Tuesday, 13 October 2015

In "Delenda Est"

Three Successive Timelines
(i) The Romans win the Second Punic War.
(ii) Neldorian intervention causes Carthaginian victory.
(iii) Patrol counter-intervention restores Roman victory.

Manse and van Sarawak travel futureward from the Pleistocene lodge, expecting to arrive in New York, 1960 (i). Instead, they arrive in (ii). After traveling pastwards and counter-intervening, they are able to travel futureward into (iii). It follows that they never arrived in (i).

They had intended to complete their furlough in 1960 (i). After that, Manse would have remained in New York whereas van Sarawak would have returned to 24th century Venus. In fact, neither arrived. They had gone to the lodge and never returned. Someone from their home offices would have traveled to the lodge to investigate and thus would have become involved in the attempt to restore Roman victory.

"(They never told you when you were scheduled to die, and you had better sense than to try finding out for yourself. It wouldn't have been certain anyhow, time being mutable. One perquisite of an agent's office was the Danellian longevity treatment.)"
-Poul Anderson, "Delenda Est," section 1, IN Time Patrol (New York, 2006), p. 175.

(An aside: Here we learn that the longevity treatment comes from the Danellians, not from future human medical advances.)

Manse thinks this before leaving the lodge expecting to arrive in New York, 1960 (i). Thus, when he thinks it, he is in a timeline where there is a recorded date not for his death but for his disappearance while on vacation at the lodge.

5 comments:

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul!

Aha! You caught a nuance I never thought of before. When, in ( i ) Manse disappeared while trying to travel to NYC, some people, possibly including the Danellians, thought he had somehow, some "when," died.

Sean

John said...

I had a stray thought this morning while listening to an item about the Gunpowder Plot. A time traveller would have had two ways of derailing the future. Arranging for it never to have happened, or arranging for its success.

Paul Shackley said...

John,
There could be a 3-sided fight between the Patrol and 2 time criminals.
Paul.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Gentlemen:

In her book FAITH AND TREASON, I thought Lady Antonia Fraser gave us a very good account of that tragic affair, born as it was from the desperation and anger some English Catholics felt from being persecuted.

Paul: Yet ANOTHER idea or theme I wish Poul Anderson had thought of treating in a Time Patrol story!

Sean

David Birr said...

Paul:
Somebody or other did a short story along similar lines, except that they weren't EXACTLY criminals....

As I recall it, the Resistance in a world conquered by the Nazis discovered that they'd only won because of a neo-Nazi time traveler who managed to manipulate Hitler into making better strategic decisions. So the Resistance sent back an agent to stop the neo-Nazi and set things right. But then HE was clobbered by ANOTHER agent, this one from a pro-Communist Resistance faction, and found himself "returned" to a future ruled by the Soviets (possibly with Chicom support).