I'm trying to write a mystery story set in the court of a fictional country called Chevalia, in the eighteenth century. Chevalia is a tiny sliver of land between the French and Italian borders, which was founded in the late 11th Century by a French knight called Sieur Antoin de Babineaux. His descendants (now the House of Babineaux-Vauquelin) still rule. Due to their low status in European politics, they are pretty safe from foreign invasion (no-one is willing to waste money and troops on this tacky little bit of land), but also don't have any alliances and few foreign exports. Because of this, most of the spouses of Chevalian princes and princesses are foreign nobles (often younger sons or daughters) and this has contributed to a multiculturalism which has led to religious toleration (although it is a Catholic country officially). They also stay out of wars, because they would be crushed as soon as they set foot on foreign land. The Royal Family themselves are a pretty happy family. King Rodolphino is known as "the Virtuous" due to his strongly-held principles and his loyalty to his wife. Although they were married as a favour from the King's father to the Queen's father, who was a Chevalian nobleman, the two became fast friends and eventually grew to love each other. Since he has a son at the head of the family, he is quite happy to see the rest of his children as an ordinary father might, making time to spoil and nurture them. The MC, his fifth daughter and ninth child, admires him greatly and is very fond of both her parents. They understand that family divides could weaken the country and cause it to be absorbed into France or Italy. One of my main problems is that the MC, Henrietta, begins the book (where the setting introduction would obviously take place) very naïve and complacent, and believes that everything is perfect. She shares beautiful apartments with her beloved sisters, has plenty of time to read and ride her horse, and thoroughly enjoys her studies. She's sixteen years old, so she's betrothed to a Chevalian nobleman, and although she doesn't love him, she doesn't expect to. She's good friends with him, and she considers that a bonus. So how can I give Chevalia some faults, and how can I make Henrietta see them when she's so convinced life is wonderful?
1/ I'd suggest researching both Andorra and Monaco, and use elements of both in Chevalia. (Andorra has been a co-principate between Spain and France since the 11th c. - which means the head of state is half-the President of France and half-the Bishop of Urgell...there IS no King of Andorra, nor even a resident Prince) (Meanwhile Monaco has a prince who is essentially a descendant of the Grimaldi family, but exists by treaty with France, from whom the Grimaldis bought the place.) 2/ Prior to the 18th c. Andorra had a tradition of metallurgy and of weaving; Monaco nothing of note. Essentially, unless you want to give them some tin or gold mines (think of deposits in Wales!) they're going to be doing pretty subsistence farming on land that is too poor for the neighbours to care enough about to bother about invading. With a name like Chevalia, I'd suggest that they're best known for horse-breeding? 3/ So, Chevalia will not be as wealthy as, say Versailles...perhaps have Henrietta visit and then compare it with the bucolic pleasures of Chevalia? 4/ You seem a little conflicted between France and Italy - I'd suggest concentrating on one.
You could give it some faults that almost every country has, some slums, some minor crime, accidents happening and causing drama, etc. Their could be some minor poverty or little diversity in products. Or you could go the way others have gone, on the surface it looks perfect but in depth there is way more, like maybe a large cult controlling the town or it secretly being a part of france while no knows it.
Hmm, if Chevalia had some faults and Henrietta is convinced that life around her is wonderful, then the problem could be hidden in plain sight. Perhaps underground slums? Since the king is virtuous maybe one of his subordinates can be corrupt? Like a hidden smuggling operation of illegal goods or possibly slaves from France to Italy where Chevalia, which exists between borders, is the medium? (Slavery still existed in some parts of italy until early 19th century but had been forbidden in france since 13th century if i remember correctly) Or Possibly behind Chevalia's "perfection", there is a dark secret behind its foundation? Like slavery for lack of manpower? Or since it had no alliances and few exports they used stolen money and resources? Henrietta could know these by accidents or unfortunate circumstances. I could go on, but maybe you need to decide which unsavoury part of the world that you want to expose to her. Poverty? Discrimination? Violence? Which one results in an interesting reaction?
