For instance, I don’t have to think to know that the large, sprawling designs of embroidery and prints in the 1740′s gave way to smaller, more intimate patterns in the 1750′s, as hoops began to shrink in size and women in court gowns looked a bit less like walking sofas.

I remember a hilarious scene from Patricia Veryan’s “Time’s Fool” in which the heroine is balancing on a second story window ledge in a fancy ball gown and has to worry about her hoops dragging her down.

I don’t think so. There’s one more book to do, Corin’s story, then I’ll rest the series for a while. I might do Corin’s sisters in the future,it’s hard to say if a story will occur to me. But – there’s a new trilogy coming from Samhain, the Secrets trilogy. I’ve taken some of the aspects of the 1750′s like the agrarian revolution, optics and the beginnings of industrialisation and written stories about people involved with them. Each hero or heroine or both have secrets to reveal. Same era, though. Like Heyer, this period in history calls to me and I’ve been studying it for – well a very long time. Longest love affair of my life!

Well, it wouldn’t kill me not to have a book on Millicent. There’s always got to be some bad apples. A few family members everyone else hates to see at holiday parties!

I’m quite happy that your love affair has lasted this long and hope it lasts much longer. I can almost never get enough of this period. Me wuvs it.

I don’t think so. There’s one more book to do, Corin’s story, then I’ll rest the series for a while. I might do Corin’s sisters in the future, it’s hard to say if a story will occur to me.
But – there’s a new trilogy coming from Samhain, the Secrets trilogy. I’ve taken some of the aspects of the 1750′s like the agrarian revolution, optics and the beginnings of industrialisation and written stories about people involved with them. Each hero or heroine or both have secrets to reveal. Same era, though. Like Heyer, this period in history calls to me and I’ve been studying it for – well a very long time. Longest love affair of my life!

“Did you base your descriptions on actual extant clothing or just make them all up?”

My editors tend to make me take too many descriptions of clothes out, which is another way of saying – yup, I adore them too. Think of the beginning of “Dangerous Liaisons” where they’re getting dressed. People spent a great deal of the day in “undress,” that is, semi formal, in far more comfortable clothes, or when on show in London, because it took time to dress they’d admit visitors to their chambers for what was called “levees,” you can see one in Hogarth’s “Marriage a la mode” series.
Make them up – kinda sorta. In those days when a dress went out of fashion it was remade, over and over. All costume collections have found this, even with grand court gowns, so the clothes that exist are usually the smaller sizes because they couldn’t usefully be cut down any further, or clothes deliberately preserved for some reason. That led to the fallacy that people in the past were smaller than we are – only the ones that didn’t have adequate nutrition were. The rest had their clothes refashioned for their children.
I’ve spent a long time in costume departments, every time I can beg or con my way into the hidden storage rooms. And because the people who look after them are as nuts as I am, they love to show them off. As long as they’re sure you’re not a madwoman who wants to smuggle matches in there (I swear, costume curators wake sweating in the night dreaming of matches and lighters). So I know how these clothes were constructed, and since I’ve had the privilege of handling them, I know how they were draped and stitched and how the fabrics handle. No darts before the 1840′s, that kind of thing. That, and being the daughter of a sample machinist and pattern cutter (works with designers to bring a garment to life) helped. Spending most of my young adulthood with my arms held out from my sides to the sound of women screaming “don’t move!” actually proved useful sometimes!
So I kinda make them up, but based on the construction and the fabrics of the time. For instance, I don’t have to think to know that the large, sprawling designs of embroidery and prints in the 1740′s gave way to smaller, more intimate patterns in the 1750′s, as hoops began to shrink in size and women in court gowns looked a bit less like walking sofas.
Got to stop now before I get really obsessed and start telling you about changes in riding costume!

On 22 June 1772 Mansfield delivered his judgment. He knew the significance of the case and said “Fiat justicia, ruat coelum” (Let justice be done, though the heavens fall). His decision was carefully worded and focused on the legality of forcible deportation. He argued that Stewart was not entitled to seize and deport Somerset by the laws of England. The laws of Virginia supported slavery but there was no law in England which did and in “a case so odious as the condition of slaves” there must be a positive law. “No master ever was allowed here to take a slave by force to be sold abroad because he deserted from his service… and therefore the man must be discharged.”

There were still many slaves in England long after 1772 – adverts for finding and returning runaway slaves like the one on display in case 2 continued to appear in English newspapers, especially in Bristol.

The term ‘the Colonies' would include places in the West Indies such as Barbados, Jamaica and Antigua (which is mentioned in Jane Austen’s Mansfield Park). Slavery was abolished in these colonies by the 1833 Slavery Abolition Act, which abolished slavery throughout the whole of the British Empire (although in fact, you can read here about how slavery continued in some parts of the Empire much, much longer).