Yes, it was still called the Civil War (and as far as I know many still do call it that), but not all followed that narrative: it depended on where the writer fell on the Tory/Whig spectrum. I mean, Heyer definitely followed it (not surprising given her constant pro-aristocratic birth-will-out point of view) but Sabatini is more sympathetic to the Parliamentary Puritan cause and the abuses they were fighting against. American writers aware of what the lack of attention paid to the Colonies meant to our history also tend to be sympathetic. And Sir Walter Scott, of all people, is startlingly nuanced in A Legend of Montrose and Old Mortality. (I haven't read his later Woodstock so don't know how he is there.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
regna
(no subject)
Date: 2011-02-04 14:37 (UTC)Puritancause and the abuses they were fighting against. American writers aware of what the lack of attention paid to the Colonies meant to our history also tend to be sympathetic. And Sir Walter Scott, of all people, is startlingly nuanced in A Legend of Montrose and Old Mortality. (I haven't read his later Woodstock so don't know how he is there.)---L.
Edited to replace brainfart wrong word.