This depends heavily on when, exactly in the 18th c. you're talking, but maybe there could be a growing republican movement that wants to abolish the monarchy? That wasn't really a thing until pretty late in the 18th c. But if France is going through its revolution right next door, maybe there's some faction of Chevalians that is inspired to do something similar. Maybe your princess could come to sympathize with them.
11th century life was ineffably short and brutal. Half the siblings would probably die before they became teenagers, so "perfection" would be highly relative. And you'd be several centuries away from even a basic nation-state system, so keep an eye on how you set up the politics too. Italy, for example, would be 800 years away from unification and only be a negotiable geographical area at the time. ETA: Oh, it's set in the eighteenth century? My bad, I missed that part. Life was still ungodly short and brutal, though the international system was better formed. And there's still no "Italy" yet...
I would say that your world is too perfect. Countries like the one you described generally don't survive from the eleventh to the eighteenth century. You say no one would bother invading because it's a "tacky little bit of land?" I call bullshit. People don't bother invading because the risk/reward balance is out of whack, not because the land is too small to bother with. For an example, see Switzerland: the terrain is a massive force multiplier because you can't just roll in with a large army, with armor, etc., and the entire populace is armed to the teeth, ensuring that any invasion would eventually devolve into blood-soaked, house-to-house, Alp-to-Alp brawling. That kind of thing also tends not to work when a people aren't united in some sense. This is a difficult concept to explain in a modern context, but you know how Texas has this weird reputation for being "proud" as a state? It's that kind of weird: where everyone is (or is at least perceived to be) on the same team, ready to have your back if anyone screws with you. In order for a nation--particularly a small one--to resist outside influences, especially when it comes to war, the nation's populace must be united, and a quick survey of the 20th century reveals that a united populace usually isn't a "tolerant" populace. 20th century examples of this are obvious. For a counterexample, take a look at what happened to the Russian and Ottoman Empires during the first world war: they splintered and then they imploded, and they were huge. They had serious advantages that Chevalia would not. If Chevalia isn't proud of being Chevalian, the only question is whether they're going to end up as French or Italian, because they're definitely going to become one or the other pretty quickly.
Not to mention that lack of trade would likely make them very, very poor, doubly so with lack of export. People tend to forget that, when you send money out of the country, it is no longer usable there, meaning that every silk dress, natural resource, or produced good that was imported mean there was less gold moving around within the state, meaning that the currency becomes scarcer. Furthermore, as an extra part about Switzerland, the country has over a hundred "demolition points", which are laced with explosives to make transport useless, damage infrastructure, and, in the winter, possibly cause avalanches. People vastly, vastly underestimate how much it takes for a country to stay neutral in two world wars when next to both France and Germany.
I'll give a better response when I have more time, but how do you suggest I fix these problems? Am I wrong in trying to keep Chevalia off the political map in order to avoid retconning it into real historical events?
The thing is, I'm trying not to make Chevalia a dystopia, just not absolutely perfect. The thing about Henrietta is that she has little understanding of politics, and also never leaves the palace during the course of the story. I've been thinking about what the trade could be. I'm thinking of writing in gold/silver mines, and/or fabric exports. That would boost wealth if I take away the factor of no-one wanting to trade with them. I think that part of my problem is that I need to be bolder. Let other countries interact with them. I still think that a policy of peace is useful: it worked for Robert Walpole and Elizabeth I to an extent. War is expensive, and if they are unlikely to win, it wouldn't be considered worth it. Small country means small populace, and that means small army. They are quite mountainous, and some parts can get very hot in the summer. There is a strong Chevalian pride, and they do celebrate Le Jour de la Fondation - the Day of Founding - every July. It is set in 1732, but revolutionary sentiment does not spread to Chevalia (perhaps gold mines could make them small but wealthy, leading to low taxes and happy peasants. I'll need to do more research.) It's a reasonable guess, Shadowfax (that sounds so patronising, sorry...), but the name comes from "chevalier", which is of course the French word for knight. I think that they would be proud of the fact that they were founded by a knight. The knight certainly was. In contrast to King Rodolphino, King Antoine had a very big head. That's all I really have for now. I'll keep thinking. More suggestions would be nice, but thank you for all your help so far. You are all wonderful people!
