1098 replies to this topic

[Anubis the Jackal]

Possibly the greatest day in British history. I intend raising a glass to Mr Cromwell tonight.

Windsor, on Jan 30 2009, 11:19 AM, said:

Charles I was beheaded 360 years ago today.

[Windsor]

Anubis the Jackal, on Jan 30 2009, 11:45 AM, said:

Possibly the greatest day in British history. I intend raising a glass to Mr Cromwell tonight.

Windsor, on Jan 30 2009, 11:19 AM, said:

Charles I was beheaded 360 years ago today.

Possibly the greatest day in English history.
The Scots and Irish were not too thrilled with the guy.

He kind of invaded both nations, killing a lot of people...

[Anubis the Jackal]

Or...defended the bravest social revolution to date against mercenaries paid by reactionaries. Anyway, James I (or VI) was ruler of Scotland, England and Ireland, so invasion is far too harsh a word.

Windsor, on Jan 30 2009, 12:34 PM, said:

Possibly the greatest day in English history.
The Scots and Irish were not too thrilled with the guy.

He kind of invaded both nations, killing a lot of people...

[Windsor]

Anubis the Jackal, on Jan 30 2009, 12:47 PM, said:

Or...defended the bravest social revolution to date against mercenaries paid by reactionaries. Anyway, James I (or VI) was ruler of Scotland, England and Ireland, so invasion is far too harsh a word.

Windsor, on Jan 30 2009, 12:34 PM, said:

Possibly the greatest day in English history.
The Scots and Irish were not too thrilled with the guy.

He kind of invaded both nations, killing a lot of people...

The only constitutional link between the Kingdoms at that point was the crown. Where the independent country of England allowed for Cromwell to become Head of State, the Scots chose to retain the monarchy under Charles II. Thus in the aftermath of 1649, Scotland and England - without the bond of monarchy - were two completely separate entities. So invasion would be the correct term. Cromwell eventually forced a Union in 1654 through conquest which was subsequently dismantled with the Restoration.

(Of course I have forgotten who threw the first stone. Can't remember if the Scots started on the English, or vice versa. There was widespead horror in Scotland when news came back that 'the English' had beheaded a Scottish monarch (again) (odd in itself because they hated hi, and it was the Scots forces who handed Charles over to be tried)).

[Anubis the Jackal]

"The Scots...?"

What all of them, or just those few who were fortunate enough to be granted titles by the Monarch?

Windsor, on Jan 30 2009, 12:58 PM, said:

Where the independent country of England allowed for Cromwell to become Head of State, the Scots chose to retain the monarchy under Charles II.

[Windsor]

Anubis the Jackal, on Jan 30 2009, 10:05 PM, said:

"The Scots...?"

What all of them, or just those few who were fortunate enough to be granted titles by the Monarch?

Windsor, on Jan 30 2009, 12:58 PM, said:

Where the independent country of England allowed for Cromwell to become Head of State, the Scots chose to retain the monarchy under Charles II.

Those who mattered in Scottish society in the 17th Century, so yes - mainly the nobility. The Episcopalians were also keen to see the Restoration of monarchy given their belief in divine right. The made up a substantial proportion of the northern population. Lastly, the Presbyterians were keen on the retaining the monarchy if their religious practices were secured. Their problem was with Charles I, not the monarchy. You must not forget that the early Presbyterian kirk had previously removed another monarch in favour of another in 1567.
So although the decision was taken at elite level, there was no popular demand for an end to monarchy.

Anyway, regardless of who chose the Head of State, it doesn't remove the fact that the two nations were - at that point - both independent of each other.

[Anubis the Jackal]

This being my point. The English Revolution was the point at which ordinary people at last started to matter, yes even if the leaders and beneficiaries were the gentry. See The Putney Debates where the rank and file of the New Model Army were allowed to discuss how the new society would develop.

Windsor, on Jan 30 2009, 11:50 PM, said:

Those who mattered in Scottish society in the 17th Century, so yes - mainly the nobility. .

[Windsor]

Anubis the Jackal, on Jan 31 2009, 01:21 PM, said:

This being my point. The English Revolution was the point at which ordinary people at last started to matter, yes even if the leaders and beneficiaries were the gentry. See The Putney Debates where the rank and file of the New Model Army were allowed to discuss how the new society would develop.

