Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 1, 2016 21:42:44 GMT
Would England have become a Catholic country again? Would Parliament have become powerless? |
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Nov 1, 2016 22:15:26 GMT
I can't imagine the there were enough Catholics to take control of the country - or putting it another way, that the surviving Protestant gentry and nobility would not have been enough to keep control of the country. I imagine there would have been a fierce anti-Catholic reaction and probably some hideous massacre of known Catholics, which would have at very least hampered any attempt to restore Catholicism - I imagine most leading Catholic peers would be busy trying to stay alive.
But James I and VI would have been succeeded by his eldest son Henry, aged 11 at the time, requiring a regency. Assuming he still dies in 1612, you then have the succession of Charles I aged just 12 and another regency. So you have a weak monarchy for the best part of a generation. One wonders whether the civil war would have occurred - maybe there would have been an evolution towards a stronger role for parliament along the lines of what occurred after 1660.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 1, 2016 22:44:13 GMT
I can't imagine the there were enough Catholics to take control of the country - or putting it another way, that the surviving Protestant gentry and nobility would not have been enough to keep control of the country. I imagine there would have been a fierce anti-Catholic reaction and probably some hideous massacre of known Catholics, which would have at very least hampered any attempt to restore Catholicism - I imagine most leading Catholic peers would be busy trying to stay alive. But James I and VI would have been succeeded by his eldest son Henry, aged 11 at the time, requiring a regency. Assuming he still dies in 1612, you then have the succession of Charles I aged just 12 and another regency. So you have a weak monarchy for the best part of a generation. One wonders whether the civil war would have occurred - maybe there would have been an evolution towards a stronger role for parliament along the lines of what occurred after 1660. So this cunning plan by Winters et al would have made no difference at all. Damned if they do and damned if they don't? |
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Nov 1, 2016 23:06:57 GMT
So this cunning plan by Winters et al would have made no difference at all. Damned if they do and damned if they don't? It's really not my period - I think carlton43 might know it better. It just strikes me as improbable that an attempted massacre of the King and the assembled peers and Commons would have actually destroyed the entire Protestant establishment. If the gunpowder had gone off, it beggars belief to assume that every single MP and peer would have died, but however many were killed some of the peers who died would have had adult (and presumably vengeful) heirs, there would have been plenty of country gentlemen and borough merchants fit to become new MPs. The Plot always seems to me an attempt to replicate the St Bartholomew's Massacre in France - a one-off extermination of the Protestant enemy; but ultimately that didn't work, and there Catholics there were a majority with the full support of the state. (But the extent of the bloodshed seems to me pretty relevant to the paranoia about Catholics that permeated English politics at the time and right up to the blaming of Catholics for the Great Fire of London.) |
|
carlton43
Reform Party
Posts: 50,907 
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Nov 1, 2016 23:49:58 GMT
I think Adam has made very valid points in his posts and that his last paragraph might have been in their minds as a total misreading of the situation. In fact there would have been many survivors and a spirit of vengeance throughout the land that would have enabled a set of extremely repressive anti-Roman Catholic and possibly anti-Dissenter legislation, coupled with a bloody purge throughout the realms with mass evacuation of recusant survivors and the forfeit of many estates and fortunes.
There was a 100% NIL chance of a Roman Catholic succession in any form.
|
|
Jack
Reform Party
Posts: 8,690
|
Post by Jack on Nov 1, 2016 23:57:57 GMT
Well, we wouldn't have Bonfire Night.
|
|
carlton43
Reform Party
Posts: 50,907
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Nov 2, 2016 0:07:34 GMT
Well, we wouldn't have Bonfire Night. Why not! Different people on the fire. |
|
carlton43
Reform Party
Posts: 50,907
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Nov 2, 2016 0:08:46 GMT
We might now have had a very different Westminster and no need for the renovations?
|
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Nov 2, 2016 0:11:57 GMT
We might now have had a very different Westminster and no need for the renovations? Depends on whether it still burned down in 1834. |
|
carlton43
Reform Party
Posts: 50,907
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Nov 2, 2016 0:16:56 GMT
We might now have had a very different Westminster and no need for the renovations? Depends on whether it still burned down in 1834. I obviously assumed newer and that it didn't. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 2, 2016 7:58:23 GMT
Well, we wouldn't have Bonfire Night. The plot in " V" would be different, no happy ending... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 2, 2016 8:01:46 GMT
I think Adam has made very valid points in his posts and that his last paragraph might have been in their minds as a total misreading of the situation. In fact there would have been many survivors and a spirit of vengeance throughout the land that would have enabled a set of extremely repressive anti-Roman Catholic and possibly anti-Dissenter legislation, coupled with a bloody purge throughout the realms with mass evacuation of recusant survivors and the forfeit of many estates and fortunes. There was a 100% NIL chance of a Roman Catholic succession in any form. In Ireland there would have been massive celebrations, followed by a massacre of Protestants... |
|
carlton43
Reform Party
Posts: 50,907
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Nov 2, 2016 10:17:11 GMT
I think Adam has made very valid points in his posts and that his last paragraph might have been in their minds as a total misreading of the situation. In fact there would have been many survivors and a spirit of vengeance throughout the land that would have enabled a set of extremely repressive anti-Roman Catholic and possibly anti-Dissenter legislation, coupled with a bloody purge throughout the realms with mass evacuation of recusant survivors and the forfeit of many estates and fortunes. There was a 100% NIL chance of a Roman Catholic succession in any form. NoIn Ireland there would have been massive celebrations, followed by a massacre of Protestants... No. There would have been a massive suppression and a complete bloodbath of RCs as on previous occasions but this time with a very vindictive thoroughness. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,931
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Nov 2, 2016 10:52:12 GMT
I think that Ireland would have seen a bloodbath on both sides, tbh.
