
    Therefore, under Celtic law, the husband of Gruoch filia Bodhe would have also had right to being king.
    Unfortunately, Gillecomgan was most probably murdered by or at the bequest of Malcolm II ‘Destroyer’ who tried to wipe out an entire generation so Duncan I’s grandson, Malcolm III Canmore could be king. There is some evidence that he tried to have MacBeth murdered as well.
    Duncan I was actually killed in battle near Elgin in the northeast of Scotland. It is uncertain whether it was actually MacBeth who killed him or not. Elgin is about as far away from the castle where you can be shown the ‘room where MacBeth murdered Duncan as you can get and still stay in Scotland!

    Reply
  51. I just came across this web site and learned about the book I will have to get it.
    I have read both the Dunnet and Tranter MacBeth books. I could not stand the Dunnet, as she had the genealogy so confused, I could not enjoy the story!
    I do have, however, all 65 of the historical novels written by Nigel Tranter, covering people in Scots history from 561AD to 1820AD, an indication of the esteem in which I hold his works. He was an author who tried to novelize history, and not an author who used historical novels for settings.
    I am of Scots descent and in fact of the four major male characters in the MacBeth story, I’m descended from Duncan I, Malcom III Canmore, and MacDuff, as well as going back to Scotland on other lines, so I have a great interest in Scots history.
    The reason Gruoch filia Bodhe had so much power goes back to when King Kenneth MacAlpine united the Dalriadic Scots and the Picts.
    While heritance in the Dalriadic Scots line was through the male line, but NOT primogenre, when the king died the next eldest brother became king and then the next and only when all the males siblings of that particular generation died did the eldest sone of the eldest brother become king.
    The Picts or Caladonians used a different system as the heritance passed through the female line, whoever married the eldest daughter of the king became king.
    Kenneth MacAlpine, the King of the Dalriadic Scots, married the daughter of the King of the Picts, making himself the legitimate heir of both kingdoms.
    Therefore, under Celtic law, the husband of Gruoch filia Bodhe would have also had right to being king.
    Unfortunately, Gillecomgan was more probably murdered by or at the bequest of Malcolm II ‘Destroyer’ who tried to wipe out an entire generation so his grandson, Malcolm III Canmore could be king. A year after the death of Gillecomgan, he killed Gruoch’s brother. There is some evidence that he tried to have MacBeth murdered as well. While the historians are divided on this, with Malcolm II having had murdered several others who stood in the way of Malcolm III’s becoming King, and MacBeth’s making Gruoch’s son Lulach his heir, based on their respective characters, it seems that Malcolm II is the most likely instigator of the murder of Gillecomgan.
    Duncan I was actually killed in battle near Elgin in the northeast of Scotland. It is uncertain whether it was actually MacBeth who killed him or not. Elgin is about as far away from the castle where you can be shown the ‘room where MacBeth murdered Duncan’ as you can get and still stay in Scotland!
    It is interesting that under MacBeth, the Scots enjoyed the longest period of peace and prosperity that they had for about 200 years either side of his reign!

    Reply
  52. I just came across this web site and learned about the book I will have to get it.
    I have read both the Dunnet and Tranter MacBeth books. I could not stand the Dunnet, as she had the genealogy so confused, I could not enjoy the story!
    I do have, however, all 65 of the historical novels written by Nigel Tranter, covering people in Scots history from 561AD to 1820AD, an indication of the esteem in which I hold his works. He was an author who tried to novelize history, and not an author who used historical novels for settings.
    I am of Scots descent and in fact of the four major male characters in the MacBeth story, I’m descended from Duncan I, Malcom III Canmore, and MacDuff, as well as going back to Scotland on other lines, so I have a great interest in Scots history.
    The reason Gruoch filia Bodhe had so much power goes back to when King Kenneth MacAlpine united the Dalriadic Scots and the Picts.
    While heritance in the Dalriadic Scots line was through the male line, but NOT primogenre, when the king died the next eldest brother became king and then the next and only when all the males siblings of that particular generation died did the eldest sone of the eldest brother become king.
    The Picts or Caladonians used a different system as the heritance passed through the female line, whoever married the eldest daughter of the king became king.
    Kenneth MacAlpine, the King of the Dalriadic Scots, married the daughter of the King of the Picts, making himself the legitimate heir of both kingdoms.
    Therefore, under Celtic law, the husband of Gruoch filia Bodhe would have also had right to being king.
    Unfortunately, Gillecomgan was more probably murdered by or at the bequest of Malcolm II ‘Destroyer’ who tried to wipe out an entire generation so his grandson, Malcolm III Canmore could be king. A year after the death of Gillecomgan, he killed Gruoch’s brother. There is some evidence that he tried to have MacBeth murdered as well. While the historians are divided on this, with Malcolm II having had murdered several others who stood in the way of Malcolm III’s becoming King, and MacBeth’s making Gruoch’s son Lulach his heir, based on their respective characters, it seems that Malcolm II is the most likely instigator of the murder of Gillecomgan.
    Duncan I was actually killed in battle near Elgin in the northeast of Scotland. It is uncertain whether it was actually MacBeth who killed him or not. Elgin is about as far away from the castle where you can be shown the ‘room where MacBeth murdered Duncan’ as you can get and still stay in Scotland!
    It is interesting that under MacBeth, the Scots enjoyed the longest period of peace and prosperity that they had for about 200 years either side of his reign!

