Westie

This is a predecessor to the "victory" that is eventually commanded by nelson. There was one other that was called "victory" between this ship and the one Nelson commanded, but she was an 8 gun schooner and wasnt fit to carry the name quite frankly. This version of "Victory" was lost in 1744, with a loss of over 1000 lives not a single survivor The "Victory" that Nalson commanded is actually still a commissioned ship of the Royal Navy (strange but true) and is the current flagship of the Second Sea Lord. She is in dry dock at Portsmouth - and if anyone is ever in the area I can recommend it as a thoroughly satisfying day out. They have an exhibit nearby that tries to recreate the atmosphere of a ship afloat - including smells. Not something for the weak of stomach.

This is one of Mark Thorburn's videos - he is a noted "Nelson enthusiast". Whilst a lot of "die hard historians" don't rate this kind of thing, I really applaud this type of work that brings history to the masses

I really love how mark is mixing the poetic licence with historical fact. Its really skillfully done. This is the battle that elevated Admiral Jervis to an Earldom and made him a very rich man. Within 4 years he will be First Lord of the Admiralty. Nelson is about to be elevated to Rear Admiral of the red (occurring on 20th of February, many remarked that this was as a result of the battle; in reality it was a coincidence - Nelson had been promoted based on seniority alone). Granger has been at the centre of a great battle, and indeed he split the spanish line in two, which was a decisive factor in the battle. George is already an obscenely wealthy man with land and an opulent london home (much grander than his father's). His wife is a skillfull and ambitious political operator. He is a favourite of the First Lord of the Admiralty. He is on very good terms with the Prince of Wales, and the Duke of Clarence. His monarch is very favourably disposed to him. His father is one of the premier Earls in the land and the likes of his grandfather and Arthur Teasdale are pulling strings in the background. Given these factors, it is inconceivable that Granger would not be granted a peerage in his own right. I'm casting my vote now for Viscount Brentwood. Earl Brentwood would also be a possibility, but only if his father were promoted to a Marquisate or a Dukedom. It would be very rare indeed for a younger son to be promoted above his father in that fathers lifetime.

Erm.... anyone else notice the subtle emphasis on wade "paying the bill".... I wonder if his card is going to be declined.... The battle of the bankers beginning?

Im sure it isnt gonna wipe out that much even if the revitalisation fails. its only a small part of the diverse portfolio. but remember, they arent running a property holdings company. They wont keep hold of the buildings, unless they can cross rent to triton plant etc

Dont forget though that schluters and cramptons have a small windfall on the way. Steff invested $300,000 in google - and gave Matt and Brad $100,000 each of that (a three way split). Andy Bechtolsheim invested the same amount of money in 1998 in google, and that stock was worth $1.7bn in 2010. Given that Matt's father owns a successful chain of Lasek centres (in bloodlines supposedly earning him way more that $100,000 a week), Matt has a nice trust fund and an obscene Schluter/Crampton/Hayes allowance. I wouldn't be surprised to find both of them are pretty evenly matched in the financial stakes within 2 years of this story. Moreover, Steff and Brad each add another $1.7bn to the collective family coffers, as well as the huge profit they will undoubtedly make from the Triton Aquisition and the revitalization of Claremont. In bloodlines Steff was said to have $2bn net worth, Brad in the several hundreds of millions. Robbie is probably in a similar league (maybe half brad's net worth). From what i can Gather, JP still has around 30% of Crampton construction, as well as the (now never mentioned) shareholding in Isidore's company (which was once Crampton California). In "The Land Whore" he had investments sat with Stefan which were doing very well for him, and those 20 Acres of escorial that are bordering onto the Stanford campus wont just be "chump change" to coin a phrase of Tonto's. The Schluter family trust still seems to have assets and these of course have appreciated in value over time and include huge land holdings if the makeup of the Schluter Family Wealth hasn't changed from what JP told is in the original "chronicles of an Academic Predator", when we were informed that it was mostly land based.Tonto was the daughter of a Crampton and so we can assume that there was a slice of that pie in the mix somewhere too. All in all, I'd say that regardless of the holdings that may or may not exist in the timeframe of this story (but we're probably pushing $3bn), that amount will probably be dwarfed by the figure it ends up as in 2010. Especially if Stefan rides the wave of the boom in the early 2000's and gets out by 2008. I wouldn't be surprised if we are talking $20-25bn or even more. Now, wade is conservative old money, and there is nothing quite so indefensible in politics as actually earning staggering amounts of money. The conservative way is "slow and steady", and so assuming a slow and steady growth rate (compounded) on $400m - lets say 6.5% after tax which is pretty optimistic, wade wont even breach $1bn in the next 10 years. I think we are about to see an example of how old money gets eclipsed by new.

