I have always been fascinated by the 17th century. I suppose initially I was entranced by the glamour of the Civil War (I remember as a child reading books like The Children of the New Forest), but later it was the complex politics of Charles I’s reign, or the social and scientific changes of Charles II’s reign that drew me in. Now I have, by coincidence I suppose, read two novels set in that turbulent century, two novels whose periods almost overlap, but whose pictures of the time could not be more different.
John Saturnall’s Feast by Lawrence Norfolk is the earlier of the two. Set in the West Country, it takes us from the 1630s until just after the Restoration in 1660, though there is a postscript in the early 1670s and a final brief passage dated 1680. Merivel, A Man of his Time by Rose Tremain is a sequel to her earlier novel, Restoration. It is set primarily in Norfolk, and all occurs within the last year or so of Charles II’s life, 1684-5. Both centre on the estate of a titled man, but we see those estates from very different perspectives and therefore the estates themselves seem different.
There would be, I suspect, very little to differentiate Buckland Manor from Bignold Manor, but they appear as immeasureably different places because of how we see them.
Merivel is a very modern man, or at least Tremain allows our modern eyes to comprehend and share what he sees. His medicine is of the time (as we saw during the plague), but he is still modern in comparison to other doctors of his day. Two of the most powerful passages in the book come when he has to treat his daughter for typhus, and when he has to cut out a cancer from a former lover (the daughter survives, the lover doesn’t); and there is a very affecting scene when he has to stand by helpless as he watches lesser doctors treat the dying Charles II by bloodletting so incompetent that they resort to cutting his jugular to get blood out. What we get, therefore, is a character who is in his time but not fully of it, so that as we float behind his eyes we get to witness the 17th century without quite inhabiting it. This is particularly true when he witnesses poverty. In the earlier novel he suffered genuine hardship after being ousted from Bignold, working for a time in a hospital for the insane run by a Quaker friend. With that history, he is far more conscious of poverty than a gentleman of his class and time would likely have been, all too aware that Charles scattering coins during an unlikely visit to an apothecary is going to make no real difference. This is a modern, not a contemporary, sensibility speaking. But then, Tremain’s novel is a comic picaresque that turns steadily into a tragedy; it is the lightness of Merivel’s character and the web of circumstance that enwraps him that is important, far more than the absolute veracity of the setting.
In contrast, John Saturnall is fully of his time. Our encounters with poverty, for example, are constant, brutal and unsentimental. People starve, people freeze, the workhouse engenders dread but a child with no other alternative will be sent there without a second thought. Poverty is not something encountered intermittently, something over which you might worry whether a few coins will help; poverty is constant, painful, and no-one has coins to worry about. Moreover, poverty is not something to be encountered in isolation. The boys who work in the kitchen at Buckland Manor sleep on the floor where they work, and labour from the moment they wake until they collapse in exhaustion at the end of the day. There is violence, to which the only response is more violence. There is all the religious extremism of the age, which mostly plays out a way to righteously and piously exert power over others. And, of course, there is hierarchy, played out in countless different ways throughout the novel. All of which is presented without question, without the moral qualms that are a symptom of a modern view.
But then, John Saturnall’s Feast is neither comic nor picaresque, nor is it a tragedy. Indeed, it is a novel that ends on a note of hope. It is, rather, a novel that attempts to come to terms with the simple reality of survival at that time.
Except that where Merivel is a novel of the 17th century that looks forward, a novel that allows our 21st century readers to see themselves in the reign of Charles II; John Saturnall’s Feast is a novel that looks backwards from the 17th century. It is a story in which central relationships are shaped by issues that stretch back as far as Roman times, and in which the circumstances within Buckland Manor seem almost medieval. In part, this feels wrong, it turns the book from a novel into an exercise in myth-making; but then, there’s also the sense that looking backwards is all that is possible. Characters truly of the 17th century could not display 21st century sensibilities, but they could all too easily display medieval sensibilities.
The end result is that Merivel is an entertaining novel, but John Saturnall’s Feast feels richer and darker.