I think your best solution is politics. Make them valuable to both France and Italy as a buffer. They would live under constant threat of invasion, but you make it kind of a cold war, because invading Chevalia is considered effectively an attack on her larger neighbor. I believe that was a common enough thing in the old days. I got the chevalier reference immediately.
What do you mean "as a buffer"? And I think my primary question now is "How can I stop them being invaded?" Thank you all for helping. This is a pretty tough problem, to be honest.
@EstherMayRose: look up the term "buffer state." It's not anything I made up--it's totally a thing. Small countries like that are common. (See: Belgium, Luxembourg, etc...) It's just that they are not "off the political map." They are important strategic points on the political map.
I had no doubt that it was a "thing". I looked it up - but it said that buffer states were MORE likely to be invaded - so how can I protect Chevalia?
I've noticed therm suddenly popping up out of nowhere, as if it has been being used for years. Maybe the term itself has been "retconned" into our reality?
It doesn't make them less likely to be invaded. It gives their neighboring countries an interest in preserving their borders. In other words, France is unlikely to annex Belgium because Belgium keeps bringing Great Britain into the war on France's side against Germany.
think of iraq before gulf 2 - the reason that the Allies didn't drive all the way to Baghdad during Gulf 1 was that Saudi didn't want them to , and the reason they didnt want them to was that a secular iraq was a useful buffer for them against Iran (who are Shia and mostly aryan rather than mostly sunni and arab like saudi) In this case Chevalia sits between france and italy so it could be a tacit agreement between both big powers not to invade it as that would be seen as an act of war against the other , which would keep them safe unless France and Italy went to war anyway (although if its 18C Italy doesn't exist, so its whatever principality was up there.) The other thing is that the french itallian border is basically the pyrenees which would make chevalier mountainous and hard to invade sort of like Switzerland
I seem to recall that they were a bit cautious of the "Kingdom of the two Sicilies" although that was more to do with the latter having a treaty with britain
Hey EstherMayRose. Here are my observations from a history-savvy reader's point of view. I'm not disparaging your setting, I just want to point out some unusual things others have been pointing towards but haven't explicitly stated. Horseland? That's how it translates from French. Not poking fun, just wondering if this is intentional, since it may make some French-familiar readers raise an eyebrow. That is a truly impressive dynasty... 600 years in power is remarkable achievement. Caesar or Machiavelli would truly be jealous of the Babineaux-Vauquelin dynasty's stability and grasp on power in such a treacherous place as feudal and early modern Europe. For context, most dynasties lasted a couple hundred years at best. There are a few outliers which did rule far longer, the world's oldest dynasty being Clan Dulo of Bulgaria, which retained power for 2,890 years. But this is the extreme exception to the rule. The 10th longest dynasty was the Zhou Dynasty of China, which ruled for 790 years. So Babineaux-Vauquelin would probably be within the top 20 longest ruling families of all time, and would have lived through some of the most tumultuous times in Europe. I'll leave it to you to decide if this is what you want your nation to be (a symbol of stability and power) or if you want to swing towards realism. This is a little counter-typical. Small states were great prey for European rulers unless they had powerful allies. While small states could and did punch above their weight, the best way to ensure sovereignty was to secure powerful allies. For example, Italian city-states which could not resist French invasions frequently formed formidable leagues and even solicited the aid of powerful empire like Spain. The lack of exports and wealth in general could lend credence to the idea of neutrality for your state, but any lands were considered valuable for the taxes and men they could provide in war-time. Among other things, feudal Europe was one massive political game of marriages, alliances, etc. You list later that your nation intermarried with many nobles from across Europe, which would have inevitably secured some alliances. The best way for your nation to survive of course would be to exist as a protectorate of a kingdom. Would it make sense in your lore for your nation to exist as a protectorate or close ally of a large nation like the Holy Roman Empire or France? That is a problem for religious tolerance during the 18th century. This is a period during which European Catholics and Protestants despised one another, even in mixed populations. In fact, the bloodiest intolerance occurred precisely in nations with diverse religious convictions. Just look at the religious genocides in England during the 17th century. These tensions are still around. Religious tolerance is somewhat a 19th, but mostly a 20th century ideal. Moreover, the churches would be owned by the Catholic church directly, so no matter what marriage arrangements your nobility had, if the priests caught a waft of what they saw as heresy (tolerance), they would not hesitate to rile the population against the rulers to put a more church-friendly king in power. If Babineaux-Vauquelin wants to stay in power past 600 years, I would recommend avoiding religious controversy in a country where the population overwhelmingly supports a well established and