Updated Sunday 15 May, 2011 12:18 PM

   Headlines  |  Alternate Histories  |  International Edition

Home Page


Alternate Histories

International Edition

List of Updates

Want to join?

Join Writer Development Section

Writer Development Member Section

Join Club ChangerS


Chris Comments

Book Reviews


Letters To The Editor


Links Page

Terms and Conditions



Alternate Histories

International Edition

Alison Brooks



Other Stuff


If Baseball Integrated Early


Today in Alternate History

This Day in Alternate History Blog








Murder Was The Case:

The Plot To Kill King Henry VIII


By Chris Oakley


Part 1



From the book A Monarchy Shattered: The Collapse of the British Empire, copyright 1978 Oxford Social Republic University Press:


To understand the world-historical chain of events which eventually led to the downfall of the tyrannical monarchy that once oppressed the English peoples, it is important to recall the monarchy’s reaction to the discovery in 1517 of a secret plan to assassinate King Henry VIII, widely acknowledged both in his own time and today to be among the most repressive of Britain’s kings. Rather than make an honest effort to remedy the political and social conditions responsible for engendering the plan, Henry and his minions chose to engage in a bloody and cruel civil war against their own people, lighting the match for the fires of resentment that would inevitably in the decades to come burn down the house of murder and evil that once was the British royal family.

Henry VIII was a vicious and corrupt man, deserving not only of the harsh fate he eventually met at the hands of the people but also of the disapproving verdict history has issued against his era as ruler of what is now the glorious British Social Republic. To him, the sacred trust of governing Britain was just a toy to be used or discarded as he deemed fit; the same was also true regarding his attitude towards the sacred custom of marriage, which as Comrade Scargill has so aptly stated is the cornerstone in the foundation of our great socialist state. This careless behavior rightly enraged the masses and in a valiant attempt to save our nation from the plight brought down on it by Henry, a laborer named Nathaniel Locksley who lived in what we know today as London’s Savile Row district gathered other men of like mind around him to prepare to strike a blow in defense of the masses against the hated king.

Unfortunately, one of those men would prove to be a Judas and betray his comrades to the oppressive Henry VIII regime. This man was, ironically, Nathaniel’s own brother Edward, a man who sold out the masses for the sake of lining his own pockets with Henry VIII’s gold. In June of 1517 he secretly went to Whitehall Palace(now the Hall of People’s Deputies) and told the king that in exchange for financial reward he would reveal the full nature of Nathaniel Locksley’s assassination plan. Henry VIII, never one to waste an opportunity to spit on the will of the people, quickly accepted this devil’s bargain and marshalled his forces to act upon the traitor’s information.

Like swarms of locusts, the tyrant’s henchmen descended on the working class neighborhoods of London, killing as many people as they could lay their hands on. The streets ran red with blood and anyone who did not yell "God save the King!" at the top of their lungs when they saw Henry VIII’s foot soldiers coming was considered an enemy of the king and summarily put to death. Nathaniel Locksley, to his everlasting credit, did not run from the danger he faced at the hands of Henry’s thugs but met it with an unshakable valor that serves as a breathtaking example of revolutionary courage to us all; he singlehandedly fought a dozen or more of the king’s minions and killed most of them before his own life was taken by a cruel sword thrust through the back of his neck. It is because of courageous actions such as this that a statue in Locksley’s honor now stands in the Museum of Revolutionary Heroes in the heart of London.

In the end, Edward Locksley’s betrayal of Nathaniel gained him nothing other than the hangman’s noose; Henry VIII, as selfish and greedy as he was brutal, never had any real intention of paying the blood money he had promised the traitor. Indeed, Henry never kept his promises to anyone, not even his marital vows-- and for this reason he is rightly hated by all decent men and women today. Following the hanging, those who sought to free Britain from the unjust rule of Henry VIII were forced to go into hiding in the hinterlands lest they too should fall victim to the cruel king’s bloodlust...


From History of Western Culture: Vol. 3, Henry VIII to King George I of Virginia, copyright 1985 the Royal American Scholastic Press of New York City:


It is one of the striking ironies of the history of Western civilization that the lone nation in the Western Hemisphere today governed by a monarchy is a country that was originally founded as a dumping ground for critics of the anti-royalist regime that seized power in the aftermath of the English civil wars of the early and middle 16th century. Named after Italian cartographer Amerigo Vespucci, who drew the earliest known maps of the North American continent, what we today know as the United Kingdom of America and Canada was viewed by Britain’s Protectorate regime as a convenient spot in which to imprison those particularly troublesome dissidents who dared speak out against the worst of the Protectorate’s excesses.

At least such was the case after 1630; prior to that date, much of the post-monarchy British government’s time and resources were concentrated on suppressing the pro-royalists’ repeated efforts to restore the Tudor dynasty to power in the second half of the 16th century. Serious efforts to explore the North American seacoast didn’t even begin until around the 1590s, nearly a decade after the last serious attempt to restore Britain’s monarchy was crushed by the Protectorate. France and Spain could have conceivably claimed the New World for themselves had not they too been riddled with political turmoil as the anti-royalist ideology espoused by the Locksleyites spread across the English Channel into continental Europe.

