I love all of these <3 I’m glad to have helped with what little I could, although I do see some changes ;) Most notably that Anna ended with Friedrich after all hahah
Thank you so much, King of Danes! You really provided me with some tremendous feedback and support. I went back and forth with Anne/Anna and where she ultimately ended up... but I ultimately liked the idea of Friedrich the best, especially given his checkered history IOTL: Catholic/Imperial supporter, briefly Protestant and a supporter of the Princely League before turning coat back to the Imperial and Catholic side. Perhaps a truly Protestant wife (with no imperial connections) who's given him a long sought after son (after many years of barrenness) might cause him to change his tune.

Obviously we discussed some other ideas... one will work well as a Vignette, I think. The other big idea we discussed can/will definitely be incorporated into a chapter proper when we revisit France... but perhaps a vignette down the line, too. 😉

Also, I love your Jane. A perfect mix of classical wife and cunning achiever!
Yes, I thought it was quite interesting! I feel like even today, modern histography does Jane Seymour a poor service. She was queen but briefly... and more well remembered for the fact she gave Henry VIII a son versus her own short life. Her motto as queen was to obey and serve. Even still, she attempted to use her influence to spare those involved in the Pilgrimage of Grace, until Henry VIII essentially told her to shut it by reminding her what happened to her predecessor. She didn't meddle thereafter.

I like to imagine in Anno she has found a rather kindred spirit in William Paget: a man who recognizes and cherishes her strengths, and who sees his wife as his foil and confidant. His future is their future, and Jane as Mistress Paget is prepared to do whatever she can to support her husband. Perhaps now she hosts dinner to the Queen's Clerk and other minor men of the royal house, but who is to say that she may not be one day soon hosting members of the Privy Council?

The irony that Blubber King Wifechop is remembered as some lost saint king here 💀 He’ll be remembered as another King Arthur. Honestly, that’s one of the best parts of this tl. No Henry to give anyone the ick
I think that's one of the funnier things about this TL, in that Henry VIII will be remembered totally differently. As you said, he's already beginning to be idolized as a Renaissance King Arthur, and even some twenty years after his death, little grocer boys are telling stories that will someday be national legends: a king asleep in the mountain legend around Henry VIII, who will return to save the kingdom/nation when it's in peril. Not unlike the legends in Germany surrounding Friedrich Barbarossa or the last Byzantine Emperor, Constantine XI Palaiologos. Or to speak more recent to this time period, the legends that would eventually surround King Sebastian of Portugal as a Portuguese patriot and slumbering king.

I felt it somewhat poignant how these OTL women who were connected to Henry's life might feel when they gaze upon his portrait IATL. They have completely different lives IATL, and most (sans Catherine of Aragon) never even met him. but I cannot help but wonder if any of these women (Catherine of Aragon, Anne Boleyn, Jane Seymour, Anne of Cleves, Catherine Howard, Catherine Parr) who manage to look upon his portrait in Anno might perhaps feel a tug or twinge... a feeling that makes little sense, but fades as quickly as it goes. A tug towards our reality.

I can only imagine Anne Boleyn at the French court, gazing upon his portrait and feeling unsettled... pins and needles running across the back of her neck for just a moment.

Or the adoring Catherine of Aragon, who IATL never endured the miseries of her OTL counterpart, perhaps looking upon the visage of her one true love and king... feeling an ache in heart, if only for a moment as she wonders: If only we had been able to grow old together, what might have unfolded... how many sons and daughters I might have given you? With us, of course, knowing the true outcome of that tragedy.

I do hope you’ll continue with these! I’ll always be ready to help 🥳
I am definitely prepared too! I hope you can continue to give me some great ideas and feedback.

