Fear Nothing But God: A Graphical History

[Major Crimson]

​

What is this?

For a few months now I've been finally developing an idea that's been ruminating for years. It started from a simple observation; the United States and the American Revolution are, to be controvertial, really rather British in character. Despite the modern understanding of Britain as a heartland of Monarchy, Britain was an early breeding ground for democratic and republican philosophy. Somehow, we just never got around to putting it into practice.

But what would a British republic look like? Not a modern, Blairite republic like in President Ashdowne is Retiring or an expy for mainland European republics. What would a democratic, republican Commonwealth look like? Maybe it would look like this.


What's the PoD?

Inthe later years of the 17th century, England was wracked with tension over the succession crisis, Parliament was spooked by the Prince of Wales' open Catholicism and saw the future King James II as a potential papist tyrant straight out of their most feverish nightmares. The Rye House Plot of OTL was a relatively disastrous attempt to assassinate him that boosted James' popularity and saw many of Britain's leading Whig and anti-Stuart politicians arrested, killed or driven into exile. Here, the plot never went ahead; James remained unpopular and the Whigs remained free. When James does come to the throne, his illegitimate brother the Duke of Monmouth raises an army to remove him as he did in OTL. This time however; Monmouth is fighting against a hated and feared King and is backed by a vibrant and popular anti-Stuart alliance. Their combined forces rise in the Great Albionic Revolution and the rest, to be very cliched, is history.

Why a graphics TL?

Many of the most well developed worlds on this site run in this format; I'm obviously taking inspiration (see: stealing ideas) from Our Fair Country and Hail Britannia amongst others. However I think there's room to diverge. Most graphics TLs hug tightly to OTL - real life political figures play a key role, butterfly nets are applied and we tend to see some very familiar things. German Empires, Soviet Unions, Republics of China and the like. Fear Nothing But God is going to try and break that mold and give every region, every country a distinct and divergent history from OTL.

Is it going to focus on Britain exclusively?

No! A key idea I've been working on is that the whole world deserves attention, not just the Anglophone North-Western quadrant. Whilst the PoD as well as my personal historical knowledge mean that we'll start in Britain, slowly we'll work our way out until everything from Mejico to Huaxia is fleshed out.

--
​

If you do have any questions, any suggested revisions, any comments or thoughts, please do let me know! I'd love to get a discussion going and once I've laid some of the ground works, exploring topics that most interest readers is going to be a key way I plan out my work.

So enjoy what I've got! I'll be updating at least weekly and I hope you like what you see!

 

[Major Crimson]

Fear Nothing But God
Part One: The Great Revolution​

The national character of any people is hard, if not impossible, to sum up in a few short words. Where nations make attempts at this in their national mottos, we often find little bar waffle and pretension. For the men and women of Albion, however, it is in those brief four words that we find the truth of their spirit: “Fear Nothing But God”. A great many Continental and Occidental histories of the Albionic Peoples have been put together, many amounting to little more than propaganda and political smears. Within the Sorority, more astute and fair histories have been told but within our own borders it has been many generations since a complete history of the Commonwealth has been told. This one, it is hoped, will chart the history of our people from Monmouth to Mitford and illuminate their lives.

Despite popular opinion, the revolution was not, from the start, a popular one. General Scott, though now a national hero, was at the start of his rebellion angling to usurp the throne rather than to dismantle its power. Though the diffuse of the Rye House Plans[0] in 1682 had allowed him to evade government suspicion, General Scott (then and sometimes still known as the Duke of Monmouth), travelled to meet his fellow revolutionary leader the Earl of Argyle in Amsterdam in early 1684 where both men assembled a great many arms and small armies of ideological allies, veterans and mercenaries which they would use to form the core of primarily militia forces once to be recruited after their landing in Britain[1]. Scott, a bastard son of Charles II, was originally put forward as a potential new and protestant King and it is to this cause which he dedicated himself until his death. The banner he raised when he landed in England was not a Royalist one however, nor a personal or national sigil. It was a plain green flag (the colour of Levellism and of the reformist Green Ribbon Club) that bore 4 simple words in bright gold; Fear Nothing But God. The phrase would outlive its creator, becoming a motto of the Revolution and the nation long after James Scott was dead.

