"The Bloody Man"

[EdT]

Originally Posted by demonkangaroo

I just finished the whole bloody thing and I must say, fantastic work, EdT. I always wanted to read the whole thing, but I didn't have time to until recently.

Thanks, good to see you've been enjoying it. I know what needs to happen in the next chapter but work hasn't allowed me the time to actually write the thing- made a little progress over the weekend but not enough. So hopefully once things calm down here I'll have the opporunity to move things on.

Originally Posted by demonkangaroo

Two things that I noticed, by the way. First, I think that the Bible verses you use to introduce each chapter are really well chosen. Did you just read all the way through,and cherry pick the ones you think are appropriate, or do you use some sort of index?

I generally have a vague idea of what I think would be a suitable biblical parallel to draw, and then I narrow it down using http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/. In extremis, if I'm stuck for inspiration, I just do a word search and find something appriopriate. Understanding the period and fiddling around with the various sects requires a reasonably good biblical knowledge too, so that has helped, of course.

Originally Posted by demonkangaroo

And secondly, I saw that all of the fake citations are never any more recent than 1950. Any particular reason for this?

Not particularly, no. I have no idea what the world ITTL will look like by the middle years of the 20th century; the latest anyone will see is in the 1830s, during the epilogue. This, incidentally, is the furthest I've ever gone post-PoD- I normally restrict things to less than a century afterwards as I tend to feel that anything more gets more and more like fantasy than hard AH.

[Thande]

Originally Posted by EdT

I tend to feel that anything more gets more and more like fantasy than hard AH.

I know what you mean, but this is actually why I personally like to see TLs brought up to the present day--providing it is done competently and doesn't just rely on lazy analogous history, of course. The reason being that you can then see just how far the world has diverged from our own, to the extent that if you crossed over into the other world's 2012 it would indeed seem so far removed from us that it might as well be a fantasy world...and yet it is a fantasy world that at some point in the past shares a history with us. To my mind that is one of the most intriguing elements that goes to the heart of AH, sort of like those science fiction stories where humans on different planets diverge to the point that they might as well be different races, yet at some point they share a common ancestry. It's like that but with crosstime rather than physical distance.

I realise however that your way of doing things is different to mine and I do not bring this up as a criticism, indeed I enjoy the fact that your more vignette-based approach means you have been able to produce several intriguing scenarios in the same time that others of us are still stuck on the same one

[Ares96]

The anniversary of Marston Moor today reminded me of this TL. Is it getting updated soon?

[EdT]

Originally Posted by Thande

I know what you mean, but this is actually why I personally like to see TLs brought up to the present day--providing it is done competently and doesn't just rely on lazy analogous history, of course. The reason being that you can then see just how far the world has diverged from our own, to the extent that if you crossed over into the other world's 2012 it would indeed seem so far removed from us that it might as well be a fantasy world...and yet it is a fantasy world that at some point in the past shares a history with us. To my mind that is one of the most intriguing elements that goes to the heart of AH, sort of like those science fiction stories where humans on different planets diverge to the point that they might as well be different races, yet at some point they share a common ancestry. It's like that but with crosstime rather than physical distance.

Oh, completely, and it can be something that’s done really well- I always loved FWoAN for precisely this reason, and I tried to bring some of that to the bits I contributed to DoD, which were generally covering periods almost a century post-PoD. Indeed, my initial line of thinking for “The Bloody Man” was radically different, in that it had an 11th century PoD (Robert Curthose dies from an infection after William Rufus empties a chamber pot over his head, fact fans…). But then the more I looked at it, the more I realised that it was a bit of a pointless exercise; I might as well root it in OTL and use genuine people.

Originally Posted by Thande

I realise however that your way of doing things is different to mine and I do not bring this up as a criticism, indeed I enjoy the fact that your more vignette-based approach means you have been able to produce several intriguing scenarios in the same time that others of us are still stuck on the same one

I suppose my view in writing a TL is that for all that it’s setting out an alternative history, there needs to be some sort of narrative thrust to stop things getting too flabby; so in AGB it’s Mosley’s story, in FaBR it’s the two Churchills, and so on. The Bloody Man is all about the British Revolution, so it’ll end when that does, more or less. It’s very tempting to go on and on ad infinitum – there are some things that I’ll mention in the epilogue that I love and would like to go into more detail about- but that’s probably not for the TL itself. With Fight and Be Right, for example, I made a conscious effort not to think beyond 1940, and while I have some ideas for how things might go ITTL, there’s deliberately nothing set in stone. I just feel that the point when you have to start making up people is a natural cut-off point.

With this said, the epilogue to The Bloody Man will take place in the 19th century, so that takes me 200 years Post-PoD. I don’t propose to cover everything that happens in the intervening time period though!

Originally Posted by Ares96

The anniversary of Marston Moor today reminded me of this TL. Is it getting updated soon?