    Reply
  53. I just came across this web site and learned about the book I will have to get it.
    I have read both the Dunnet and Tranter MacBeth books. I could not stand the Dunnet, as she had the genealogy so confused, I could not enjoy the story!
    I do have, however, all 65 of the historical novels written by Nigel Tranter, covering people in Scots history from 561AD to 1820AD, an indication of the esteem in which I hold his works. He was an author who tried to novelize history, and not an author who used historical novels for settings.
    I am of Scots descent and in fact of the four major male characters in the MacBeth story, I’m descended from Duncan I, Malcom III Canmore, and MacDuff, as well as going back to Scotland on other lines, so I have a great interest in Scots history.
    The reason Gruoch filia Bodhe had so much power goes back to when King Kenneth MacAlpine united the Dalriadic Scots and the Picts.
    While heritance in the Dalriadic Scots line was through the male line, but NOT primogenre, when the king died the next eldest brother became king and then the next and only when all the males siblings of that particular generation died did the eldest sone of the eldest brother become king.
    The Picts or Caladonians used a different system as the heritance passed through the female line, whoever married the eldest daughter of the king became king.
    Kenneth MacAlpine, the King of the Dalriadic Scots, married the daughter of the King of the Picts, making himself the legitimate heir of both kingdoms.
    Therefore, under Celtic law, the husband of Gruoch filia Bodhe would have also had right to being king.
    Unfortunately, Gillecomgan was more probably murdered by or at the bequest of Malcolm II ‘Destroyer’ who tried to wipe out an entire generation so his grandson, Malcolm III Canmore could be king. A year after the death of Gillecomgan, he killed Gruoch’s brother. There is some evidence that he tried to have MacBeth murdered as well. While the historians are divided on this, with Malcolm II having had murdered several others who stood in the way of Malcolm III’s becoming King, and MacBeth’s making Gruoch’s son Lulach his heir, based on their respective characters, it seems that Malcolm II is the most likely instigator of the murder of Gillecomgan.
    Duncan I was actually killed in battle near Elgin in the northeast of Scotland. It is uncertain whether it was actually MacBeth who killed him or not. Elgin is about as far away from the castle where you can be shown the ‘room where MacBeth murdered Duncan’ as you can get and still stay in Scotland!
    It is interesting that under MacBeth, the Scots enjoyed the longest period of peace and prosperity that they had for about 200 years either side of his reign!

    Reply
  54. I just came across this web site and learned about the book I will have to get it.
    I have read both the Dunnet and Tranter MacBeth books. I could not stand the Dunnet, as she had the genealogy so confused, I could not enjoy the story!
    I do have, however, all 65 of the historical novels written by Nigel Tranter, covering people in Scots history from 561AD to 1820AD, an indication of the esteem in which I hold his works. He was an author who tried to novelize history, and not an author who used historical novels for settings.
    I am of Scots descent and in fact of the four major male characters in the MacBeth story, I’m descended from Duncan I, Malcom III Canmore, and MacDuff, as well as going back to Scotland on other lines, so I have a great interest in Scots history.
    The reason Gruoch filia Bodhe had so much power goes back to when King Kenneth MacAlpine united the Dalriadic Scots and the Picts.
    While heritance in the Dalriadic Scots line was through the male line, but NOT primogenre, when the king died the next eldest brother became king and then the next and only when all the males siblings of that particular generation died did the eldest sone of the eldest brother become king.
    The Picts or Caladonians used a different system as the heritance passed through the female line, whoever married the eldest daughter of the king became king.
    Kenneth MacAlpine, the King of the Dalriadic Scots, married the daughter of the King of the Picts, making himself the legitimate heir of both kingdoms.
    Therefore, under Celtic law, the husband of Gruoch filia Bodhe would have also had right to being king.
    Unfortunately, Gillecomgan was more probably murdered by or at the bequest of Malcolm II ‘Destroyer’ who tried to wipe out an entire generation so his grandson, Malcolm III Canmore could be king. A year after the death of Gillecomgan, he killed Gruoch’s brother. There is some evidence that he tried to have MacBeth murdered as well. While the historians are divided on this, with Malcolm II having had murdered several others who stood in the way of Malcolm III’s becoming King, and MacBeth’s making Gruoch’s son Lulach his heir, based on their respective characters, it seems that Malcolm II is the most likely instigator of the murder of Gillecomgan.
    Duncan I was actually killed in battle near Elgin in the northeast of Scotland. It is uncertain whether it was actually MacBeth who killed him or not. Elgin is about as far away from the castle where you can be shown the ‘room where MacBeth murdered Duncan’ as you can get and still stay in Scotland!
    It is interesting that under MacBeth, the Scots enjoyed the longest period of peace and prosperity that they had for about 200 years either side of his reign!