It's the way he sired a glorious queen ITTL and OTL
Indeed, that is very true and worth mentioning! Of Henry VIII's OTL children, obviously the most famous and recognized is Elizabeth. She had a long and successful reign. Edward and Mary were sovereigns and preceded her, but each reigned for such short periods that their reigns were really nothing more than transitions from the era of Henry VIII to Elizabeth I. Tudor histography tends to focus primarily on Henry VIII (and to an extent, his father Henry VII as the founder) and Elizabeth. There has been more focus in the last few years on Edward and even Mary (with a lot of focus on her role as England's first true queen regnant, and how shaped the role for Elizabeth).

IATL, Henry VIII's reign spanned only four years. He died at twenty-two, and his council at the time of Thérouanne was still primarily staffed with Henry VII's trusted councilors. Tudor histography IATL will likely focus on Henry VII as the founder of the dynasty and his restoration of England post the War of the Roses... but Henry VIII's reign will likely be seen as the transitional period leading into his daughters. ATL Henry VIII didn't live long enough to do anything: he wed Catherine, executed two of his father's unpopular ministers, and executed Edmund de la Pole. By June of 1513, he was dead and Catherine gave birth to Mary in December. There's not much to explore there, beyond the bridge from Henry VII to Queen Mary.

Queen Mary's reign will be highly researched (likely divided into two distinctive 'eras'... Mary's youth and Catherine's regency from 1513-31; and her personal rule from 1531 onward). People IOTL tend to think of Henry VIII or Elizabeth when we talk about the Tudors... in ATL, Mary will be the one who people think of. She takes the place of Mary and Elizabeth from IOTL, all rolled into one: she is England's first queen regnant, and will be considered one of England's greatest queens period. Succeeding to the crown upon her birth means she will have a very lengthy reign that will span a great portion of the 16th century.

I really liked the vignettes. Bessie and Jane are really having a much better life than in OTL.
Thank you so much, Victoria. I know when I started Anno, the plan was to give Catherine (and by extension, Mary) totally different lives from ATL. When Mary and Anne Boleyn went off into France, I of course occasionally thought of Henry VIII and how his other mistresses and wives might end up IATL. I enjoy that this is a TL where Catherine, Mary and Anne have all come out ahead compared to their OTL fates, so I suppose I also want to give the other women who were in his life different fates as well.

Anne of Cleves was a particularly nice one of these, though I also loved Bessie's! Yes please where more is concerned!
Thank you, FalconHonour! Hers was particularly fun to write. I already had an idea in mind she was going to get married, because her brother was likely to use her as a marital pawn regardless, and I knew I wanted her to have a child IATL. It just... took some time to whittle down the marital choices. 😅 I had long settled on the Palatinate Wittelbachs, but it was a bit of discussion of who... there was Friedrich II of course (IOTL he married Christina of Denmark), but I also pondered Otto Heinrich, his eventual heir, and briefly considered Friedrich III, presently the Count Palatine of Simmern. I didn't really like the Otto Heinrich idea, and Simmern is presently too far away from the succession to nab Anne as a wife, and I didn't feel like cleaving through 3-4 people to move him up higher. Friedrich II was the eventual choice that came to mind, since he's the current Elector and I'd taken his OTL wife away. His advanced age also means the possibility of an underage elector and perhaps Anne of Cleves being ending up regent.
 
Last edited:
Where the Vignettes are concerned - perhaps you'll consider:
Catherine Willoughby
Kitty Howard
Kate Parr
Christina of Denmark
Edward Seymour
Edward Stafford, Duke of Buckingham
Meg Douglas
Tom Seymour
Robert Dudley
Bess Throckmorton

I have literally just reeled off a list of people I either have a soft spot for or who I think could be interesting in ATL. If they either don't exist, have already been dealt with, or would be spoilers, feel free to ignore me!!
 
Executed after rebelling against Queen Mary for the throne. His son and heir is currently attempting to get back in the good graces of Mary and John. We might see him as Viscount Stafford some day?

Doesn’t exist ttl since Margaret had an affair with Albany instead of the disastrous Angus marriage
Damn, I should have expected the Stafford to do something stupid. They never learn!

And good point about Meg Douglas, I wasn't convinced she existed, but I couldn't quite remember!
 