I also forgot Kew Palace, but of course what both Kew and Windsor had in common was that they were personal retreats. The King entertained those who he considered his friends there - people who lived up to his strict moral code. This was the very apex of high society. And while lords Chatham and Spencer would have had seats at the table here by virtue of them both being Earls, people like Arthur Teasdale, Charles Fox, Lord Hood etc would not. These were not places of business, simply because at the very highest levels of SOCIETY, some major players were conspicuously absent. Power did not make one socially acceptable.

Indeed - Debrette's "The New Peerage" had been published for the first time around 20 years previously, and following the fallout from the policy of enclosure, this period in history had a high rate of "deeds" being issued - commissions that confirmed ownership of land on behalf of a petitioner were common. The book "the new peerage" published by debrettes was the first look through the window of the aristocracy and their prestige. Houses in London confirmed a certain level of social standing. A house on the right street, in the right area, proximal to the right places, membership of the right club, attendance at the right parties and social gatherings etc - brought together within a very tight knit business community, this ensured that with enough influence, you would know everyone's business. This brings to light one little nagging issue in my mind though (as I ramble on)..... reading these stories you would be forgiven for thinking that most social interaction took place at Carlton House or in audiences with the King. In reality, there was a whole social season each year taking in events such as the Debutante Balls (known as "coming out" - so maybe we should keep Granger away from those ), Royal Ascot, The Lord Mayors Ball, etc Summers would not be spent in London at all by the majority of the Aristocracy and Royalty. They had country estates, where the air was better and the temperatures cooler. In the summer months a more sedate pace of business was undertaken, involving as it did, travel between vast estates.

Edward II was probably suffocated, but I love the story of the red hot poker to the anus.... it has an eloquence and beauty that I would love to see replayed against freddie. Davina, being a Devonshire, could probably by insulated and protected. Her father is most probably the 5th Duke, who is contemporary to this story, and mother was Georgina, duchess of Devonshire. Georgina was a powerful woman in her own right a quite a firebrand. I would like to congratulate Mark on his portrayal of a wayward member of this family, as well as giving her a dynastically appropriate name - Davina was and is a common name within the Cavendish (devonshire) family.

Not to pre-judge the next story, but perhaps it refers to granger either leading a mutiny against a corrupt admiral (there is still a wilcox left?), or taking to India or the West Indies, in order to put down a large scale mutiny taking place there.

Ways in which this could end that i would consider "happy": (1) Matt and Wade stay together, become stronger and sexier, and live happily ever after (2) Matt realizes what a fool he is, and, unable to bear the shame, moves to Europe the become house-boy to an Englishman and his hot Czech boyfriend. (3) Matt and brad get stoned and finally give in to their urges (4) A 3 day full team orgy finally wears out Matt's sexual appitite and he becomes ready to commit to one man (5) you reintroduce cam healy as Matt's new boytoy (those first two scenes in bloodlines were SO. FREAKIN. HOT.) (6) Wade slaughters Carl on the ice (literally, with razor sharp hockey sticks - I originally had this end in mind for JJ but im not precious about this) (7) Everything gets screwed up, but you kill off JP (even the worst possible endings are made happier without JP) and thats all I can think of. Of course if you could arrange number 2 as a matter of urgency, that would be the best solution all round I think. **fully expects flames for advocating the termination of JP Crampton**

that chapter left me... well... devastated I have nothing further to add right now