It is certainly getting updated, but not that soon, unfortunately. I’m ridiculously busy at work and haven’t had the chance to sit down and write for a month or so now, which is very frustrating. Hopefully I’ll be able to grab some time over the summer. Determined to keep going though!

[Arachnid]

Great to see your still thinking about it, by the way do you still give any thought to the Caesariad?

[jkay]

Thanks so much for pawning your mean, nasty dictator off on we poor Americans.

That said, so far I'm sadly MOSTLY enjoying the TL. SO far. :-)

EDIT: And, how tolerant was Cromwell to those whom wanted to enjoy Christmas?

[Thande]

Originally Posted by EdT

Indeed, my initial line of thinking for “The Bloody Man” was radically different, in that it had an 11th century PoD (Robert Curthose dies from an infection after William Rufus empties a chamber pot over his head, fact fans…). But then the more I looked at it, the more I realised that it was a bit of a pointless exercise; I might as well root it in OTL and use genuine people.

Now I'm both puzzled and intrigued by what the effective "point" or "goal" of Bloody Man is if two such temporally separated PODs can produce it...

[Blackadder mk 2]

Originally Posted by Thande

Now I'm both puzzled and intrigued by what the effective "point" or "goal" of Bloody Man is if two such temporally separated PODs can produce it...

The point may be that a lack of ability to compromise can destroy you, even when your opponents aren't as strong as they could be.

EdT's TLs seem to focus around the point that you shouldn't do this or it'll haunt you. With "Greater Britain" it was assuming that there is an end to progress or conflict, with "Fight and Be Right" it was that you shouldn't assume you will always be in control or can do what you like and here it's you should learn when to come to the table.

[Thande]

Originally Posted by Blackadder mk 2

The point may be that a lack of ability to compromise can destroy you, even when your opponents aren't as strong as they could be.

EdT's TLs seem to focus around the point that you shouldn't do this or it'll haunt you. With "Greater Britain" it was assuming that there is an end to progress or conflict, with "Fight and Be Right" it was that you shouldn't assume you will always be in control or can do what you like and here it's you should learn when to come to the table.

That's more "meta" than what I was thinking. Debatable whether there's a "goal" to A Greater Britain (beyond "making people think more about Oswald Mosley as a complex character") but IMO the "goal" of Fight and Be Right is to create a plausible narrative that ends up with a Britain evocative of 1984 (see his map of London). So I was assuming this TL has a similar goal, probably something like "a Britain which is X" or "an America which is X". I could be wrong, though.

[EdT]

Originally Posted by Arachnid

Great to see your still thinking about it, by the way do you still give any thought to the Caesariad?

I do, yes. The problem with the Caesariad is that I worked out exactly where it was going to go, and then got a bit bored with actually writing up the relevant chapters. I will reboot it at some point, probably after I’ve finished TBM, and finish it properly. There’s a fair bit of material already written so it should be doable reasonably quickly if I really sit down and put my nose to the grindstone.

Originally Posted by jkay

Thanks so much for pawning your mean, nasty dictator off on we poor Americans.

That said, so far I'm sadly MOSTLY enjoying the TL. SO far. :-)

Glad you’re enjoying it. I actually think that Cromwell is a great fit for 17th century New England- probably better than across the Atlantic. And ITTL he certainly won’t be remembered in the way you describe!

Originally Posted by jkay

EDIT: And, how tolerant was Cromwell to those whom wanted to enjoy Christmas?

Well, Christmas was formally abolished by the Long Parliament in 1647, but there had already been clampdowns on its observance as early as 1643, so I think it’s a little unfair to blame Cromwell for that particular aspect of the period. Remove him from the picture and it still would have happened; it was the work of Parliament, and there was broad support for the move. Which is not to say that Cromwell wouldn’t have been sympathetic to such a move. He certainly would not have celebrated Christmas himself, and would have strongly disapproved of those who did. That’s not the same as wanting it banned however, and I suspect that privately he would not have minded people observing the holiday, so long as others were free not to. However, Parliament had decided otherwise, and Cromwell was the sort who would enforce the law rigidly, as can be seen by the constant battle he fought with the Lord Mayor of London in the 1650s to ensure that shops remained open on Christmas Day.

Originally Posted by Thande

Now I'm both puzzled and intrigued by what the effective "point" or "goal" of Bloody Man is if two such temporally separated PODs can produce it...

I should explain that just because the PoD was in the 11th century doesn’t mean that the TL would be set there. The idea was for a collapse of Royal authority an subsequent civil war in Britain in the 17th century, albeit an extremely divergent one. It was going to be a bit more novel-ish, with the main character bearing a lot of resemblance to the Prophet Theaurau John. A little like a 17th century version of Harry Harrison’s “Hammer and the Cross”, if you’ve ever read that. But then I decided this was a little pointless, why not go with OTL’s Civil War instead and use real people, who are probably more interesting?

Originally Posted by Blackadder mk 2

The point may be that a lack of ability to compromise can destroy you, even when your opponents aren't as strong as they could be.