From the date of his landing in England, Scott met with considerable military success. A victory at the Battle of Bridgewater against over-confident Stuart Generals sent shock-waves through Stuart society and, foolishly trying to disband the Parliament he had called in the Royalist City of Oxford just a year prior, King James II was rebuffed and retreated to London. The Oxford Parliament recognised the threat to them posed by the now all but openly catholic King James and declared him illegitimate. The "Oxford Declaration" bound together Whigish and Radical Parliamentarians to General Scott's Rising, an alliance that would continue with some tension until his death at the Battle of Chiltern Hills. Despite losing their general, the Parliamentarian and Revolutionary Armies were victorious and crushed their foes under the command of the ageing but respected Brigadier Algernon Sidney who would go on to become the primary commander of Revolutionary forces until the War's completion.

​

It was supposed by many that the Revolution in the South-West and Argyle's invasion of Western Scotland would be the start of another decades long civil conflict as had occurred in the First Revolution but this was not to be. Charles, through cowardice or miscalculation, fled the country after his defeat at Chiltern Hills and though fighting would continue in Virginia and Ireland until late 1686, his self-exile to Paris all but killed the Stuart cause[2]. Entering London with the revolutionary forces now firmly united behind General Sydney and his chief political ally John Locke, there was a brief debate about finding a new King though before long it became clear that, with two arexists at the helm of the state, the only palatable English candidate dead and mistrust in Parliament of the Netherlander claimant William of Orange[3], a return to a Commonwealth was the only possible outcome and the "Act establishing a Commonwealth" was passed on November 19th, abolishing the English, Irish and Scottish thrones forever. Locke wrote the vast majority of the new Instrument of Government, a constitution with a controversial name but one considerably more liberal than its predecessor. Integrating parts of previous proposed constitutions; the compromise "Heads of Proposals", the more radical "Agreement of the People"[4] and some of Locke's own writings, it made clear the need for regular and democratic elections, the division of power between an elective, term limited Lord President and a powerful, unicameral Parliament. The Instrument was accepted overwhelmingly in the new and revolutionary parliament and though it has seen much revision over the years, particularly during the major restructuring of the Arrovian Reforms, it remains the basis of Albionic government up to this day. Several of the first reforms made by the new government were shocking even a hundred years later, such as the mass expansion of the franchise to all men of property and the abolition of...

[0] This is the PoD, no Rye House Plot means no opportunity for a Royalist crackdown and no public outpouring of sympathy for the monarchy, meaning Monmouth gets more public support and Parliamentary tensions boil over two or three years earlier than OTL.
[1] Under less suspicion at home, Monmouth has more funds and more men ready to come to his side, allowing his rebellion to get off the ground. Also means Sydney (and others) are not executed.
[2] As in the Glorious Revolution of OTL.
[3] This is an exaggeration, most of Parliament would have actually prefered William over a republic but Sydney is almost as powerful as Cromwell was previously (whilst not being such a megalomaniac/terrible person) and Locke has gained a reputation as the political father of the revolution and, with both advocating a republic, it is too difficult for parliament to oppose.
[4] OTL leveller proposals that impacted the US constitution but were considered too radical for 1646. Here they are accepted almost wholesale, in part due to Locke's own liberalism and in part due to a want to avoid the mistakes of the first Commonwealth and Protectorate.