Where the Vignettes are concerned - perhaps you'll consider:
Catherine Willoughby
Kitty Howard
Kate Parr
Christina of Denmark
Edward Seymour
Edward Stafford, Duke of Buckingham
Meg Douglas
Tom Seymour
Robert Dudley
Bess Throckmorton

I have literally just reeled off a list of people I either have a soft spot for or who I think could be interesting in ATL. If they either don't exist, have already been dealt with, or would be spoilers, feel free to ignore me!!
I definitely like some of these ideas! I will keep them in mind. I will say Catherine Parr is for sure in. Most of Henry’s OTL wives will be seen in some capacity.

Catherine Howard… it’s not a no, but it’s also not a yes. I actually have some plans for her that will end up figuring into a chapter proper. I do think at some point she could have one, but it will be when she’s a bit older and a mother of her own.

As for Buckingham, he mucked it up in the 1520s and got his head chopped off—but there is his son as King of Danes mentioned!

As for the Dudley’s — I haven’t quite decided on his father’s career trajectory. He likely still wed his OTL wife, since he was fostered by Guildford.
 
Here’s a quick question- given that the arrangement over the church in England means that the crown can levy taxes from ecclesiastical lands if approved by the convocations of York and Canterbury, and that the church owned 25% of land in England, could Mary end up promoting further enlargement of church lands so that if parliament ever refuses a tax she can try one of the clerical alternatives?

Especially as the situation in Ireland develops, perhaps allowing a decent chunk of the land taken from Irish chiefs to fall into the hands of the church might not be seen as a bad way of going about things, especially given that Ireland is still technically a papal fief.

The non dissolution of the monasteries also excites me as there’s a decent chance old English stuff that we’ll never know about made it atl, and old English might end up with a stronger place in the national identity in the 19th century and onwards.

As an aside- I’m going through some of these old chapters, I realise I kinda liked the pictures that were “a boy believed to be prince so and so”. I realise AI is tempting, especially for adults where the portraits that we have are very clearly of real people and so can’t be repurposed for atl figures, but maybe we could get an actual painting or sketch every now and then for the children.
 
Here’s a quick question- given that the arrangement over the church in England means that the crown can levy taxes from ecclesiastical lands if approved by the convocations of York and Canterbury, and that the church owned 25% of land in England, could Mary end up promoting further enlargement of church lands so that if parliament ever refuses a tax she can try one of the clerical alternatives?

Especially as the situation in Ireland develops, perhaps allowing a decent chunk of the land taken from Irish chiefs to fall into the hands of the church might not be seen as a bad way of going about things, especially given that Ireland is still technically a papal fief.

The non dissolution of the monasteries also excites me as there’s a decent chance old English stuff that we’ll never know about made it atl, and old English might end up with a stronger place in the national identity in the 19th century and onwards.

As an aside- I’m going through some of these old chapters, I realise I kinda liked the pictures that were “a boy believed to be prince so and so”. I realise AI is tempting, especially for adults where the portraits that we have are very clearly of real people and so can’t be repurposed for atl figures, but maybe we could get an actual painting or sketch every now and then for the children.
It is most definitely an interesting idea to consider, and very likely.

The OTL dissolution absolutely neutered church landownership and it's power within the realm. Afterwards, the Anglican Church (at least in Tudor times) functioned as an offshoot of royal power. Before the dissolution, the House of Lords was actually dominated by the Lords Spiritual; the Archbishops and Bishops had seats, as well as the Abbots of various monasteries. They outnumbered the Lords Temporal until after the dissolution. This means that IATL the Lords Spiritual will continue to dominate the lords, and they will absolutely see the benefit in more land going into church hands. Combine that with Catherine and Mary's relative miserliness with patents of nobility (Catherine made very few grants, while Mary has a lot of Elizabeth's OTL pickiness; she's likely to favor knighthoods, baronies, and earldoms for her most exceptional servants. Her grants of dukedoms will likely be limited to her sons, rather than the influx of creations that occurred during Edward VI's reign IOTL), it's easy to say how church land ownership may grow.