EdT's TLs seem to focus around the point that you shouldn't do this or it'll haunt you. With "Greater Britain" it was assuming that there is an end to progress or conflict, with "Fight and Be Right" it was that you shouldn't assume you will always be in control or can do what you like and here it's you should learn when to come to the table.

This is an interesting point, actually- I didn’t necessarily mean this to be the lesson to take away from things, but it does broadly fit my view of history. And handily enough, it fits the bill with this TL too- what was the Civil War if not the direct result of King Charles’ inability to swallow his pride and come to some sort of compromise with Parliament, something they desperately wanted to do? When Britain does see peace ITTL- and it will eventually, believe it or not- it will be through a certain measure of compromise too. I don’t do value judgements with my TLs but I think it could be argued that TTL has a happier ending in some respects than some of my others, thanks to the triumph of pragmatism- although we’re a way off that yet.

Originally Posted by Thande

That's more "meta" than what I was thinking. Debatable whether there's a "goal" to A Greater Britain (beyond "making people think more about Oswald Mosley as a complex character") but IMO the "goal" of Fight and Be Right is to create a plausible narrative that ends up with a Britain evocative of 1984 (see his map of London). So I was assuming this TL has a similar goal, probably something like "a Britain which is X" or "an America which is X". I could be wrong, though.

FWIW, the “goal” of AGB was “Oswald Mosley as PM does not mean jackboots down Whitehall and an alliance with Germany”, whereas the “goal” of FaBR (insofar as there was one) was to redo the old vignettes I had done involving a Socialist Britain, but more plausibly and interestingly. I’m not sure I have a similar goal for TBM in this sense, beyond “have fun with the English Civil Wars”.

However, I think my TLs have other common themes. All three explore interesting, and often neglected, political thought from the time period they cover (Mosleyism, Tory Democracy and Independency, respectively)- they all also focus on the character of a historical figure and try and get behind the traditional image to reveal something more rounded and nuanced. Which ties into the historical memory aspect, which I’ve talked about quite a bit before- we all have our lazy preconceptions about various ‘great people’ of history; I attempt in my TLs to create new and strange historical myths about them, to show how dependent on spin and circumstance our own views are.

[Thande]

Originally Posted by EdT

However, I think my TLs have other common themes. All three explore interesting, and often neglected, political thought from the time period they cover (Mosleyism, Tory Democracy and Independency, respectively)- they all also focus on the character of a historical figure and try and get behind the traditional image to reveal something more rounded and nuanced. Which ties into the historical memory aspect, which I’ve talked about quite a bit before- we all have our lazy preconceptions about various ‘great people’ of history; I attempt in my TLs to create new and strange historical myths about them, to show how dependent on spin and circumstance our own views are.

Yeah, I've noticed that tendency as well, and it's something I like the most about your TLs: they make you think. This also goes for your habit of putting in really unlikely things and then adding "all this is OTL" in a footnote: these kinds of anecdotes remind us that we have a tendency to block things out that don't fit our idea of the historical narrative.

I try to play with this myself in my own TL but of course, over 100 years past the POD, a lot of them have got quite removed from OTL (much as you were talking about above, effectively turning into a fantasy world) such as historians trying to bundle a load of 1848-style quite unconnected popular revolutions into one discrete ideological shift under the name "Populism". If there is such a point more directly relevant to OTL that I wish to make, it is that I do not believe (as some apparently do) that if there is to be a major ideological conflict defining the 20th century as in OTL, said ideological difference need not have anything to do with economics.

Blackadder's point about your TLs having the theme of unwillingness to compromise leading to disaster makes me wonder if you'll ever do a TL concerning the American Revolutionary War, as in that case it's OTL that has that theme and you could perhaps do something with the reverse.

[Jape]

Its certainly the thing I most enjoy about your TLs EdT; digging up the lay lines of popular historical narrative and laying them elsewhere, while at the same time playing with popular ahistorical tropes to give flavour: British *fascism, Ingsoc, Imperial Federation, 1930s utopian corporatism, the Fourth Reich etc.

[stevep]

Originally Posted by EdT

I do, yes. The problem with the Caesariad is that I worked out exactly where it was going to go, and then got a bit bored with actually writing up the relevant chapters. I will reboot it at some point, probably after I’ve finished TBM, and finish it properly. There’s a fair bit of material already written so it should be doable reasonably quickly if I really sit down and put my nose to the grindstone.

EdT

Great news as I was really enjoying that. Likely this a lot as well but disappointed when the Caesariadwas put on hold for TBM.

Interested to see what world is going to develop but sounds like, in Britain [or England?] at least there will be an outbreak of moderation and people will start talking to opponents rather than shouting/preaching at them.

Steve

[Suirantes]

I have finally finished this timeline, and I can say that you did fantastic work, EdT.

I hope that you will be able to continue this timeline soon.