    Reply
  55. I just came across this web site and learned about the book I will have to get it.
    I have read both the Dunnet and Tranter MacBeth books. I could not stand the Dunnet, as she had the genealogy so confused, I could not enjoy the story!
    I do have, however, all 65 of the historical novels written by Nigel Tranter, covering people in Scots history from 561AD to 1820AD, an indication of the esteem in which I hold his works. He was an author who tried to novelize history, and not an author who used historical novels for settings.
    I am of Scots descent and in fact of the four major male characters in the MacBeth story, I’m descended from Duncan I, Malcom III Canmore, and MacDuff, as well as going back to Scotland on other lines, so I have a great interest in Scots history.
    The reason Gruoch filia Bodhe had so much power goes back to when King Kenneth MacAlpine united the Dalriadic Scots and the Picts.
    While heritance in the Dalriadic Scots line was through the male line, but NOT primogenre, when the king died the next eldest brother became king and then the next and only when all the males siblings of that particular generation died did the eldest sone of the eldest brother become king.
    The Picts or Caladonians used a different system as the heritance passed through the female line, whoever married the eldest daughter of the king became king.
    Kenneth MacAlpine, the King of the Dalriadic Scots, married the daughter of the King of the Picts, making himself the legitimate heir of both kingdoms.
    Therefore, under Celtic law, the husband of Gruoch filia Bodhe would have also had right to being king.
    Unfortunately, Gillecomgan was more probably murdered by or at the bequest of Malcolm II ‘Destroyer’ who tried to wipe out an entire generation so his grandson, Malcolm III Canmore could be king. A year after the death of Gillecomgan, he killed Gruoch’s brother. There is some evidence that he tried to have MacBeth murdered as well. While the historians are divided on this, with Malcolm II having had murdered several others who stood in the way of Malcolm III’s becoming King, and MacBeth’s making Gruoch’s son Lulach his heir, based on their respective characters, it seems that Malcolm II is the most likely instigator of the murder of Gillecomgan.
    Duncan I was actually killed in battle near Elgin in the northeast of Scotland. It is uncertain whether it was actually MacBeth who killed him or not. Elgin is about as far away from the castle where you can be shown the ‘room where MacBeth murdered Duncan’ as you can get and still stay in Scotland!
    It is interesting that under MacBeth, the Scots enjoyed the longest period of peace and prosperity that they had for about 200 years either side of his reign!

    Reply
  56. wow! what a wonderful book and essay. And to read a note from Ms. King herself. I picked this book up purely by accident. I was browsing the stephen king section and picked up lady thinking it was a twisted stephen king novel. i was in a hurry as my family was rushing me. i was so annoyed when i sat to read it while waiting in a hospital waiting area, bored and forced to entertain myself i gave it a go and, what a wonderful go indeed! ty susan and now i found your site, it’s a great day indeed. how about something about cleopatra????

    Reply
  57. wow! what a wonderful book and essay. And to read a note from Ms. King herself. I picked this book up purely by accident. I was browsing the stephen king section and picked up lady thinking it was a twisted stephen king novel. i was in a hurry as my family was rushing me. i was so annoyed when i sat to read it while waiting in a hospital waiting area, bored and forced to entertain myself i gave it a go and, what a wonderful go indeed! ty susan and now i found your site, it’s a great day indeed. how about something about cleopatra????

    Reply
  58. wow! what a wonderful book and essay. And to read a note from Ms. King herself. I picked this book up purely by accident. I was browsing the stephen king section and picked up lady thinking it was a twisted stephen king novel. i was in a hurry as my family was rushing me. i was so annoyed when i sat to read it while waiting in a hospital waiting area, bored and forced to entertain myself i gave it a go and, what a wonderful go indeed! ty susan and now i found your site, it’s a great day indeed. how about something about cleopatra????

    Reply
  59. wow! what a wonderful book and essay. And to read a note from Ms. King herself. I picked this book up purely by accident. I was browsing the stephen king section and picked up lady thinking it was a twisted stephen king novel. i was in a hurry as my family was rushing me. i was so annoyed when i sat to read it while waiting in a hospital waiting area, bored and forced to entertain myself i gave it a go and, what a wonderful go indeed! ty susan and now i found your site, it’s a great day indeed. how about something about cleopatra????

    Reply
  60. wow! what a wonderful book and essay. And to read a note from Ms. King herself. I picked this book up purely by accident. I was browsing the stephen king section and picked up lady thinking it was a twisted stephen king novel. i was in a hurry as my family was rushing me. i was so annoyed when i sat to read it while waiting in a hospital waiting area, bored and forced to entertain myself i gave it a go and, what a wonderful go indeed! ty susan and now i found your site, it’s a great day indeed. how about something about cleopatra????

    Reply

Leave a Comment