No. Land is pretty much always separate when it comes to a peerage. Otherwise it would be possible to sell a title to someone by selling them the land it is linked with. Only lesser dignities are attached to land. Not an earldom. It is also possible to disinherit the eldest son, who would nonetheless inherit the title, but not necessarily the property that goes with it. Some of the confusion in this might be because back in this time, there were such things as land trusts, whereby the land wasn't owned by the individual but by a trust. This type of trust would basically hold land in trust to avoid estate duties/death taxes over centuries, and would ensure that in the event that the title holder left debts rather than fortunes, the creditors could not take the house, lands, artworks etc. These trusts were often created to pass with the title, although the distinction here is that the man would hold the land because he holds the title, and not the title because he holds the lands. This arrangement would actually make sense for the Earl of Bridgemont, as you mention his father left him only debts - a trust holding the core assets of the estate would ensure that the new earl would receive an income and a substantial property portfolio protected from his father's creditors. And now that i think this through, if that one line above were changed to read "title trust" at the end, we are back into the realms of factual accuracy. With my sincere apologies for being so pedantic (I'm guessing that the majority of you would not see/care for any distinction that I have just made). I have done a lot of work relating to English peerage law and title law, and many of you will know of my passion for British History. Sometimes that passion for accuracy overspills - so I'm sorry if I spoiled it for anyone

Great chapter it really gives me some closure on a lot of information. I wont be quite so desperate to read the next chapter. Though, as I pointed out in my last post, an Earldom is never linked to land, and so the implication in the Earl's letter that parts of the Bridgemont estate are tied to the title was erroneous. However, such things didn't spoil this picky englishman's enjoyment of a really great story.

Well, I have had, and enjoyed, straight sex on a number of occasions with a number of women. I do (now) identify as gay, but I still admire and appreciate beauty and sexuality/sensuality in whatever form it takes. I do have a preference for men, to the extent that while I believe i can commit to being faithful to a man, I do not believe I could remain faithful to a woman. That is not to say that i do not find women extremely attractive, but I guess my rhythm and my mood are more suited to being with a man in a relationship context. If my life were more a series of hookups, I'm inclined to think my conquests would be more evenly distributed between male and female. They would probably incline more to female if I frequented the "gold digger" bars and clubs. I also used to have a predilection for strip clubs and lapdancing clubs for straight guys, but I recognise now that it was more about the "taboo" than the fact that it was a woman shaking her extremities against my face.

I'm just stopping by to say that i thought the last chapter was superbly written. In places it was very reminiscent of Robbie/Brad in millennium, though perhaps with some slight role reversal. It shows how similar Matt and Brad are here. I'd love to comment more, but from today I'm In the Czech Republic and just don't have time with Christmas etc. However, I will still read more chapters if Mark publishes them and I hope to comment more later next week. West

I can't answer this question without Paya's permission.....

Yeah. Paris is very expensive in my view.... at least for the level of hotel comfort I have come to expect (**I'm NOT a snob!**). and Given our proposed move, I really don't see any room in our expenditure for this. Now, if anyone wanted a road trip.... they can drive with us from North West England to Southern Czech Republic (1500 miles).... and while you are driving with us.... you couldn't help us move some boxes could you??

In this, very specific circumstance, i happen to agree with you Jeremy. I know, I know, Its not comfortable for me either, BUT - hear me out. These guys have narcissism ingrained in their souls. The over indulgent parenting that you talk about the over gen Y, the problem we see here is that this family were so ahead of the curve, that Brad and Billy and Ace all had this same over indulgence in the 1980's. And now, when they have their own children, that over indulgence is concentrated and intensified. These kids have every possible material possession. Their parents are all successful - VERY successful. From a very young age they were brought up to believe themselves as something special. But then again - so was everybody else. So Will and Darius and JJ have an even bigger problem. They KNOW they are part of a whole generation of "special" - but they are a cut above even everyone else. There is a reason I think that some of the more successful characters in this story, spent much of their lives outside of the "family". JP was an outsider even in his own family. Stefan started life as a hustler in Paris. Matt was adopted. Wade is not a crampton. Brad was brought up inside the family, but he has always thought more of stefan than he did of JP - probably because of the full knowledge that while always accepted, he didnt "belong" with Ace, Billy and Claire. That said, Brad is pretty self absorbed. Billy was a full member of the family - he screwed up. Jim Crampton's middle name is "entitlement". Nick & Bitty Schluter anyone? You see where I'm going with this? So what I'm saying is, we see exactly the paradigm you expect in Gen Y, but amplified. We are starting to see the cracks in this very special family. My prediction: there are some people here who will end up very damaged. You say though "even though CAP was actually built on reflecting the mindset of the given period" - Mark can do that, yes, but it wont fit with this family he has created. Reflecting an average mindset would involve reflecting the average. And he doesn't. And in fact few real people do. Jeremy you are trying to fit everything into its correct little box, and if that's how you make sense of the world, then fine - but its going to leave an awful lot of unanswered questions.