[EdT]

Originally Posted by Thande

Yeah, I've noticed that tendency as well, and it's something I like the most about your TLs: they make you think. This also goes for your habit of putting in really unlikely things and then adding "all this is OTL" in a footnote: these kinds of anecdotes remind us that we have a tendency to block things out that don't fit our idea of the historical narrative.

That's definitely what I try to do with my TLs- far as I'm concerned, if you come away having been moderately entertained and knowing a bit more about the driving forces that propelled history the way it did IOTL, then I've been successful. I suppose this is the other reason why I'm reluctant to go too far post-PoD; I see AH as very much a useful device for learning more about OTL, and the further you diverge, the less helpful it is. So yes, I put the emphasis on the "History, rather than on the "Alternative".

Originally Posted by Thande

Blackadder's point about your TLs having the theme of unwillingness to compromise leading to disaster makes me wonder if you'll ever do a TL concerning the American Revolutionary War, as in that case it's OTL that has that theme and you could perhaps do something with the reverse.

Well, I have a couple of ideas in that vein (either a proper 'disunited states' TL or 'ARW fails, then there's a transatlantic revolution a generation later against Ernest Augustus') but tbh I think the period has been covered an awful lot by other authors and I'm keen to carve out new areas to consider. Also, the American sections of TBM (and there will be a lot more set there in this TL) have sated my appetite for the colonial stuff somewhat, although the 17th century stuff is a very different kettle of fish from the following century. I wouldn't rule it out though, at some point- got a lot to finish off first though!

Originally Posted by Jape

Its certainly the thing I most enjoy about your TLs EdT; digging up the lay lines of popular historical narrative and laying them elsewhere, while at the same time playing with popular ahistorical tropes to give flavour: British *fascism, Ingsoc, Imperial Federation, 1930s utopian corporatism, the Fourth Reich etc.

Ooh, 'digging up the lay-lines of popular historical narrative'. I like that!

Originally Posted by stevep

Great news as I was really enjoying that. Likely this a lot as well but disappointed when the Caesariad was put on hold for TBM.

Sorry, I know it was not particularly well-disciplined of me to start on something new like that. Promise I will get back to it eventually though- I do have the whole thing completely planned out, after all.

Originally Posted by stevep

Interested to see what world is going to develop but sounds like, in Britain [or England?] at least there will be an outbreak of moderation and people will start talking to opponents rather than shouting/preaching at them.

They've got to run out of bible verses and ammunition eventually!

Originally Posted by Suirantes

I have finally finished this timeline, and I can say that you did fantastic work, EdT.

I hope that you will be able to continue this timeline soon.

Thanks! I will definitely be writing again when work is a little less crazy and I have the chance.

[Clandango]

I look forward to reading this through. Is there any companion piece with extra details I should see?

[EdT]

Originally Posted by Clandango

I look forward to reading this through. Is there any companion piece with extra details I should see?

Not yet, though I may produce something at some point; for the time being, everything I've written is in the thread itself.

But here's the good news- I've had some time to write! So here's the next part, and hopefully the one after that should be completed soon to boot. As it's been a while since the previous chapter, I thought a recap might be useful...

[EdT]

(you may want to imagine this part scrolling upwards slowly )

In 1633, an obscure East Anglian gentleman farmer named Oliver Cromwell decided to seek a new life in the New World. That was fourteen years ago now, and the world has changed greatly since that day. It is now a time of Civil War. The British Isles have been wracked by conflict for almost a decade, and what started as a conflict between the King and his Scottish subjects has been transformed into a multi-sided life or death struggle that has only become more savage as the participants grow increasingly desperate. At first, the King was pitted against the English Parliament and his Scottish subjects, and was defeated after two years of bitter fighting. But the victors quickly fell out amongst themselves, and after barely a year of peace the war erupted again, this time between the King and his parliamentary allies on one side, and a loose coalition of revolutionaries, soldiers and religious extremists on the other.

The fiery destruction of London was only the first act in this new chapter of violence. In England, King Charles and his army of foreign mercenaries rage at the walls of Hull, while in the south, the revolutionary general John Lambert has secured the approaches to the capital and is struggling to keep the New Model Army on the path of moderation. A powerful French army marches through Dorset, alienating the very people it was sent to assist; and blundering through it all, a rag-tag assemblage of religious fanatics march every westwards to an unknown destination, led by the mad Prophet Theaurau John and his bride.

The ripples of this conflict have already spread far beyond the British Isles. In the Netherlands, the young Stadtholder’s impetuous support of his father-in-law King Charles is about to provoke a civil war of his own; in France, Cardinal Mazarin’s gamble in meddling in English matters has hastened the very conflict that he was attempting to prevent. Even in far-off New England, the fragile colonial unity forged by Oliver Cromwell and his allies is threatened by the war. Some say that it is the end of the world. There are many Bloody Men abroad.




