"The Bloody Man"
- Thread starter EdT
- Start date
- Status
So the (dramatic) options are somewhere between a push to the sea and self evacuation on the one hand to a roving band of mercenary soldiers running around the countryside fighting for survival, payment, and personal satisfaction perhaps? Either way, shall look forward to see what, if anything, develops from this.
Always good to hear!
I can already see it now, the Frenchman runs home and after declaring that something has gone wrong with the funeral procession simply states "You know what to do" as his child gets his father his favorite club and he begins to barricade.
On a more serious note, it will be interesting to find out (if possible) what the reaction to the fighting in Britain, France, and the Netherlands is in the rest of Europe; we've already been informed that Spain will be interested in what takes place, but are there other areas that will be looking into how things play out, Denmark, the Holy Roman Empire, etc?
wolf_brother
Possibly but I'm not so sure. We know things are stabilising fairly quickly in England, since EdT has basically said that, so there will be a quick victory, but for whom? Given that Hull is holding and the foreign mercenaries are having fiscal problems, plus that the royalists are led by James I
I still have a sneaking feeling that Parliament is going to come out on top. [Although that could be personal bias.] However likely to be socially somewhat more radical than OTL, so could end up with something like the OTL French revolution.With France there might be different winners, and definitely won't be a Louis XIV, but I suspect that the aristocracy will still come out on top. Its more powerful than in Britain and controls the army, unless that develops unrest like England's while radical political change on the continent is more likely to prompt intervention from the neighbours. [This could prompt more radicalisation of course but I suspect is more likely to be supressed rather than ultimately successful, at least at this period].
Steve
PS Of course this excludes the other two options. That both revolutions fail or, possibly most intriguing of all, both succeed. If there are radical Parliamentary regimes in both states just about anything can happen!
wolf_brother
Banned
In regards to the latter that's exactly my point; we too often forget, or ignore, the fact that until the early 20th century Britain was effectively controlled by an oligarchy of the aristocracy/landed gentry, and, after the Industrial Revolution, the merchants. Even by 1850 Britain had a population of some 22 million, but its socioeconomic and sociopolitical spheres were dominated by less than a few hundred aristocratic families, most of whom were largely interconnected through decades or centuries of intermarriage, economic ties, and political alliances, who often about half of all land and capital in the county, while another some thousand or so lower gentry, landed commoners, and wealthy merchants formed a second tier of rule that controlled the vast majority of the rest of the land and wealth. Even after the Reforms Bills of 1832, 1867, 1872, 1883, 1884, and 1885, Britain would hardly be called 'democratic' in the modern sense until 1918, or even 1928.
If OTL is any proof-of-concept, a powerful kingdom which is largely controlled by a balance-of-power between the monarch and aristocracy, with the rising power of the bourgeois co-opted by the latter, allowing the commoners to go about their business unmolested has at least the potential to eventually led to parliamentary democracy.
wolf_brother
Possibly but I'm not so sure. We know things are stabilising fairly quickly in England, since EdT has basically said that, so there will be a quick victory, but for whom? Given that Hull is holding and the foreign mercenaries are having fiscal problems, plus that the royalists are led by James I
With France there might be different winners, and definitely won't be a Louis XIV, but I suspect that the aristocracy will still come out on top. Its more powerful than in Britain and controls the army, unless that develops unrest like England's while radical political change on the continent is more likely to prompt intervention from the neighbours. [This could prompt more radicalisation of course but I suspect is more likely to be supressed rather than ultimately successful, at least at this period].
Steve
PS Of course this excludes the other two options. That both revolutions fail or, possibly most intriguing of all, both succeed. If there are radical Parliamentary regimes in both states just about anything can happen!
If I'm reading wb correctly, he's suggesting England/Britain becomes the home of unstable radical governments, punctuated by royalist restorations that ineffectually try to turn back the clock, while France becomes the home of stable, successful, gradually reforming parlimentary government...