Catherine financed the creation of several monasteries that imported Spanish nuns and monks... Mary may seek to finance her own religious houses, too. With the church retaining such a significant piece of England's land, it also limits the amount of land available for the landed nobility to build their estates; there is no land bonanza as OTL England had. You also have the typical economic pressures of this period, where many tenant farmers were thrown off their land because the owners wanted to enclose it for sheep / wool, which was more profitable. I figure that the clerical owners will probably see things not unlike their secular neighbors: of course, perhaps some smaller clerical establishments might see it as prudent to keep the tenants around, I could see the larger and more wealthy monasteries following the trend of the nobility and seeking to enclose their vast lands, too.

Ireland is definitely interesting to consider, as you've mentioned! You have the Anglo-Irish lords of course... some of dubious loyalty, some are not. But their holdings are only of a small fraction of Ireland's total landholdings, which remains in the hands of the chiefs. That is land that is ripe for the taking and to be used productively, and there are many monastic groups that might jump at that. The mention of John Rawson in my last chapter also made me ponder, as he belonged to the Knights Hospitaller: no dissolution means the English Langue will continue to exist... I could absolutely see the crown using the English Langue as a way to garrison difficult areas, perhaps leasing them fortifications or lands in more dangerous regions, with the expectation that they will hold it down and use the land productively. Madhukar... it was you, I believe, or perhaps another reader who posited the idea of Jesuit 'reductions' in Ireland not unlike the reductions in South America. I found that a very interesting idea to consider, too. Funnily enough, England's religious changes and attempt to uproot Irish life as they knew it probably caused them to cling tighter to Catholicism, which became an important part of their national identity. It wouldn't surprise me if things went the opposite here, where the Catholic Church plays a role in oppressing the Irish, thus pushing them towards the Reformation. Can't say I'd see the Irish as Lutherans or Calvinists, but I could see some Irish theologian eager to take those ideas and meld them to fit Ireland. A sort of homegrown Irish Protestantism, perhaps.

Indeed, so much was lost when the monasteries were dissolved. Bits and bobs were carted off and sold off, and much of the building material was used for construction. There's a reason that so many of England's great manor houses have a historical beginning tied to some monastery or priory.

I definitely understand it. I do like using the AI, though obviously it doesn't compare to the real thing. I do really enjoy getting to create different people and pictures, but I am also not opposed to using historical pictures and try to use a mix of them. I am definitely not opposed to do some portrait hunting for future chapters, so we can have more 'alleged' portraits: that this may be so-and-so or so-and-so. After all, it's super common that even today paintings are disorganized and we sometimes don't who it is. This portrait, for instance is described as a portrait of an unknown woman. It's believed to be Queen Mary I (and likely is... it looks like other portraits of her from this time period) but we don't know for sure. I definitely enjoy ya'll getting to see an idea of these characters/things (especially our ATL characters, palaces, ect that don't exist IOTL), but I promise that I'll continue to use historical art and pictures alongside AI.
 
I loved GM Philips PoV! Very interesting that France leaned on Venice to donate Corfu to the Knights, it was a very important part of their overseas territories, but if it came with promises to not pirate Venetian ships then I could see them doing so, its not Crete, Cyprus or Momenvasia and perchance its just leased, like Malta was from Charles V, for some symbolic item, instead of a falcon maybe its Corfiote wine/grappa or maybe a single ducat or something similar, so the Knights are in a relationship with Venice. With the Siege of Rhodes turning out as OTL, the Knights hopefully come to the same conclusion, that they need to get the local populace on their side in order to be secure. Plus with Venetian overlordship, to an extent, they might allow the Corfiote nobles of the libri d'oro into the order, which could help with gaining manpower. As England remains catholic, the English Langue should remain strong and could help keep the knights away from overly francophile tendencies when combined with the Italians and Iberians.

