My love affair with the 17th century was dealt to me through a pack of cards.  I had always been interested in history and loved exploring castles and other historic sites, which are some of Great Britain's treasures. 

My parents bought me a pack of cards which portrayed the images of every monarch since the conquest and a short biography on the reverse of each one.  A few stood out, but once I saw that of King Charles I, I was captivated, yet I didn't fully understand why.  The majestic painting of Charles hunting, superb clothes and sumptuous colours, the dignified pose was inspiring.  Reinforced by the description of his short life and, above all, his execution, it spurred me on to want to find out more about this man and why he was executed.  How could a king be killed?  Looking back, I also felt slightly defensive about the king, as though outraged that 'they' could do that to him.  School was frustrating because we studied every monarch and royal house, but stopped at the Gunpowder Plot and jumped to the Industrial Revolution. 

As I found out more about his life, this led into intense interest in the English Civil War itself, and the wider scope of 17th century history.  I joined The Sealed Knot reenactment society and relished the exhausting times spent living and breathing the past.  Being in a mock battle with no signs of modern life was a fabulous experience and brought me closer to the history book's story.  It was during a childhood holiday when we visited Carisbrooke Castle that I found out my Dad was very much Parliamentarian in sympathy and that we held contrasting views.

But I wanted to contribute and I was passionate about keeping this history alive - maybe it was the fact that school shunned it and the fact that many events and beliefs of the time are mocked now that we have our modern democracy and way of life.  So I wrote a historical fiction set in the period whereby I could mix the history with an entertaining plot.  Decision Most Deadly started as more of a hobby and on and off I worked on it for for ten years, publishing it in 2009.

I have a friend who says that history is in the past, and what is important is the future.  With my involvement in the period, I really wanted to find out which side my family would have supported during the civil war, so I began researching the family history.  Again this brought me close to local history, which before this I saw as secondary to national history.  I appreciated local situations more and learned how the tide of life affected my ancestors, as well as the country at large.  It was great to begin to see the whole spectrum.  Eventually I found the allegiance of my forebears was with Parliament; my Dad claiming that I am now the black sheep of the family with my intense Royalist views!  I insist that I am correcting the traitorous heritage.

The whole journey that these events, hobbies, actions and research still take me down is an enriching one.  Without history I feel I would not be who I am today, and it really gives me a secure feeling.  I think history should be celebrated and encouraged - I think the government should incentivise family history research because once you start, you gain a lot of knowledge of your family and area, bringing you close to family members your line have drifted from.  Why should we lose track of our relations?  Also you gain a lot of respect for family and the local area - you realise what your ancestors have coped with or survived through and can put your own trials into context.  It can make you a more balanced person.

I hope you enjoy my articles and the History Times site itself; there is a wealth of knowledge and learning waiting to be unlocked and a great variety to suit every taste.