​

 

[Major Crimson]

Fear Nothing But God
Part Two: The Irish Revolutionary War and Founding Fathers of the Commonwealth​

The Revolution in England was complete after two victories against stuart forces during the March to London, but had truthfully only secured one of the Three Kingdoms. The situation in Scotland was tense and though many Highland clans and ex-Covenanters had fallen in behind Argyll's Rising, enough Stuartists and cautious moderates existed north of the border that it was unclear whether Scotland would welcome the revolution or war upon it. With the Scottish Parliament too poorly led to coordinate a proper response, a Covention of Estates[1] was called to decide on the position of Scotland. The Convention decided to accept the Revolution and to agree to the founding of a commonwealth, contingent on a series of demands; the autonomy of the Church of Scotland along Presbytarian lines, the continued existence of the Scottish Parliament and continued rights over tax within scotland, criminal law and a few other issues, and -. The terms were controvertial in England where recently elected Lord President Sydney was under significant pressure from some Whigs and more extremist pro-Anglicans in Parliament to deny these religious concessions and establish the Church of England as dominant in all the British Isles. Sydney, however, was a believer in religious toleration (at least for protestants) and agreed. He was backed in this by Argyll, de facto leader of the Parliamentarians in Scotland and from this point on there was no questioning of Scotland's new freedoms and position in the Commonwealth.

In truth though, the main area of concern for the new government came not in Scotland but in Ireland. King James, fleeing London for Paris, found a surprisingly chilly reception in France. Instead of open arms and sympathy, the French mainly responded with frustration; they had assumed James was on the path to the establishment of a friendly England and were considerably more worried about the threats posed by Austria and the Netherlands than any chaos up north. James did, however, retain the support of the Irish Parliament and, on Christmas Eve 1685, sailed to Cork.

The Irish Parliament had already denounced the Revolution over in what was now being called the Commonwealth of Albion, and pledged their loyalty to James. The Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, the Earl of Tyrconnell, had organised the Irish Parliament behind a "Royal Irish Army" and had been fighting pro-Commonwealth rebels since the summer of 1685. Until the arrival of James, the "Irish Revolutionary Army" had ironically actually had little luck against Tyrconnell's forces. It was the arrival of James which scared the new government in London enough to dispatch the new Lord President Sydney with the remainder of his Parliamentary Army to Ireland to support the primarily protestant Revolutionary Irish. King James caused further issues as he and Tyrconnel clashed repeatedly over the future of Ireland. The Lord Lieutenant and indeed the Palriament as a whole was in favour of increased autonomy and parliamentary power whilst James, adamant to maintain the power he had, refused. He imagined that when restored to power he would rule the three kingdoms as a united entity and would increase, rather than moderate, the power of the central royal government in London. Under significant pressure, James was able to agree to some reforms but made a fatal mistake in refusing to fully repeal the Act of Settlement, which had given Protestants in Ireland considerable lands and powers. This would sour his reputation with the Irish Parliament significantly.

Meanwhile, Sydney's strategy in Ireland relied on a surprising amount of toleration. He made it clear that he was not fighting a religious war but a political one; they were against a corrupt Catholic King, not against a Catholic People. The Lord President was well aware of the utter horror evoked by the memory of Cromwell and felt that Ireland and Albion would never be at peace if he was not able to dispell the inevitable comparisons to the dreaded Lord Protector. This was not the only astute observation the President-General had made however, and Sydney moved to exploit the three-way divide in Irish society. Whilst many, then and now, viewed the division in the nation as a simple gap between Protestant Settlers and Catholic Natives, the catholic camp was in fact deeply divided itself. Much of the Parliament of Ireland and many of King James' most ardent supporters were not truly native Irish at all but "Hiberno-Normans" or "Old English", Catholic nobility of English and Norman descent who had ruled much of Ireland since the 11th century. Sydney, aware of this, had pro-Commonwealth literature printed which appealed to much of the truly native population, painting King James and his "cabal of Old English Lords" as preventing the restoration of the rights of Catholics and Protestants alike. This was arguably true and over time proved effective. Whilst the Irish Revolutionary would primarily consist of Protestant officers throughout its existence, by the end of the conflict just under half of their soldiers were catholics. [2]