Indeed, in some respects the Locksleyite political philosophy was a precursor to the radical leftist ideologies of the 19th and 20th centuries. Among other things it preached a doctrine of fanatical hate toward the upper classes, a staple of modern-day extreme left thought, and called for the elimination of any groups of individuals deemed to be enemies of the state, another fundamental tenet of modern hard-line leftist dogma. In the case of the Locksleyites themselves, that list of enemies included Christians who objected to the Locksleyite regime’s suppression of their religious practices.

The initial response to these protestors was to have them summarily beheaded. To call Locksleyite actions on this score hypocritical only begins to scratch the surface of the moral rot that ran through the post-monarchy British government at that time and still infests it to a considerable extent today. The Locksleyites professed to abhor capital punishment as an affront to the working classes and used that abhorrence as one of the justifications for their rebellion against the Tudor dynasty, yet they had no qualms about resorting to execution themselves  when working-class Englishmen dared voice any objection to the Locksleyite regime’s increasingly anti-religious policies. To uncover the truth about the full extent about the wave of executions that claimed the lives of so many faithful Protestants and Catholics may take generations, if not centuries, given the rigid information control policies practiced by the present-day British government, but anecdotal evidence suggests the death count reached well into the thousands at the height of the Locksleyite-directed bloodbath. As late as the year 1639, at which time the first exile camps for religious dissenters were being established in the New England interior, hundreds of people were still being put to death every month in London for offenses real or imagined against the Locksley government.

By 1705 the Catholic Church in England had effectively ceased to exist and the Protestant Church had diminished to a handful of small furtive cells operating mainly in the English countryside, where they could more readily elude the ever-prying eyes of the authorities than in the cities...


From the introduction to Winters Of Discontent: British Uprisings From The Locksleyite Rebellion To The Heseltine Insurgency, copyright 2002 British Liberty Press:


Since the collapse of the British Social Republic in 1998, the full truth about the Locksleyite regime and its heirs has finally started to emerge into the light of day, and as that truth is revealed many of the most cherished beliefs about our nation’s history are crumbling into ruin like the dungeons in which the Locksleyites once imprisoned their critics before executing them. Far from being the valiant defenders of the downtrodden masses they made themselves out to be, the men who overthrew  the British monarchy were often more tyrannical than the rulers they professed to despise, and those who inherited their mantle not only continued the Locksleyites’ harsh policies but in many cases made them even more cruel than they’d been to start with.

Under what passed for a judicial system in the years after the Lockleysites seized power in Britain, the flimsiest proof could be used to justify imposing the harshest conceivable penalties on political dissidents; in fact, the authors’ research over the course of writing this book has turned up credible evidence that some of those put to death were executed with no proof of their guilt whatsoever. We may never know precisely how many innocent men and women perished at the Locksleyites’ hands; even a rough estimate of such deaths is a tricky proposition at best given the vast gaps in our nation’s historical record which have been caused by the BSR’s heavy-handed censorship of any material or ideas not fully in concert with its ideology.

While Henry VIII may indeed have been a harsh ruler, the Locksleyites were not by any means justified in the atrocities they inflicted on him following his overthrow and capture in 1523. The deposed Tudor monarch was subjected to tortures beyond human imagining, and his family was forced to endure all manner of indignities while under Locksleyite custody. Before he was finally executed at the behest of a Locksleyite tribunal, Henry had been broken in both body and spirit; had the king not been under constant guard by his jailers, it’s quite likely he would have committed suicide before the tribunal delivered its pre-determined verdict...


From Volume I of The Royal Canadian Military History Encyclopedia(6th Edition), copyright 2005 Royal Canadian Military Academy Press:


With their power base secured and their opposition crushed, the Locksleyite rulers of Britain turned their eyes overseas in the search for ways to expand their revolution and purge their homeland of "undesirable" elements. At the same time that Britain began seriously undertaking exploration of the North American coast to determine the possibility of using that region as an exile colony to which banish dissenters, it was also actively supporting anti-royalist insurgencies in France and Spain. Their backing of the French and Spanish anti-royalist rebellions served a dual purpose: in addition to spreading the Locksleyites’ ideology beyond Britain, this backing kept the French and Spanish monarchies distracted from British colonization efforts in North America.

By 1640 anti-royalist movements had seized power in Spain and Portugal and the French monarchy hovered on the verge of collapse; in central Europe, the princes of the lands which today make up the Austro-Bavarian Union watched nervously as the anti-monarchist and rigidly secular philosophy the Locksleyites preached continued to extend ever deeper into the continent. The princes’ anxiety would deepen after the British invasion of Holland in 1644....


To Be Continued


Please Leave Your Comments In The Discussion Forum!

Hit Counter