Mainwethering And Everard II

See Mainwethering And Everard.

Everard asks:

"'If we've already succeeded, why bother?'" (4, p. 28)

My answer to that question is that Everard and Whitcomb are in a timeline where it is known that they recovered a stolen time machine from the fifth century. If they do not depart on that mission, that will not alter the facts either that they did arrive in the fifth century or that they did recover the stolen time machine. Nor will it prevent the Everard and Whitcomb who did recover the stolen machine from returning, with the machine, to the London office of the Patrol. Thus, if they do not travel to the fifth century, then Everard and Whitcomb will have duplicated themselves, an undesirable outcome.

Mainwethering's answer is different:

"'The job is yet to do, in terms of your and my duration-sense.'" (ibid.);
success should not be taken for granted merely because it is recorded;
"'...man has free will.'" (ibid.);
if they fail, success will not have been recorded;
in that case, he will not have told them about it.

Again, he is telling them about it so any state of affairs in which he is not telling them about it can exist only in a divergent timeline, not in the current timeline. Man has free will? Does that mean that, although it is recorded that they succeeded, they are free to act in a way that prevents from succeeding? But they did act successfully in the current timeline. Or is it meant that their opponent is free to act in a way that will prevent their success? But, again, it is already known that he did not act in such a way in the current timeline.

Mainwethering continues:

"'That is undoubtedly what happened, if I may use the term 'happened,' in the few cases where the Patrol has a record of failure.'" (p. 29)

What happened? Someone had a record of success but either he or his opponent freely acted in a way that prevented that success? Or he failed precisely because he took success for granted? But he should not have been told of the recorded success in the first place. If the failure was serious enough to change history so drastically that the Danellians did not exist, then the Patrol also would not exist and therefore would not have a record of failure whereas, if a failure left the Danellians and the Patrol in existence, then would it even be recognized as a failure? The Patrol's job is to ensure the Danellians' existence and the organization is prepared even to alter the course of events for this purpose.

Mainwethering concludes:

"Those cases are still being worked on, and if success is achieved at last, history will change and there will 'always' have been success.'" (ibid.)

"...still..." does not mean "now, as we are speaking, in 1894." Instead, it means that, within the current timeline, Patrol records describe continued work on those cases in both earlier and later years as appropriate. But anyone who succeeds will thereby initiate a divergent timeline and will disappear from the current timeline into that newly created divergent timeline. History in the current timeline will not/cannot change.