A series of indecisive Battles across the country frustrated commanders on both sides and though a small catholic victory at the Battle of the Boyne seemed to threaten victory for the Stuartists, Sydney's rapid advance down the eastern coast culminated in the Battle of Navan, which resulted in a convincing victory for the Commonwealth and Revolutionary forces. Frustrated with James' mismanagement of the war, instrasigence on Settlement and refusal to grant autonomy, Tyrconnell opened secret talks with Sydney in the June of 1686. The Albionic Lord President was surprised by these overtures but was happy to negotiate a conclusion to the conflict. Tyrconnell offered what appeared to be total victory; the Irish Parliament would denounce King James, acknowledge the authority of the Parliament in London and join the Commonwealth. His demands were sweeping however; inspired by what he had seen in Scotland, he asked for freedom of Catholic worship, the continued existence of the Irish Parliament as a devolved authority, an autonomous Irish Army and a pardon for all members of the Irish Parliament. Sydney was put under significant pressure to refuse; the General of the Irish Revolutionary Army, Arthur Rawdon, was outraged by the idea of catholic toleration and accurately pointed out that a significant number in London would be equally disgusted with the suggestion. What, Rawdon argued, was the revolution fought against if not Catholicism? Sydney's reply was simple, it was fought against Catholic Absolutism, in defence of Christian toleration and Parliamentary sovreignty. Rawdon and many Protestant Irish continued to object to this "surrender" but Sydney's authority remained strong and their protestations came to nothing. In late June 1686, both Sydney and Tyrconnell publically declared their agreement and announced that peace would soon be achieved in Ireland. [3]

The Parliament of Ireland passed the Act of Nullification and Religious Liberties in late July 1686 and James, again, fled to Paris. The Commonwealth Parliament narrowly passed the Ireland Act a month later and thus the war in Ireland was ended. The Kingdom of Ireland would become the Captaincy of Eire and no distinction both Catholic and Protestant payer and practice would be fully allowed on the isle (though discrimination continued in England and Scotland). Sydney travelled to the Irish Parliament with a small contingent of guardsmen, and personally bore no arms or armour. He met Tyrconnell outside the Parlimanet building and bowed to him before publically declarating; "Now and forever, Eire shall have no sovreign but her people and her parliament." The move again outraged many English and Protestant Irish in his entourage but went some way to relieving the tensions that continued to plague Ireland.

Peace was achieved throughout the British isles and with a federal or, as it was known, "Fraternal" model of devolution and regional religious autonomy established, the Fraternal Commonwealth of Albion and Eire was officially declared in August 1686. Peace had come to the British Isles, though tension now brewed in London between nostalgic[4] Politicians who were dismayed at the inability of the revolution to establish Anglican supremacy and progressives who revelled in the new toleration and freedom of worship that had been achieved.

On the other side of the Atlantic, the third and final theatre of the Revolution was also coming to a close...

​

The Founding Fathers of the Fraternal Commonwealth are a group of influential figures marked out for their unique role in the founding of the Commonwealth and the Revolution. Debate over who to include and who not to continued for many years, with Academics from different Captaincies arguing for the inclusion or exclusion of certain figures and with some appearing incosistently on some lists and not on others. In the mid-20th century however, the Commonwealth government moved to compile an official list of "Founding Fathers". Researchers from the four Universariums and dozens of individual universities across the FC worked on the project, with the final members voted on in Parliament. When the list was compiled, there remained controversy about the exclusion of certain individuals such as Grey of Warke, a controvertial revolutionary general and alleged traitor, and the inclusion of others, such as Richard Talbot, who had intially and virulently opposed the revolution. Whatever the case, most scholars accepted the official designation and it is generally taken as a fact that there are 12 or 13 core founding fathers; 5 English, 3 Scottish, 2 Irish and 2 American. The inclusion of Elizabeth Guant, author and women's rights advocate, was hotly debated and decried by some backbencher Alliance MPs as "an arbitrary inclusion" due to her lack of role in the actual founding of the state or the passage of the constitution. Nevertheless, she is included in the official list.