(Which, I know, is a massive simplification of each nation's political history. Just summarizing for effect.)
wolf_brother
I agree that the OTL revolution was very much an incomplete one. As you say, although the power of the monarchy and 'great' aristocracy was constrained it was still considerable and in many ways overwhelming until pretty much modern times. Coupled with the co-opting of many of the later developing industrial leaders its a major factor in Britain's relative decline in the last ~150 years especially. The faces have changed but there is still a substantial residual of privilege and concentrated power.
Steve
I agree that the OTL revolution was very much an incomplete one. As you say, although the power of the monarchy and 'great' aristocracy was constrained it was still considerable and in many ways overwhelming until pretty much modern times. Coupled with the co-opting of many of the later developing industrial leaders its a major factor in Britain's relative decline in the last ~150 years especially. The faces have changed but there is still a substantial residual of privilege and concentrated power.
Steve
Interestingly, this is heading in a dicrection not unlike what LTTW tried to do. Integrate British socio-political developments with the rest of western Europe. Where LTTW had a Jacobin Invasion and then a repressive government that led to a *1848 style revolution, while TBM is looking to make the rest of western Europe have Civil Wars around the same time as the English one.
Maybe I'm fishing but its interesting to make Britain's history look more European rather than some abberation.
Maybe I'm fishing but its interesting to make Britain's history look more European rather than some abberation.
Thande
Donor
Tony Jones' "Puritan World" also did this, in a not dissimilar way to this TL, in fact.
If James I is leading the Royalists, then the Cavaliers win. No debate. No amount of advantages Parliament has can save them from the Royalists having a zombie king.wolf_brother
Given that Hull is holding and the foreign mercenaries are having fiscal problems, plus that the royalists are led by James I
The Presidents have been arrested, but given the flight of the King and Queen-Regent, they’re probably unlikely to remain under lock and key for long. As they’re held in the Bastille, however, a lot will depend on whether the garrison can be relied upon to surrender; OTL, the Frondeurs had a rather lucky break in taking the place.
Ok, now you need to keep Philip VII alive and well. Imagine how a ITTL Palace of Versailles would look like if it was built by him.
Judging by the Chateau de Saint-Cloud, I suspect that it’d be rather less extravagant, and rather more tasteful; indeed, given his interest in improving the Palais Royal IOTL, I suspect that King Philippe wouldn’t move his court away from Paris in the first place. It’d be an interesting reign though; I get the impression that Philippe was as competent as his brother, without the ridiculous ego.
Logically speaking Spain would benefit, but then again, IOTL they were entirely unable to capitalise on the Fronde and when the war ended, in 1659, they had to give territorial concessions. It’s worth remembering that for all that the French were embroiled in a civil war, the Spanish weren’t in much better a state; they had insurrections of their own to deal with in Portugal, Catalonia and Naples, and ITTL still haven’t managed to secure peace with the Dutch. It’s astonishing that the French and the Spanish managed to continue fighting for a decade after Westphalia IOTL; both sides were pretty much in a state of collapse in 1648, let alone 1659.
With all that said, an earlier Fronde (although this Fronde is very different from OTL’s- see below) will have an impact on the course of the war, and vice versa. Condé’s army is going to be tied up fighting the Spanish for the foreseeable future, as the victory at Lens, which effectively ended the Spanish threat to northern France, hasn’t happened yet.
Thanks. It’s nice to write about the continental stuff actually; if the Dutch segments have more than a passing resemblance to how things worked in the Roman Republic, the French side of things is much more “Game of Thrones”, with lots of dynastic squabbling and the like.
He’s just Phillip VII; the French didn’t really go for regnal names much. The Duc d’Orleans, should he become King, would probably have to be an exception though- who wants to see a King Gaston I?
