I’m deep in edits of my novel set in the early 18th century and keep coming across the same problem. I look up a term or a word to see if it’s reasonable for a character to use it and discover that either it didn’t exist or that it has replaced an earlier similar term with just enough difference to look odd.
For instance today I wanted my 1718 protagonist to describe someone as a ‘cat’s paw’. A quick check with Etymonline proved that cat’s paw didn’t appear in print until 1790 and it may not have been used at all in 1718. Instead my protagonist, Kit, would say ‘cat’s foot’ – which just looks wierd.
I consulted the oracle [Erastes :)] and have used cat’s paw in the interests of clarity. What would you do? What do you do? Which is better? Accuracy at all costs or an easier experience on the reader?
Elin Gregory 
I think it really just depends on a) what you’re writing the book for, and b) whether you care if particularly picky people call you out on something totally meaningless in the grand scheme of the work. I mean, the sort of people reading Erastes really aren’t looking for Complete 100% Without A Doubt Historical Accuracy 100% Of The Time. They’re looking for an entertaining read that follows the historical setting as well as possible. If you were writing a biography of someone from that time meant to be used as a research source, then of course it’d be different. But no one’s going to be using your book as a footnote in a research paper, probably, so I think you’re safe choosing a phrase roughly historically accurate but not necessarily accurate down to the exact year.
“the sort of people reading Erastes really aren’t looking for Complete 100% Without A Doubt Historical Accuracy 100% Of The Time.”
It’s what she aims for and many of her readers expect it.. If she uses a colloquial term, 99% of the time it will be period appropriate, if that can be ascertained.
However, I’m writing a rompy parody of all the pirate cliches designed to make people laugh so you’re perfectly right and I hope a disclaimer to the effect that “This is Sellars and Yeatman history” will cover my ass. 🙂
With me, I love my books to be authentic. If Kit used ‘cat’s foot’ I’d be thrilled. If I didn’t know what it meant, I’d look it up. Also, the scene he’s in should give a hint to its meaning anyway. On the other hand, your editor will tell you what works best for them! Good luck! Love the flavor of your stories. 🙂
Thanks, lovely! I dearly love a reader who knows their way around a dictionary 🙂 The story is larded with obscure nautical terms that are a nightmare. Foot would have worked though. Here’s the context:
“You hit Denny,” the captain said. “Why did you do that?”
Fright was a pointless emotion, Kit reminded himself, unless it could be tempered into healthy caution.
“I woke from sleep and hit a shadow who had just grabbed my cods,” Kit replied. “I hit him once. As soon as I realised my mistake I hit the man who needed to be hit. I apologise for hurting Denny. It was unfortunate and unnecessary. I won’t apologise for punching Wigram.To use Denny as a cat’s foot was unforgivable.”
Now I need to decide whether to use ‘cods’ [authentic but obscure] or risk ‘bollocks’ [1744 so probably OK] or go with ‘balls’ which is well attested back to the 13th century but doesn’t really have much period flavour.
It’s such good fun but adds hours onto the editing process.
Men have a 1000 words for those things! 😉 I’d go with cods because it sounds like something Kit would say. I imagine we read what happened to him earlier so would know what he was talking about?
IMO if your readers see that you have made an effort to be accurate with some of the major stuff like sea faring terminology and topography etc, they will forgive a minor thing like the use of ‘cats paw’. Good luck with it sweetie. 🙂
Thanks sunshine. 🙂
I’m a stickler for accuracy, and I love it when authors manage to slip in obscure but authentic words. Then again, I may have been doing one author a disservice: it seems that teenager as a term may have been around a lot longer than I thought.
Wow, yes, 1670s for teens as applied to age, I would never have even thought of using that term that early. Isn’t etymonline.com a boon!
I also love my very old Oxford Dictionary of Historic Usage.
As Jessie said above, I think accuracy is important for technical terms such as architecture, weapons, nautical refercnes, heraldry, etc.. but when dealing with dialog some slight anachronisms are ok especially if it helps the reader know what the character is trying to say. The last thing you want is to knock your audience out of the moment and have the scrambling for a dictionary. I think a balance must be struck.
Yes, you’re right. I think ‘Cat’s foot’ sounds just peculiar enough to stop a reader in his or her tracks.
With technical terms – whipstaff, frizzen pan, la’board, heads – they MUST be correct, in part to please the readers who understand them, but the readers who don’t are going to accept them because they are reading ‘historical’ and expect to see some archaic and unfamiliar words.
It’s probably one of those situations where you can’t please everyone 🙂
I’m with Goran on this one–so long as there is correct usage.