Founders are generally divided into 4 factional catagories; Monmouthites, who supported General Scott's claim to the English throne, Levellers who wished to establish a democratic Commonwealth and followed the teachings of the Levellers of the 1650s, Whigs who wished to increase the power of parliament but were more moderate than Levellers and split on the issue of a Commonwealth, and the Kirkers, Scots who wished to restore the independence and Presbytarian nature of the Church of Scotland. Smaller factions are sometimes identified, such as the Diggers (though this group would truly not form until the lead-up to the first Parliamentary election) and the Quakers, who whilst a small religious sect at the time, formed a distinct political grouping as well.

[1] A Convention was called during the Glorious Revolution of OTL and decided to support William of Orange. This is effectively the same thing happening.
[2] The OTL Williamite Army had a small but notable catholic contingent and William was far less tolerant of Catholics than Sydney. Thus, with explicit catholic toleration, Sydney wins a surprising high level of catholic support.
[3] This agreement might seem surprising but it does make sense for both sides. The Commonwealth Army is better trained, armed and led, their victory is effectively assured and changing sides is the only way the Irish Parliament can continue to exist and protect Catholic rights. Meanwhile, whilst the Commonwealth can win the war, Sydney fears a gruelling guerilla war or rising which he will be less able to subdue.
[4] ITTL Nostalgic means conservative, as the term was not coined until the 18th century OTL.

 

[TheKutKu]

I’ve already said it, but this timeline really gave me a phenomenal first impression, i’m Happy you’re going to explore it in depth with your excellent storytelling skills that you’ve shown in your previous TLs. It’s also, as you said, really the first AH graphic timeline (in the continuity of hail Brittania’s) that is actually significantly divergent which is very refreshing (not that a convergent timeline is bad, but it’s weird when a 17th century POD timeline still has the Soviet Union....)

 

[Osk]

Beautiful set up, can't wait to see more!

 

[Planita13]

Wow this is hot. Very interesting! I've noticed a bit of a narrative going on. Will this continue into the future?

 

[FleetMac]

This is awesome; a really neat glimpse at a TL where some philosophical roots of the OTL American Revolution take seed in the Isles first. Consider me, a supporter of "Hail Britannia" and the like, a subscriber!

PS: Can't wait to see what awaits the Colonies, naturally.

 

[PolishMagnet]

Watched!

Can we get more insight into religious matters? What is "Old Anglican" and how does it differ / where did it split from the mainstream Anglican Church?

 

[Major Crimson]

I’ve already said it, but this timeline really gave me a phenomenal first impression, i’m Happy you’re going to explore it in depth with your excellent storytelling skills that you’ve shown in your previous TLs. It’s also, as you said, really the first AH graphic timeline (in the continuity of hail Brittania’s) that is actually significantly divergent which is very refreshing (not that a convergent timeline is bad, but it’s weird when a 17th century POD timeline still has the Soviet Union....)

Glad to have you on board! Thanks so much and I hope you enjoy what we've got to come!

Beautiful set up, can't wait to see more!

Thanks kindly! Updates coming shortly.

Wow this is hot. Very interesting! I've noticed a bit of a narrative going on. Will this continue into the future?

Yep, well I've got to really ground it in the present day first but there's actually a vague plan for the next few years of the "plot" with an eventual ending already planned out.

This is awesome; a really neat glimpse at a TL where some philosophical roots of the OTL American Revolution take seed in the Isles first. Consider me, a supporter of "Hail Britannia" and the like, a subscriber!

PS: Can't wait to see what awaits the Colonies, naturally.

Thanks so much! Colonies are coming next as the Revolution in America and then the status of the North American colonies in the 21st century is revealed.

Watched!

Can we get more insight into religious matters? What is "Old Anglican" and how does it differ / where did it split from the mainstream Anglican Church?

Brilliant! Once I've finished reposting the stuff I've got up on the site already and done the colonies, I'll do a religious breakdown of the FC and explain all the weird terms.

 

[Major Crimson]

​

Political Map of the World, 2019​

Note: A few errors persist and a few changes need to be made but this is the broad setup. ​

 

[FleetMac]

Looks good @Major Crimson though I have to ask; Port Niger is listed as "U.C." territory. Was that supposed to read "F.C.", or is that another polity somewhere else on the map? I know it's a work in progress, but for some reason that really sticks out at least to me.