_____________________________________________

Chapter 23

Judas then, having received a band of men and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and torches and weapons. Jesus therefore, knowing all things that should come upon him, went forth, and said unto them, Whom seek ye? They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus saith unto them, I am he. And Judas also, which betrayed him, stood with them. As soon then as he had said unto them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground.
John 18: 3-6.

_____________________________________________


Wootton Rivers
Wiltshire, August 1647

The Salvation Army slumbered, strung out in an untidy camp along the banks of the river Avon, their presence marked by burning crosses hammered into the earth at regular intervals. Somewhere near the centre of the jumble of tents and bivouacs, the Prophet and the Prophetess stood together in contemplation, watching the fire and sharing a cup of mead, a spoil of the fight that afternoon. The local vicar, a man named Waterman, had declared for the King; he had roused the local village folk against the Pilgrims, calling them ‘a company of tinkers and pedlars’, and had killed several in a well-planned ambush. But he did not have God on his side. The Salvation Army had swatted the clubmen aside like the irritants they were, and after their village had been burnt, it had been left to the Prophet to decide on a suitable penance for their leader.

He remembered the vicar’s screams as they placed him in the baker’s oven, and the Prophet’s destroyed lips twitched in satisfaction beneath his mask. If ye worship not, ye shall be cast the same hour into the midst of a burning fiery furnace; and who is that God that shall deliver you out of my hands? Only a true Prophet, such as Daniel, or himself, could endure the crucible of the Lord; and the Reverend Waterman was no true Prophet, though at least he did not claim himself to be one. Theaurau John had done the Lord’s work that day, and the mead, which had been brewed by the late vicar and his wife, was ample compensation. It dulled the pain of what he would now have to do.

The Prophet’s gnarled hand caressed the swollen belly of his love, lost in thought. It would not be long now until the birth, he knew. A few months maybe, perhaps a little more. Time was drawing on, and they were still many miles from their destination. But that was no longer his responsibility.

Behind them, lost in the darkness, Castiel stirred. John. You must tell her.

He sighed, glad for the first time that beneath the mask his ruined face could no longer show emotion. “Yes, Lord, I shall. It is time.”

The Prophetess heard his whisper, and turned to him, eyes shining with tears in the light of the fire. “You need not say the words, my love. For I have seen this too,” she said, quietly. Haltingly, she recited the doggerel that resulted from her prophetic trances.

“Theaurau’s visions were very choice, And much there lay therein,
Touching His power and His reign, Who is exalted to be King.
Yet not to him falls leadership, in the final fight;
for humble Anne this honour bears, with the Lord of Light. ”

The Prophet bowed his head. Tears stung his ravaged cheeks. “I must go, my love. My calling now lies elsewhere. I shall not see Avalon, but for God’s Will. But you shall bear the child there. We shall meet again, I swear it. Whether in this world, or in Holy Sion.”

The Prophetess tenderly lifted the mask, and kissed what lay beneath.

“The Apostate shall not harm you, they shall not any thing do,” she murmured, “for you are marked by the Lord, that are faithful and true”.

They embraced, and the Prophetess spoke again. “Go in the light of the Lord, Theaurau John. Fulfil thy task, and I shall fulfil mine. This parting will be but brief, compared to the eternity of the Kingdom of Heaven. But I beg of you, think of me in the days to come.”

The Prophet replaced his mask, and slowly shuffled into the night. “My love, I shall think of you always.”


****

(Taken from “The Wars of the Five Kingdoms” by James Price, Miskatonic University Press 1947)

Compared to the dramatic months that had preceded it, the war in the late summer of 1647 was an exercise in mutual frustration and caution, both sides preoccupied and unable to take bold action. The principals in the struggle for England were both enduring miserable sieges. The King spent the summer raging impotently at the walls of Hull, John Lambert was engaged in a similarly frustrating- although ultimately more successful- investment of Reading. In Wales, the Earl of Denbeigh[1] remained reluctant to leave the safety of Brecon to engage Vavasor Powell’s rebels in the south; in the Midlands, Sydenham Poyntz and Michael Jones engaged in raids and skirmishes but did not risk a decisive battle. Only one theatre saw the sort of mobile, active campaigning that had characterised the first Civil War, and this was in Dorset, where the French invaders struggled to seize control of county in the face of a heterogeneous coalition of Agitators, disgruntled local clubmen, and eventually the fanatics of the Salvation Army.

Even here, however, the summer campaign began with a siege. The Comte du Créquy had brought his army to the walls of Wareham, which he hoped to take in a swift action before moving eastwards to Poole and then eventually Southampton. The port was no stranger to conflict; it had changed hands twice during the first round of fighting, and suffered considerable damage at the hands of Royalist and Parliamentarian alike. Despite this, the people were resolute in their defiance of the invaders. Xenophobia still trumped war weariness; Winston Churchill, who was present as a senior commander in the besieging force, later wrote that;

“The townspeople resolved to adhere to their late principles and to stand for the defence of the liberties of their unconquered nation, to oppose all forces whatsoever that endeavoured to make an inroad within the bowels of this country, and display their banners in opposition to the new-raised Royalists.”