Im not sure the Knights Hospitaller would be down with garrisoning territory away from the Med, they do have commanderies scattered across Europe but the order managed to keep itself focused on its maritime crusade, helps i suppose that it was very profitable, which is probably why it managed to outlast the Teutonic and Templar knights. The order was always hurting for manpower in this time, especially full knights so it is unlikely that they would spare too many for other pursuits.
 
I loved GM Philips PoV! Very interesting that France leaned on Venice to donate Corfu to the Knights, it was a very important part of their overseas territories, but if it came with promises to not pirate Venetian ships then I could see them doing so, its not Crete, Cyprus or Momenvasia and perchance its just leased, like Malta was from Charles V, for some symbolic item, instead of a falcon maybe its Corfiote wine/grappa or maybe a single ducat or something similar, so the Knights are in a relationship with Venice. With the Siege of Rhodes turning out as OTL, the Knights hopefully come to the same conclusion, that they need to get the local populace on their side in order to be secure. Plus with Venetian overlordship, to an extent, they might allow the Corfiote nobles of the libri d'oro into the order, which could help with gaining manpower. As England remains catholic, the English Langue should remain strong and could help keep the knights away from overly francophile tendencies when combined with the Italians and Iberians.

Im not sure the Knights Hospitaller would be down with garrisoning territory away from the Med, they do have commanderies scattered across Europe but the order managed to keep itself focused on its maritime crusade, helps i suppose that it was very profitable, which is probably why it managed to outlast the Teutonic and Templar knights. The order was always hurting for manpower in this time, especially full knights so it is unlikely that they would spare too many for other pursuits.
Yep, you are correct Andristan. François definitely put his thumb upon the scale, but Corfu and the Ionian Islands are leased, similar to Charles V's agreement IOTL surrounding Malta. I'm unsure what the symbolic item could be: I do love the idea of Corfiote wine or even a single ducat. Heck, I wouldn't even be surprised if there's no symbolic gift and Venice instead receives/asks for a yearly rent from the Knights for the use of the islands. They are merchants, after all: Venice will continue to use Corfu as an important port and retain their trading rights and privileges, same as when they owned it directly. Perhaps even better privileges, since the knights will now own it and will be quite economically dependent on Venice.

I'd say Grand Master Philippe took notice of the natives sullen faces as he took control of the city. There will be an influx of knights of varying nationalities no doubt, but the Knights Hospitaller will definitely have to work closely in these early years as they establish their administration with the extant elite. Certainly many of the Venetian merchants and such might choose to stay, and Corfu even in the 16th century has a vibrant community of Corfiot Italians (or rather, Venetians). Plenty of Greek nobles settled in Corfu through various times and Italianized to some extent, like the Calogerà family. There's also the General Council of Corfu, which in previous centuries was less stratified but by the 15th onward is dominated by Corfu's most illustrious noble families, who are a closed case. I can definitely see the benefit of recruiting from the Libro d'Oro: second and especially third sons, those who might be inclined towards religious careers most definitely. The English Langue will continue to be around, and Englishmen and Anglo-Irishmen will likely continue to join up; I think we could definitely see more variety amongst the ATL Grand Masters.

That's sadly what I figured. They will need all the manpower they can get. I mentioned it only because John Rawson was quite involved as a knight and Henry VIII secured his appointment to the Priory of Kilmainham, which was held by the knights in Ireland. Afterwards, he was quite involved in Irish/English affairs. Unsure of it's purpose or what it's true value was by that time. When the order was dissolved in England, Rawson gave up the priory for a title and some cash, while the orders house at Kilteel went to his son-in-law who had married his natural daughter. The order had quite a few priories and commandries across Ireland: Dublin, Meath, Kildare, Cork, Waterford, Galway to name a few. It's hard to say what state they were in by the 16th century however... Manpower is certainly the biggest issue, and something that a pan-European order will compete with the European crowns with.
 