Windsor, on Jan 30 2009, 11:50 PM, said:

Those who mattered in Scottish society in the 17th Century, so yes - mainly the nobility. .

The people already had some degree of power in Scotland before the English revolution. The Crown was weakend due to the 'revolutions' of 1560 and 1567 where the Kirk institutions gained influence and power. The 'rank and file' of the Kirk congregations did discuss how church society would develop due to the bottom up elective structure. The Kirk practically created a second Scots Parliament in the General Assemblies.

Incidently the General Assembly stopped meeting after 1653 for some reason... (Not that Charles II was any better for then when he took over from Cromwell).

[Monoclinic]

Anubis the Jackal, on Jan 31 2009, 02:21 PM, said:

This being my point. The English Revolution was the point at which ordinary people at last started to matter, yes even if the leaders and beneficiaries were the gentry. See The Putney Debates where the rank and file of the New Model Army were allowed to discuss how the new society would develop.

Windsor, on Jan 30 2009, 11:50 PM, said:

Those who mattered in Scottish society in the 17th Century, so yes - mainly the nobility. .

Personally I prefer the Levellers ;-)

[Geronimo]

Anubis the Jackal, on Jan 31 2009, 01:21 PM, said:

This being my point. The English Revolution was the point at which ordinary people at last started to matter, yes even if the leaders and beneficiaries were the gentry. See The Putney Debates where the rank and file of the New Model Army were allowed to discuss how the new society would develop.

Windsor, on Jan 30 2009, 11:50 PM, said:

Those who mattered in Scottish society in the 17th Century, so yes - mainly the nobility. .

So why did they blow it by allowing the restoration? Cromwell was a great man but needed to do more to maintain the republic. He wasn't quite ruthless enough. Perhaps he should have borrowed Edinburgh's guillotine and sorted out a few more of the aristos. Charles II didn't mess about hunting down those who had condemned his father to death. In some ways the English revolution was a bit too early before the democratic model had been fully worked out. It's a pity the Chartists couldn't organise themselves as a revolutionary movement so we didn't have to be stuck with the monarchy we have now. All that bloodshed and we let them back in.

[Windsor]

Geronimo, on Jan 31 2009, 07:09 PM, said:

Charles II didn't mess about hunting down those who had condemned his father to death.

Including Cromwell himself.

[themaninblack]

Quite frankly, I don't like the way this thread about death anniversaries has turned
into a debate about contentious figures in British constitutional history and I will not stand for it..........


















































....today is the Anniversary of the death of Guy Fawkes

[One shot Paddy]

Windsor, on Jan 31 2009, 07:58 PM, said:

Geronimo, on Jan 31 2009, 07:09 PM, said:

Charles II didn't mess about hunting down those who had condemned his father to death.

Including Cromwell himself.

And one of my ancestors!

[Windsor]

One shot Paddy, on Jan 31 2009, 09:30 PM, said:

Windsor, on Jan 31 2009, 07:58 PM, said:

Geronimo, on Jan 31 2009, 07:09 PM, said:

Charles II didn't mess about hunting down those who had condemned his father to death.

Including Cromwell himself.

And one of my ancestors!

He employed one of mine.

[themaninblack]

'Old Stone Face', Buster Keaton died today in 1966...

[Windsor]

30 years since this knob died.

[themaninblack]

Windsor, on Feb 2 2009, 01:32 PM, said:

30 years since this knob died.

Cock 'n Roll man, Cock 'n Roll...

[grobler]

30 years since this knob died.[/quote]

Cock 'n Roll man, Cock 'n Roll...
[/quote]


F@ck....do I feel old....

[halleluyahjohntudor]

Windsor, on Jan 31 2009, 07:58 PM, said:

Geronimo, on Jan 31 2009, 07:09 PM, said:

Charles II didn't mess about hunting down those who had condemned his father to death.

Including Cromwell himself.

Old Wart Face had already snuffed it, so they just dug up his corpse and hanged it on Tyburn Tree to make sure that it was really dead.

[themaninblack]

This isn't a death anniversary as such, but it's interesting that the 30th Anniversary of what in retrospect
is one the most important geo-political events since the Second World War has garnered little attention in the media...

I wonder why?

The Iranian Revolution