Wareham’s defences initially seemed weak. While the town was protected by the sea on one side and the rivers Frome and Piddle on its flanks, the one land approach, the western wall, was in a state of total disrepair; a week of artillery bombardment completely obliterated this barrier. Yet when the attackers launched an assault, they found that the townspeople had blockaded the streets and turned their houses into bastions. The attackers would be forced to take Wareham building by building[2]. On the evening of July 9th, a general assault began, and bitter house-to-house fighting erupted through the town. For a while it seemed like it would only be a matter of time before the defenders were annihilated, but then providence stepped in; a fire, probably started by the attackers to flush out the remaining resistance, grew out of control and, helped by a strong easterly wind, forced the invaders to retreat to their siege lines. By the morning, half the town was burning and all further fighting was impossible for another few days.

Help was on the way. The news of the French invasion had caused a patriotic tumult in Hampshire, and Robert Blake, the hero of Lyme in the first Civil War, was able organise a considerable force in Southampton before marching westwards to confront the new foe. He had reached as far as Ringwood, just beyond the New Forest, when he heard the news; Wareham had finally fallen, after a bloody battle where the last remaining defenders were burnt alive in the ancient Minster of Lady St. Mary. The town was almost entirely obliterated; “Look at this place, and see the heaps of rubbish, the consumed houses, a multitude of which are raked in their own ashes”, the local minister would preach, later that year, “Here a poor forsaken chimney, and there a little fragment of a wall that escaped to tell what barbarous and monstrous wretches there have been.” [3]

With Wareham lost, it was obvious that the invaders’ next target would be Poole, and Blake moved quickly to place his force between the town and the advancing French. The two armies met on August 1st on a piece of marshy ground by Lytchett Bay, and the name of the crossing, ‘Kingsbridge’, proved a good omen; despite the poor riding conditions Colonel Churchill led his cavalry on a “wild and desperate” charge on Blake’s wing, and “fell so furiously on the enemy that they forsook their hedges and fell to their heels”. It was a measure of Blake’s skill as a general[4] that he was able to salvage the majority of his force in good order and retreat northwards towards Wimbourne, leaving Poole to be besieged by the victorious Royalists…”


(Taken from “The British Revolution” by Richard Moore, Miskatonic University Press 1937)

“The siege of Reading was an ugly business even by the standards of the era. The city had not been prepared for a siege. The defenders had no chance to stockpile food and ammunition, and so were forced to requisition supplies from the townsfolk, who had already been reduced to near penury by having been forced to play host to the Earl of Essex’s army for several years during the previous round of fighting[5]. Soon, everyone was eating horsemeat, then dog meat, and finally, by the end of July, cat carcasses were changing hands for up to twelve shillings apiece. Metal was also at a premium, as the defenders quickly shot off all of their bullets; it did not take long for Burgoyne to melt down every scrap of lead in the town for ammunition, and as members of the New Model Army began to fall to these crudely improvised musket-balls, the Army Council came to the view that their enemy were deliberately trying to inflict gratuitous pain, and began to shoot prisoners who used them[6]. The besiegers were not in a particularly comfortable state themselves. While the New Model Army was able to eat, it was not able to eat well, and the roving bands of foragers had to cast their net further afield each time; there was hardly a scrap of food to be found anywhere in Berkshire or north-west Surrey, and with cheese costing five shillings- half a week’s wages- a pound, the majority of the soldiers had to subsist on a meagre, improvised bread made from beans.

By the second week of July the food situation in Reading was desperate enough for Burgoyne to take the step of expelling a large number of women from the city, in the hope that the burden of feeding them would fall upon the besiegers. All this did, though, was to depress morale on both sides. The Army Council was unwilling to expend its own meagre food stocks, and so decided to forbid the refugees passage through the blockade. For the remainder of the siege, a forlorn and ragged group of starving women eked out a miserable existence in the no-man’s between the walls and the siege lines, constantly weeping and pleading for help while the two armies tried to ignore them[7].

It was only a matter of time before the defenders of Reading reached the end of their strength. By mid-August, after two months of stubborn resistance, the inhabitants were reduced to eating candles and paper, and the starving townspeople finally convinced Burgoyne to surrender. The Army Council was determined to make an example of the defenders, as Ireton put it, “for some satisfaction to justice, and in part to avenge for the innocent blood they have caused to be spilt, and the trouble, damage and mischief they have brought upon the town”. While a few of the garrison were set free, the majority were sent under guard to London. The lucky ones were placed on a ship to the Continent, and told never to return to England; the majority appear to have been sold into indentured servitude in the West Indies[8]. Their leaders, Burgoyne and the Earl of Holland, were not so lucky. Both were shot on the morning of August 20th; The Earl, on being led before the firing squad and promised that they would make it a quick death, remarked that “Friends, I have been nearer to you when you have missed me before”…”


(Taken from “The Wars of the Five Kingdoms” by James Price, Miskatonic University Press 1947)

“The Battle of Kingsbridge had dented Agitator hopes in Dorset but had not destroyed them entirely, and it did not take long for Robert Blake to seek to regain the initiative. While a lesser general might have concentrated on the relief of Poole, Blake knew better; his epic defence of Lyme, four years previously, had taught him that a well-defended port with supplies brought in by ship could hold out more or less indefinitely. He was not alone in this view; Frederick Schomberg, du Créquy’s colleague and a veteran of fighting in Holland, vociferously argued the case for leaving only a token force at Poole and concentrating on the enemy army, only to be overruled.