foreign-ruled church system. Finally, marriages during this time period were never inter-denominational. A Catholic could not marry a Protestant. A Russian Orthodox Christian could not marry a Catholic. One or the other (almost always the woman) had to convert, and could only enter such a marriage with the permission of the churches involved. In the early 1800's, Russia's Count Rezanov was going to travel from San Francisco in California all the way to Rome to get permission from the Pope to marry a Spanish Catholic noblewoman in California under the Orthodox Christian faith. He died from a fever in Siberia on the way. He literally had to travel across the entire world to arrange a legal marriage because of a difference in faiths... Between the Orthodox and Catholic churches, which are nearly identical in doctrine. So at a time when Catholics and Protestants are just finishing butchering one another in the thousands, your royal house will need a LOT of luck to establish all of these multi-religious marriages. Back to your original question, on how to add faults. There is no need to add large faults as such, I think. I just think that the setting has to be made more believable by taking into account the real society of feudal and early modern Europe... The lack of stability caused by a semi-feudal government, the religious tensions, looming threat of war, mentions of poverty among the peasants (who are still barely considered human by the nobility). As for trade... I suppose gold mines are always a possibility, as is agriculture. However, keep in mind that the richer you make a small nation, the less likely it is to remain independent. In general, I think your setting is fine but for the things we have mentioned. Just be wary, lest you begin to apply 21st century morals (religious tolerance) to an 18th century society. Even America, an exceptionally tolerant place towards other religions, still did not have any religious protection during this time period, and persecution based on "heresy" was still commonplace.
1/ Gold mines. When the Spanish found gold and silver in the Americas, it totally destabilised the European economy because Spain was suddenly rich enough to buy themselves an army, etc. If your little country has much in the way of precious metal mines, they'll be invaded quicker than snap. If you're going mines, go for something a little more useful and not so valuable; tin, copper...and make it HARD to mine. 2/ If you look at Andorra, that was formed in 11th c. by agreement between France and Spain, and the head of state is STILL nominally a Frenchman and a Spaniard. Essentially, Andorra is a democratic monarchy, because the HoS basically leaves the nationals to get on with it. If you look at Monaco, that was bought by the Grimaldis in the 13th c., and is still ruled by it. ("Albert II[1][2] (Albert Alexandre Louis Pierre Grimaldi; born 14 March 1958) is the reigning monarch of the Principality of Monaco and head of the princely house of Grimaldi.") If you look at Liechtenstein, that too was purchased - by the Liechetenstein family - this time in the 18th century. Both Andorra and Liechtenstein are in mountainous country bordered by two larger neighbours. All three survive thanks to some sort of treaty with their "landlord/s". 3/ A royal family that has survived unbroken? Does it have to be unbroken? The Grimaldis seem to be unbroken, but that's only because the Prince of Monaco has to change his name to Grimaldi as a condition of accession. 4/ The French/Italian border is the Alps...the Pyrenees is the French/Spanish border. 5/ Fabric exports? What fabrics? Wool requires sheep-farming, which only really took off in Britain in the 17th century with the enclosures. Prior to that, mountainous country was farmed by crofters. With the enclosures (monasteries were among the first, in the 14th c.) these small tenants were driven off the land to allow grazing by sheep, which was more profitable. This was a time when "sheep, which are naturally mild, and easily kept in order, may be said now to devour men" (Thomas More). It also requires a lot of processing. Much of Britain's wool was exported to be woven abroad, although that peaked in the 14th c. Linen? Possibly, but it was produced all over Europe, so hardly really exportable. Exports of unprocessed wool? Not very profitable due to the low added value. You're more likely to earn the foreign currency by tolls for travel through the mountain passes...although that might give your neighbours another reason to invade...or how about exporting hardy young mountain men to fight in foreign wars? If your country is that peaceful, they'll need somewhere to burn off their testosterone (Switzerland was famous for exporting its fighting men...the Swiss guard STILL protects the Pope!) and then return with gold in great store. 6/ Le jour de la foundation...in July? Not the 4th, I hope! 7/ Set in 1732? Half a century before the French revolution, so little reason for revolutionary fever to have reached a backwater like Chevalia. The English Revolution (better known as the English Civil War) the previous century was largely the result of British issues...a return to the doctrine of the divine right of kings interrupting Britain's drift towards our current constitutional monarchy, fuelled by the semi-Marxism of the Diggers and the Levellers, and by anger at the enclosures of the previous centuries, so, again, not likely to have reached a country that was still largely feudal. 8/ If you want conflict, how about enclosures? Large landowner drives peasants (who have no marketable skills other than hard work and farming) off the land they've farmed forever, and grazes sheep because he wants more profit out of wool exports...