 

[Višeslav]

What happened to India TTL? Did it get colonized, if so by who/who got what? Actually, what happened with colonialism in general later on (in Africa and Asia)?

 

[Tethys00]

does anyone claim the Sahara, Amazon, and Australian interior or did everyone agree to leave it be?

 

[AstroRangerBeans]

How did the Nayanu (OTL Vietnam) grab a big chunk of Luzon and other Philippine Islands? Is there any reason or cause that have changed the islands history?

 

[Major Crimson]

Looks good @Major Crimson though I have to ask; Port Niger is listed as "U.C." territory. Was that supposed to read "F.C.", or is that another polity somewhere else on the map? I know it's a work in progress, but for some reason that really sticks out at least to me.

Woops that's a typo! In the early stages I was deciding between "United Commonwealth" and "Fraternal Commonwealth". I'll correct that shortly.

What happened to India TTL? Did it get colonized, if so by who/who got what? Actually, what happened with colonialism in general later on (in Africa and Asia)?

Colonialism in general ITTL never evolved outside of its 17th century form. Whilst places like Australia and America were subject to a similar settler colonialism as OTL, various factors meant proper imperialism and European expansion into Asia and Africa did not occur. Rather, Western powers continued to buy, conquer or found "Treaty Ports" or "Factories"; costal cities which allow European powers to buy and sell. Instead of direct annexation the Empires worked through coercing local leaders and relied on native resource extraction. Direct annexation of territory has happened but is generally considered gauche and expensive.

India saw a stronger Mughal Empire hold back the European powers, though they were forced to cede factories along the coast, which meant that no major western power ever carved out significant Indian Territory.

I'll go into more depth in all this in the future, maybe through a wiki page talking about imperialism.

does anyone claim the Sahara, Amazon, and Australian interior or did everyone agree to leave it be?

They were claimed and explored heavily pre-1900 but the "World Forum" negotiated a series of treaties with the local states states to bring these territories under loose international governance. Mostly in exchange for the forgiveness of debts, tariff relief or other such incentives. These days the Nondominions are half way between a nature reserve and a no-go zone. You can visit but never for more than a few weeks unless you have an academic permit and no corporate activity is permitted. Again, something I'll elaborate on in the future!

How did the Nayanu (OTL Vietnam) grab a big chunk of Luzon and other Philippine Islands? Is there any reason or cause that have changed the islands history?

Nayanu were the main beneficiary from the Chinese collapse of the late 19th century and had heavily modernised, the closest thing there is to a Meiji Japan ITTL.

Spanish control of the Philippines suffered heavily when the Spanish empire collapsed in the mid-19th century and other Empires swooped in. Most heavily this was the then-expansionist Chinese. This was fine and dandy until the Chinese Empire stumbled and fell a few decades later, allowing the Vietnamese rise. As ever, I'll do a box and a breakdown on the Empire soon!

 

[Tethys00]

Also, why is are the Navajo in Oklahoma?

 

[Major Crimson]

This is actually the first thing I made and uploaded set in the FNBG-verse, its slightly outdated with references to the "United Commonwealth" so it needs a little amending but I'm still really happy with it. It gives a breakdown of modern TTL politics and a little backstory on the post-revolution world. ​

 

[Planita13]

A unique take on political positions. I like it!

 

[Lazer_Pages]

Can I ask what’s going on with Rumelia and Anadolu?

 

[Used-to-be Song Chinese]

Political Map of the World, 2019
Note: A few errors persist and a few changes need to be made but this is the broad setup.​

​

Lovely map, but may I suggest one more change you can make for this map? The name "Manjutudi", which I understand as the literal translation of the phrase "Manchurians' Land", actually sounds off in written Chinese, it would be better to reuse "Manchukuo" as taken during the period of Japanese overlordship IOTL, or probably not using Chinese at all and use the Manchurian words "Manchu Gurun".