I'm not sure Matt is so.... One dimensional? If he wanted to be BMOC, he would have a plan, and he would ruthlessly pursue it. Im pretty sure having a steady boyfriend (albeit in an open relationship) , who happens to be the son of a senator and President of the LGBT club doesn't go with the "big man" image. More than that, we saw in bloodlines that, like JP, Matt feels the pressure of his heritage - but he feels that a few times over. Firstly, he is a Carswold, secondly, he is the son of Robbie Hayes. And lest we forget, you cannot spend more than an hour with this family without feeling the weight of generations of Cramptons and Schluters, I genuinely do think this is a crisis - and to some extent you might be right in that partially this is a crisis of "responsibility" - but I think this goes much deeper than just a 20-year old who doesn't want to settle down and has some lame ambitions to be the big man on campus.

Some of you might know/have gathered that I'm currently doing a complete reread through CAP again, and this evening I've just finished "the box", which is in many ways the "odd one out" of the CAP series. We see glimpses of Matt and Wade in this story too, and I've got to say that there has been a drastic change in Matt's personality since the box, through millennium, up until now. I'm even more convinced that Matt is in some kind of crisis in his mind. What that is, I dont know - but I am extremely intrigued. Mr Arbour, this is down to your exceptional writing talent....

This wont be the end of Matt and Wade. It will however, be a "changing point" for them. As mark says, the balance has to change. Whether that means total monogamy, a limited "open relationship", some kind of three-way polygamy with Tiffany, or that they ditch the relationship and just become "friends who screw more than once" - there is always going to be a special bond between these two. What concerns me a little here is that, although Matt is a slut, I've just been rereading bloodlines - and he does really love Wade. A huge amount. And it was Matt that originally insisted on the first "restriction" to their open-ness (that Wade wouldn't turn to women at parties). The character i know from bloodlines - and I've just finished rereading it for the 9th time - will get insanely jealous, overcompensate with a "screwing spree", then pick up the pieces and try to win. Because Matt's fatal flaw is, that he has to win - the problem is, that he has to do it, before Wade falls for Gathan.

Bah! "because the fans wont like it" is the lamest excuse.... "does it work for the story?" now thats a good reason for writing something. I'm dreaming of JJ being ruthlessly slaughtered by a team of hockey players, who, being sick of his smarmy attitude and taunting of "skaters", sharpen the edges of their hockey sticks and slice him like salami on the Ice. But then, I'm pretty moderate in my tastes....

but its not just about Children. For some its about the Journey. For many its about societal pressure. For others, it may just be because they genuinely like both. I do not doubt that, had I not found my wonderful paya - I could have easily settled down into a "conventional" arrangement. And I do not doubt, that given that there is no pressure in this family regarding choices, each child would feel total freedom of expression. Moreover, given that there is a somewhat looser attitude to the importance of sex and monogamy in this family and these stories - I think it entirely realistic for Will and others to have the occasional exploration and adventure.

I'm not liking all this "should" judgment crap to be honest. "he should wait".... Its absolute rubbish. Events don't shape lives - our reactions to those events do. Will may have kids early, but there are a million different avenues and roads that story could go down. This is a mistake people fall into a lot here, when they apply conventional rules to a totally unconventional family. They are (socially at least) generations ahead of the curve in terms of acceptability. Nothing about a teenage/early pregnancy (if it even happens) will follow the conventional wisdom we see day to day. You are prejudging a paradigm of which we can have no knowledge - and I suspect you are all getting it drastically wrong.