Right. I'm going to do this bit by bit. @QualityPen. Thanks for contributing, but trust me, the main purpose of my life has been developing and enriching my historical knowledge for close on fifteen years now. I like to think that I have made some progress since I was three. This story was actually partially inspired by the unit I did in History last year about British politics between the 1660s and 1760s. Thank you for not disparaging my setting. "Chevalia", as I explained unthread, comes from the French word for knight, which is, of course, "chevalier", since they were founded by a knight. Henrietta sometimes alludes to this in her narrative. (I do A-Level French, so I'd hope I have enough to tell the story with, although I'm writing in English obviously.) The line of Babineaux-Vauquelin is supposed to represent stability and strength. Since we're currently studying domestic rebellion in the Tudor times, obviously starting with the Wars of the Roses, I was thinking about this a lot. I had the idea of a brutal civil war (why? - I'll think of something) between the Babineaux and the House of Vauquelin in the mid-late thirteenth century. After many members of both families were killed, the Babineaux vanquished the Vauquelin, but le Roi Jean II de Babineaux married Marguérite de Vauquelin as a gesture of peace, and changed the name to Babineaux-Vauquelin. There have been threats, naturally, but there has been widespread propaganda for many centuries claiming that divisions leave them vulnerable to annexation. More thinking will resume, but the current family has plenty of cousins, who will of course have issue (or enough of them will) to ensure the dynasty's survival. But that's why I'm asking the question! I was thinking of giving them an alliance with France, because the plot revolves around French visitors. It also seems logical, since their founder was French and their culture is also very French. Re the religion thing: You would not BELIEVE how much emphasis the course placed on this last year, and I'm fully expecting Religious Divisions, Round Two this year. I was thinking that there were unlikely to be too many Protestants in a country between France and the Duchies of Italy. However, if they want to be able to make good matches in Europe, they can't be too picky, so I doubt they'd mind a conversion. (Whether or not the women wanted to convert is another matter!) However, they would often bring younger siblings, in the hopes of them finding a match, or in the hopes of a better life for them and their families, who would not need to convert. I felt that the multiculturalism of the country, especially of the court, would require a kind of tacit acceptance of the other faith, in order to avoid wiping out half the population. Thank you for your support. @Shadowfax. Thank you for numbering your points. That's made my life a lot easier. 1. Thanks. Copper sounds better. I was wondering what sort of problems that would cause. 2. Again, I think a treaty of some sort with France is the way to go. 3. I've already dealt with this in this post. I'm certainly not thinking a direct line for 600 years! 4. I was aware. Thanks. 5. Thanks for the suggestions about the armies. I was thinking crafts maybe? Importing plain silk and exporting embroidered silk, maybe? What do you think? 6. I wasn't thinking of the Day of Independence. I got the idea for a summer celebration from the Queen's official birthday. I had the idea that no-one knows the exact date, but they decided to celebrate in the summer when the weather is nice. (And it's much less revered than Independence Day - more sort of an excuse to not open the shop and instead have some beer!) 7. Trust me, I know this. Thanks for helping me reason out their safety. 8. To be honest, enclosures are a good idea. I read all about that in Horrible Histories, which of course put it in words of one syllable. However, one of my main problems is that this is likely to go over Henrietta's head. Thank you both.