Ireland is definitely interesting to consider, as you've mentioned! You have the Anglo-Irish lords of course... some of dubious loyalty, some are not. But their holdings are only of a small fraction of Ireland's total landholdings, which remains in the hands of the chiefs. That is land that is ripe for the taking and to be used productively, and there are many monastic groups that might jump at that. The mention of John Rawson in my last chapter also made me ponder, as he belonged to the Knights Hospitaller: no dissolution means the English Langue will continue to exist... I could absolutely see the crown using the English Langue as a way to garrison difficult areas, perhaps leasing them fortifications or lands in more dangerous regions, with the expectation that they will hold it down and use the land productively. Madhukar... it was you, I believe, or perhaps another reader who posited the idea of Jesuit 'reductions' in Ireland not unlike the reductions in South America. I found that a very interesting idea to consider, too. Funnily enough, England's religious changes and attempt to uproot Irish life as they knew it probably caused them to cling tighter to Catholicism, which became an important part of their national identity. It wouldn't surprise me if things went the opposite here, where the Catholic Church plays a role in oppressing the Irish, thus pushing them towards the Reformation. Can't say I'd see the Irish as Lutherans or Calvinists, but I could see some Irish theologian eager to take those ideas and meld them to fit Ireland. A sort of homegrown Irish Protestantism, perhaps.
Well, the English Protestants liked to make the point that they were just returning to the original precepts of Insular Christianity before it was shackled by Rome, etc. I can definitely see any alt-Irish *Protestants going the same route, especially since it fits the milieu even better. Among other reforms, maybe they can repudiate the Synod of Whitby and go back to old Insular reckoning of Easter, reclassify Patrick et al as prophets and later really emphasize the peregrinatio aspects of exile and missionary work, sort of a Early Modern Irish Mormonism.
 
Well, the English Protestants liked to make the point that they were just returning to the original precepts of Insular Christianity before it was shackled by Rome, etc. I can definitely see any alt-Irish *Protestants going the same route, especially since it fits the milieu even better. Among other reforms, maybe they can repudiate the Synod of Whitby and go back to old Insular reckoning of Easter, reclassify Patrick et al as prophets and later really emphasize the peregrinatio aspects of exile and missionary work, sort of a Early Modern Irish Mormonism.
I have to say this is a super intriguing idea, especially the references to Mormonism... polygamy and concubinage once had some legal + cultural sanction and was regulated by complex legal codes, though later church authorities did no support it.

Polygamy was of course justified through the Old Testament and the Patriarchs, and was fairly liberal for a time as a men and women were able to 'divorce' and remarry and no limit to the number of marriages. Such marriages tended to be based around resources and wealth. The freedom to remarry may have benefitted some aristocratic women, as numerous divorces + divorce settlements could leave them with substantial wealth and allow them exert more influence in subsequent remarriages.
 
I have to say this is a super intriguing idea, especially the references to Mormonism... polygamy and concubinage once had some legal + cultural sanction and was regulated by complex legal codes, though later church authorities did no support it.

Polygamy was of course justified through the Old Testament and the Patriarchs, and was fairly liberal for a time as a men and women were able to 'divorce' and remarry and no limit to the number of marriages. Such marriages tended to be based around resources and wealth. The freedom to remarry may have benefitted some aristocratic women, as numerous divorces + divorce settlements could leave them with substantial wealth and allow them exert more influence in subsequent remarriages.
Oh, I hadn't even thought about the polygamy aspect. I mean, there was a very brief bout of it in the end stages of the brief Radical Anabaptist Münster rebellion, but it did seem to be the idea of one particular unstable guy who took over after the first leader was killed before it was crushed a month later. There does, however, appear to be an Irish precedent in the Brehon laws: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Irish_law They seemed pretty harsh and terrible for women, which led to this later reformulation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cáin_Adomnáin
 
Oh, I hadn't even thought about the polygamy aspect. I mean, there was a very brief bout of it in the end stages of the brief Radical Anabaptist Münster rebellion, but it did seem to be the idea of one particular unstable guy who took over after the first leader was killed before it was crushed a month later. There does, however, appear to be an Irish precedent in the Brehon laws: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Irish_law They seemed pretty harsh and terrible for women, which led to this later reformulation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cáin_Adomnáin
Yep, the mention of Mormonism definitely piqued my interest in that idea. I found the Brehon law's religious justification interesting, since Joseph Smith had his own religious justifications for instituting polygamy.