This is an excellent question. IOTL, the Lords Seventeen were almost entirely drawn from the same pool of higher-level oligarchs from where opposition to the Stadtholder emerged. This would imply at first glance that the VOC would align towards the regents, simply because in many case they’re one and the same. However, smaller and medium-level investors, and the majority of VOC captains themselves, were apparently Orangists, so it’s something of a question as to whether any orders given out will be obeyed. Add this to William’s vocal support for colonial ventures, and his tendency to go for naked populism, and the situation suddenly becomes more complicated. Smaller partners in the VOC never actually saw much in the way of return; the Stadtholder could strike a real nerve with the middle classes if does a spot of banker-bashing…
As a result of all of this, I suspect that for the most part, VOC ships will continue to dock in their usual home destinations, and the side which will benefit will depend on where they’ve arrived and the sympathies of their captains.
On your final point, I wouldn’t necessarily read that into what I’ve written so far; if William’s being described as the “Stadtholder King”, it’s worth remembering that so was William III and he never wore a Dutch Crown…
The Fronde is a fascinating and confusing thing, and far less clear-cut than the English Civil War, although there are some interesting parallels. I don’t think your assessment of the outcome of the Fronde is quite accurate, however; it severely undermined the parlements and the feudal nobility and bolstered central Government in the person of the King, rather than cementing it.
It’s worth examining, I think, how TTL’s Fronde is different from OTL’s. IOTL, you had two Frondes, the first led by the Parlements and centred around Paris, the second far more diffuse and aristocratic. ITTL, at least at the beginning, things are rather different; on one side we have the Queen Regent and Mazarin, and on the other we have Gaston and Condé, with the support of the Parlements.
The cause of the squabble is also rather different from OTL, being at root an aristocratic fight over the composition of the Regency, rather than the parlements demanding various constitutional ‘reforms’ (more accurately, the reversal of the recent trend towards absolutism). This is significant, as for all that Gaston is using the parlement of Paris as a tool to further his own goals and will promise them all sorts of things in return for their help, he does not share the parlement’s agenda and can’t necessarily control them.
On your point regarding the estates-general, I suspect that should the Frondeurs win out, we’d see a convocation of the thing to ratify the new regency arrangements, plus anything else that the Parlements have managed to extract as a concession. It seems an obvious demonstration of the sort of old-fashioned Government a lot of the Frondeurs were after.
Finally, It’s worth stressing the point again that “Parlementary Government” in the French context doesn’t mean what it would in the English context. Whatever else happens, it’s probably very unlikely that the Estates-General would meet and function as the English Houses of Parliament did, assuming there’s no Absolutist trend in France. More likely is a weird sort of informal federalism with the various Provincial Parlements doing a lot of the governing and having bilateral relationships with the King at the centre.
Pretty much, and the less-dramatic options range from somebody actually stumping up the cash to the various mercenaries gradually slipping away one by one to seek employment elsewhere. Of course, we’re not limited to only one of these things happening!
The Danes and Swedes will be particularly interested in the Dutch situation, given the Republic’s interests in the Baltic; mind you, with the Thirty Years’ War still in the process of winding down, it may be a little while before anyone in central and northern Europe can afford to take too close an interest in events there.
This, of course, is precisely why Parliament maintains the post of Witchfinder General!
Thande
Donor
Zombie Witch King James I would be rather ironic seeing as he was the one who stoked up a lot of the witch-hunt furore due to his paranoia and wrote a book on the subject...
(I dare you to put this in the TL, perhaps as one of a set of wild rumours about ThereauJohn's Salvation Army)
At its own time, the level of detail in this TL suggests really intensive research into a complicated era for the entirety of Europe
A bit slowly at present sadly! I haven't been at home much the last few weeks- been criss-crossing the country thanks to work- so I haven’t really had much opportunity to sit down and write. Should hopefully be doing a bit over the weekend though, so with luck there will be a new part to publish soon.
That’s the other problem! I do end up doing ridiculous amounts of research as I am quite anal about these things- and while this is all to the good, it does slow down the writing process.
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. 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? And secondly, I saw that all of the fake citations are never any more recent than 1950. Any particular reason for this? And lastly, keep up the great work! I hope that you'll find time to update in the relatively near future.
- Status