It is not impossible that Catholics could have ended up being expelled from Britain en masse (as happened a few centuries earlier with the Jews)
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Nov 2, 2016 11:18:52 GMT
NoIn Ireland there would have been massive celebrations, followed by a massacre of Protestants... No. There would have been a massive suppression and a complete bloodbath of RCs as on previous occasions but this time with a very vindictive thoroughness. I could see two possible outcomes of a Catholic rising in Ireland. One is that the English government, busy trying to suppress Catholics in England and set up a regency council, fails to suppress the rebellion and an independent Catholic Ireland arises. Protestants flee or are killed. The constitution of any such Ireland would be interesting. More likely though is carlton43's scenario. The Protestants in Ireland, with their backs against the wall, fight back viciously; the Scots, unaffected by an explosion at Westminster, come to their aid, with growing English support as the English Protestant establishment gets back on its feet. Both the successful Gunpowder Plot and the Catholic Irish rising would confirm every Protestant's worst fears about Catholics in general and Irish Catholics in particular; I think a "final solution" would be proposed and carried through In the extreme of this scenario Ireland would be wholly colonised by Protestant settlers, especially Scots and northern English, in a dry-run for British colonisation of North America, but alternatively there is not actual genocide, but repression so heavy as to wipe out Catholicism, rather like the elimination of Protestantism in Bohemia during and after the 30 Years War but with the religions reversed. I suspect that in this scenario Arminianism in the Church of England is discredited before it can start, and existing trends towards Calvinism in the CofE accelerate. The English and Scots have a common cause in suppressing Irish Catholics, promoting co-operation between the two parliaments both of which have enhanced roles during the minorities of Henry IX and Charles I. Perhaps we then have an increasingly Calvinist CofE and Presbyterian Church of Scotland uniting in a common Presbyterian Church, especially if Charles I is brought up in Calvinism by a hard-line Protestant council (rather as James VI and I was) and his tendency towards asceticism and fanaticism latches on to that religion. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Nov 2, 2016 12:42:14 GMT
That sounds a very appealing scenario all round
|
|
baloo
Conservative
Posts: 760
|
Post by baloo on Nov 2, 2016 13:03:25 GMT
That sounds a very appealing scenario all round Including the massacres of Catholics? |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Nov 2, 2016 13:14:43 GMT
That sounds a very appealing scenario all round Including the massacres of Catholics? In the long run the effect would have been a far more durable union of the whole British Isles which we could see endure still today and with Scottish Nationalism still being very much a minority pursuit (and Irish nationalism too for that matter) |
|
baloo
Conservative
Posts: 760
|
Post by baloo on Nov 2, 2016 13:24:04 GMT
Including the massacres of Catholics? In the long run the effect would have been a far more durable union of the whole British Isles which we could see endure still today and with Scottish Nationalism still being very much a minority pursuit (and Irish nationalism too for that matter) You really are a vile little man. You don't even have the courage to say "yes". |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 2, 2016 13:39:25 GMT
No. There would have been a massive suppression and a complete bloodbath of RCs as on previous occasions but this time with a very vindictive thoroughness. I could see two possible outcomes of a Catholic rising in Ireland. One is that the English government, busy trying to suppress Catholics in England and set up a regency council, fails to suppress the rebellion and an independent Catholic Ireland arises. Protestants flee or are killed. The constitution of any such Ireland would be interesting. More likely though is carlton43 's scenario. The Protestants in Ireland, with their backs against the wall, fight back viciously; the Scots, unaffected by an explosion at Westminster, come to their aid, with growing English support as the English Protestant establishment gets back on its feet. Both the successful Gunpowder Plot and the Catholic Irish rising would confirm every Protestant's worst fears about Catholics in general and Irish Catholics in particular; I think a "final solution" would be proposed and carried through In the extreme of this scenario Ireland would be wholly colonised by Protestant settlers, especially Scots and northern English, in a dry-run for British colonisation of North America, but alternatively there is not actual genocide, but repression so heavy as to wipe out Catholicism, rather like the elimination of Protestantism in Bohemia during and after the 30 Years War but with the religions reversed. I suspect that in this scenario Arminianism in the Church of England is discredited before it can start, and existing trends towards Calvinism in the CofE accelerate. The English and Scots have a common cause in suppressing Irish Catholics, promoting co-operation between the two parliaments both of which have enhanced roles during the minorities of Henry IX and Charles I. Perhaps we then have an increasingly Calvinist CofE and Presbyterian Church of Scotland uniting in a common Presbyterian Church, especially if Charles I is brought up in Calvinism by a hard-line Protestant council (rather as James VI and I was) and his tendency towards asceticism and fanaticism latches on to that religion. There would surely have been Spanish and/or French involvement in such an Irish rising, making it likely to succeed before England could suppress it. |
|