By the second week of August Blake was on the move again; but not southwards, towards Poole and the enemy. Instead he went north. His target was Blandford Forum, the only town in East Dorset to declare for the King. Blake’s objective was simple; punish those parts of Dorset that did not support his cause, and raise the rest of the county against the invaders. In this he was characteristically successful. After a brief struggle, Blandford Forum was reduced to “a model of misery and desolation”. With resistance crushed, Blake made camp in the ruins and began to send delegations to the nearby towns and villages promising a return to order. His charm offensive soon bore some fruit. There was a huge assemblage at Gussage St Michael on August 20th, where Blake met a delegation of local clubmen and promised to keep their homes free of violence and disorder[9]. Skilfully presenting himself to the delegation as little more than a clubman himself, Blake left the event with a white ribbon in his hat and with promises of support, so long as his troops departed the area quickly.

While Blake was winning friends in the north, the Comte du Créquy’s expedition was finding Poole an unexpectedly tough nut to crack. The besieging artillery were unable to make much impression on the town walls, and ships from Southampton regularly sailed into the harbour with food and ammunition; given the poor agricultural land to the south of the harbour and the devastated state of the countryside towards Wareham, it soon became apparent that the defenders were far better nourished than the besiegers. As August progressed, the people of Poole began to mock their opponents by organising elaborate meals on the walls and occasionally throwing cabbages and turnips at the siege lines. A growing faction in the Royalist camp, concerned at the supply situation and alarmed by reports of enemy action inland, began to argue for withdrawal; an argument that the Comte angrily rejected as cowardice. Finally, on September 1st, the argument was rendered moot. Du Créquy, surveying the siege lines, was struck in the chest by a lucky shot from the town walls. The Comte lingered for two days before his wound became infected and he died; at this point, with the siege no closer to completion and food beginning to run short, a relieved Schomberg took full command of the expedition and decided to leave only a token force at Poole. He would lead the bulk of his army northwards, to seek out and destroy the increasingly dangerous threat that was Blake…”


(Taken from “The British Revolution” by Richard Moore, Miskatonic University Press 1937)

In the early months of the Second Civil War, the Army Council had a single, overriding preoccupation; to secure London and its approaches. By the beginning of August, and the capitulation of Reading, the New Model Army had finally completed this task. There were no forces loyal to the King within a hundred miles of the capital, and ships flying the Cross of St Edward patrolled the waters of the Thames Estuary, warding off any the threat of further foreign landings. The time was now ripe to take the fight to the enemy; but should the Army march northwards directly against the King, or westwards, to destroy the Comte du Créquy’s army in Dorset? There were compelling arguments in favour of both strategies. All agreed that the King posed the greatest long-term threat, but he seemed locked in a futile investment of Hull; John Okey argued that the best course of action was to replicate the New Model Army’s march of 1645 and crush resistance in the South West before swinging north to eliminate the main royal force.

For a few weeks, the Army Council dithered. It was only on August 11th, when John Lambert received a letter from Robert Blake advising him of matters in Dorset, that a decision was made. The letter, written as Blake rushed to defend Poole from Du Créquy’s attack, painted a highly confident and reassuring view of the campaign; a view that, thanks to the battle of Kingsbridge, had suddenly become dangerously inaccurate. On August 13th 1647, blithely unaware of the setback their allies had suffered on the south coast, the New Model Army struck camp and began the long march northwards to Yorkshire. The decisive campaign of the war was about to begin…”


****

Market Lavington
Wiltshire, September 1647

Market Lavington stood silent and abandoned in the drizzle, as Thomas Blood leant on the door to St Barnabas’ Church and watched the solitary figure shuffle down the muddy street towards him. The original inhabitants had fled, either to nearby Devizes or onto Salisbury Plain. Where they had gone, and which of the various armies marching across the land had triggered their flight, was a matter of supreme indifference to Blood; what mattered was that the place was now deserted.

