Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
Not having read these books I'm not sure what is postulated in terms of "alternate history", but keeping Richard III alive means no Tudor dynasty in England, and the Tudors did rather a lot of things which quite radically changed England - the break from Rome and disolution of the monastaries to name but two. No Henry VIII, no Elizabeth I; things would probably never been very different.
|
Other than the obvious large differences HarryT points to, the only other things Randall Garrett is sort-of-specific about are
- Richard III was a changed man after the fever that killed him in our history. He settled down to become one of the best Kings ever in British history.
- a mention that (somewhere in there, time-wise) a monk/scholar/something "codified the laws of magic" sufficiently to make magic into a repeatable, reliable tool. He also hints that this happened earlier than the point of the scientific revolution in our history.
Beyond that, you should think of the "Richard III didn't die" thing as the
excuse for whatever difference you see. The "MacGuffin," as it were. The details are not incredibly important to the stories.
Xenophon