The Protestant Reform didn't openly espouse polygamy, of course (outside the radical Anti-Baptists). But some reformers, such as Martin Luther certainly had their own thoughts. Luther is mostly remember for his role in Philip of Hesse's bigamous marriage. Philip too used the Patriarchs as an argument, but Luther argued that like the Patriarchs, one needed divine sanction. He believed that a bigamous marriage needed an extreme reason, like the wife having leprosy or was abnormal in some other respect. Philip did eventually get his second wife... but more because of political expediency rather than religious reasons, I think. Luther always refused to acknowledge his role in the scandal.

Melanchthon even suggested that Henry VIII's problems were solved easier by taking a second wife rather than divorcing the first.

I believe the Cáin Adomnáin was more of an addition to existing law, rather than a reformation of the existing Brehon Law. The Wiki mentions it was an ancient Irish Geneva Treaty and one of the first articles that represents human rights, since it seems to regulate how innocents are treated during warfare, the outlawing of killing women, even if they commit murder, ect. We also really have no clue how successful the Law of Innocents actually was in regulating behaviors and attitudes, unfortunately.

Brehon Law in general didn't exactly place high status upon women, but it was in some ways egalitarian: women could become Brehons through inheritance. Tribal Ireland was a male dominated society, but women and girls had more freedom, independence, and rights to property than in other parts of Europe in the same period, and women held property separate from their husband. Marriage laws and laws regarding polygamy / concubinage were complex. Divorce was also pretty available, with property split based on the contributions each spouse made to the household. Definitely an awful system for the common woman, that's for sure: but you can also see how aristocratic Irish women in this period may have benefited from such a system. It wasn't uncommon for some noble Irish women in the 11th-12th centuries to marry 4-5 different times because of this.
 
So, everyone: I am once again asking for your help!

I am presently hard at work on our next chapter concerning the 1542-46 Italian War. It's going well, and I've written a little over 5000 words. Awesome, right? I've written about that much before, and usually at that point I'm nearing the finish line...

... Except I'm not even sure if I'm even half way done with this one. This may end up a long one. 😲 I know I've written some chunky chapters previously, but I think 6000 was about about my upper limit so far. We are very likely going to breach it with anywhere from 3-5k more words! I've still got a couple more years to write about, and different situations / fronts as well. It's quite a hefty war with a lot of participants and fronts to cover.

My question (once again! I have a lot lately!) is this: would you prefer to get the chapter whole, regardless of length? As always, I'll use images to break up the text, so it's not a giant block of 8-10k words (for reference, let's consider GRRM: the GOT series is regularly 4-5k per chapter; AFFC is 6.5k. So this monster is going to be even longer than an average chapter in Game of Thrones: Travelogue. 🙃)

Is there an upper limit that is too long for a chapter for you guys? I write this stuff for my enjoyment, but also for all of you: so if the idea of a 8-9k (if not a 10k!) chapter sounds like a slog and a chore rather than being fun to read, then that's something I want to change. On the other hand, if the longer the better makes you happy, then I'm happy to oblige!

I'm not opposed to splitting up this monster into two chapters: but I also don't really have a cutting point that makes sense to break into a second chapter, at least not right now. There's also no real way to split it up by front, since there's quite a few. I also like my chapters to sort of have a definite ending, even if there is a bit of a cliff hanger: I like them to be able to read as a stand alone (even if you might have little idea what's going on). I feel like splitting it might end up lopsided: like pt. 1 being 6-7k and pt. being 3-4k versus being an even split.
 
No ones forced to sit and read the whole thing if they’d rather take a break and come back to it later- perhaps you can se it as a way to test out your ability to structure things in a way that builds and sustains momentum through an exceptionally long chunk of writing, but whatever it ends up looking like will be devoured pretty voraciously.
 
Top