Or at least it was deserted, Blood thought with satisfaction. From the darkened doorways and windows of the village, fifty Swiss Guards, provided by the Comte D’Artagnan for the purpose, watched the newcomer trudge towards the church. A further company of troops lurked in a copse just outside the village, ready to intervene if required. Yet it appeared that they may not be needed; the Salvation Army had halted in its progress along the Westbury Road, and only a single man had come to Market Lavington. Blood suddenly felt a pang of doubt. Why has he come alone? This is too easy. He shook his head to clear it of his misgivings. He had a small army at his back, after all- and yet…

Blood closed his eyes for a moment and took a deep breath. It was time. He stepped forward, drawing his sword. “Thomas Totney,” he bellowed, “You are wanted for great crimes. Murder. Arson. Blasphemy. You must be tried. Surrender, in the name of the King!”

The figure stopped, and suddenly Blood realised that what he assumed to be a hood was in fact a crude, filthy mask of hemp and canvas, crowned by a pale, pitted scalp that hinted at the ruined face that lay beneath. Its piercing gaze swung in Blood’s direction, causing him to flinch involuntarily.

“Thomas Totney? I have heard of him,” the Prophet rasped. “You are right to seek him for crimes. He was a sinner and a reprobate. Yet he has already been tried, and in a manner far more testing than any Earthly court could produce. He is now dead. Thomas Totney burns in the crucible of heaven.”

The Prophet took a step forwards. Musket barrels suddenly protruded from every window overlooking the square, and Blood grunted in satisfaction. Everything is under control, he told himself, surprised that he needed the reassurance. “You are surrounded, Totney. If you do not surrender, you shall be shot on the spot. But I would rather see you answer for your crimes against the Kingdom.”

The mask, inscrutable, regarded Blood for a long moment. “There is but one King, and he is the Lord of Hosts. It is he whom I serve, not the usurper in York who has cast in his lot with the Devil. You do not even truly act in his name. You have a different master, Man of Blood.”

Blood tried to hide the surprise on his face. How does he know me? Did I meet this man before he donned the mask? Was he one of the many I have wronged?

“We have met before, then?” he asked, keeping his voice level. The Prophet shook his head, mockingly.

“We have not met, Man of Blood. But Castiel has whispered of you. You are no Prophet, nor a false one. You fancy yourself an agent of Satan. Yet in serving the powers of Hell, you unwittingly fulfil God’s plan. You know of what I speak. The spark that ignites the inferno, the breath that fans the flames.”

Blood’s face drained of all colour. He knows, he thought. How can he know of the Chandlery? They were all killed in the explosion. How can he know?

The terrible figure began to laugh, a dreadful, gurgling sound. “Be sure your sin will find you out, Man of Blood.”

Blood, by now thoroughly shaken, struggled to regain control of the conversation. “Do you surrender? I will not ask again.”

Theaurau John drew his sword, slowly, and Blood prepared to give the order to open fire. But then, to his surprise, the Prophet casually tossed the weapon aside. “I render myself unto your power, Man of Blood,” he rasped. “My usefulness is almost at an end; for while there is not a greater prophet than John: he that is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he. I have merely prepared the way for someone greater. Even now, he is borne to his birthplace in Avalon.”

Blood’s Swiss Guards poured from doorways, pistols and swords raised, and the Prophet strode forward into their custody. As manacles were placed on his wrists, he returned his gaze to Blood. “Know this. You, Man of Blood, still have a part to play in God’s plan. I have seen it. You will not strike the blow that fells the Antichrist, but you shall find the chink in his armour.”


_____________________________________________


[1] IOTL, the Earl was one of the most prominent Welsh Royalists, and was killed in 1643, during Prince Rupert’s raid on Birmingham. ITTL he survives, and plays a fairly minor part in the rest of the war, before taking up arms in the second. By this stage he is getting on a bit and while still experienced and well regarded, is getting increasingly cautious.

[2] This is more or less what happened in Taunton IOTL; the battle there has been described as a ‘mini Stalingrad’ and entirely levelled the city.

[3] Much the same was said of Taunton IOTL, although on that occasion there was a happier ending for the defenders, the town having been relieved by Lord Fairfax.

[4] Blake is best known today as the finest Admiral Britain produced between Drake and Nelson, but his experience in the First Civil War IOTL showed that he was at least as talented a commander on land.

[5] Reading had a similar problem IOTL; it changed hands several times during the Civil War and was then heavily garrisoned for the remainder of the conflict, transforming it from a prosperous market town into a poverty-stricken backwater.

[6] This happened several times IOTL too; improvised bullets were common, but generally spelt execution if the user was captured.

[7] Something similar happened OTL at the siege of Colchester; although on that occasion Thomas Fairfax ordered the women stripped naked before being sent back into no-man’s land.

[8] The same fate was inflicted on the defenders of Colchester IOTL.

[9] IOTL the region was very well known for its clubmen, and the Prince of Wales had a very similar meeting at Gussage Corner. He was rather less successful in gaining the support of the locals however; ITTL, the presence of foreign invaders, as well as Blake’s diplomatic skills, are enough to lead to a slightly different outcome.

[EdT]

...and here's a map showing what exactly is happening in Dorset, Hampshire and Somerset.

[mrmandias]

Oh, very good.