Podcast Host / Moderator (5:01)

So I want you to imagine it is the 5th of November 1605 and the gunpowder Plotters have just finalized their plans to blow up the Houses of Parliament. What are their immediate goals and objectives?

Anna Whitelock (5:13)

Anna? I guess very simply to blow up what they saw as the Protestant royal establishment and establish a Catholic regime and therefore a Catholic country that was front and centre of their main objectives. And we can discuss how realistic or naive that was, but that was the goal.

Podcast Host / Moderator (5:32)

And so what was going to come next then? What does that mean establishing a Catholic country?

Jesse Childs (5:37)

Jessie, before you build, you have to destroy. And that means the King, the Queen, Prince Henry, who would all have been at the state opening of Parliament, wouldn't they? There was some chat about maybe even Prince Charles might have been there, but in the end he wasn't. You have the bishops, the lords, the judges, the lawyers, civil servants, anyone within a sort of hundred Meter radius of Parliament, it's been estimated, might have gone up in the blaze. And all the records of government, because they were held at Westminster and Catesby was quite clear about this, he said, in that place have they done us all this mischief. Therefore in that place God has reserved for their punishment. And so to destroy, but then to build up and have, have a Catholic regime. There's a whole second phase of the plot in the Midlands in order to kidnap the King's James dead James, now his nine year old daughter, Princess Elizabeth. She is in well being, protected by Lord Harrington in Combe Abbey in Warwickshire. And the idea was to kidnap her, put her up as a puppet queen and presumably marry her off to some suitable Catholic. And yes, as Anna said, restore the ancient national faith as they saw it to England.

Podcast Host / Moderator (6:47)

But the picture you've just painted is one of total anarchy. They've taken out the entire political elite and religious elite. I mean, there's not going to be anyone left to run the place.

Gareth Russell (6:57)

No, I think even the basics of government would have been incredibly difficult, to put it mildly. I mean, as Jesse says, 100 metre radius of Parliament is pretty much everyone who knows how to govern or is used to governing. And a Protestant strike back would have been very, very difficult because no matter how many of them there are, anyone that they had acknowledged as a leader, both spiritual and secular, is likely to be dead. And who is the legitimate Protestant leader afterwards. So there would have been, I think, absolute anarchy and chaos throughout the country for months after the plot.

Anna Whitelock (7:29)

I think it's really important to kind of dwell on that, that, you know, this is an act of terrorism, sort of mass murder like never before. I mean it would literally, we know that the boughs of gunpowder were, you know, in a vault under Parliament. It would have literally gone up in flames. And just not just the, the reality of it, but the symbolism, you know, literally the seat of power on fire. And I think, you know, we can, as we, as we do, sort of think, well, and then this would have happened and they, but actually, you know, everybody would have been so taken aback. I mean, this wasn't just the murder of the King and of course we haven't had the English Civil War yet, so, you know, none of that's happened. This is the entire ruling establishment and you know, bishops as well, the judiciary, everything. And so I think it's important to kind of stop and pause and think how would people have reacted to that? Whether they were Catholic or Protestant, wouldn't. First and foremost, they see this as an act of barbarism and terrorism and find sort of widespread condemnation, actually, rather than people rising in, you know, sympathy in the Midlands. And then, of course, the plan was that that Protestant rising to spread elsewhere.

Jesse Childs (8:52)

I think that's absolutely right. I think, as we know, you know, many Catholics were appalled by the plot and not just after the event. I mean, Francis Tresham, who was the last recruit, recruited by his cousin Catesby, who was the ringleader, of course, he was appalled by it. And this was just the month before the plot, and he begged Catesby not to go ahead with it. He actually tried to give him money to send him away. He said, and I think this is exactly what would have happened. He said, if it happens, Catholics will be lynched. There will be something like the massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day. Obviously Protestant on Catholic, but, you know, they would be blamed. Every Catholic. Catholic would be attacked in his bed, he would be dragged out and it would be an absolute bloodbath.

Anna Whitelock (9:35)

And Henry Garnet, the leader of the English Jesuits, had been against it, you know, and the Jesuits were often seen as the kind of shock troopers of Catholicism, you know, there to almost by any means try and re establish Catholicism. And the fact that he was for, you know, came out against it, I think says a lot. And similarly, you know, the sense of that Catholic powers on the continent would have supported this. I mean, Guy Fawkes and the other conspirators had tried to get Spanish support in advance and really that hadn't come to anything. And I think that there's no reason to think that there wouldn't have been this widespread condemnation from foreign powers, not least Spain, as there was, of course, when Henry iv, King of France, was assassinated just five years later. Then, you know, other Catholic powers, including Spain, also condemned this action. So I think it's really important to think about assassination and the shock and the widespread abhorrence of assassination, rather than think, well, actually Catholics would have come out in support of this, because I don't think it was the case.

Gareth Russell (10:39)

Yeah, because James has had a moment before where the solidarity, the trade unionism of monarchy has meant more to foreign Catholic royal families than the cause of the Church. So when he was still King of Scots, the Grand Duke of Tuscany discovered that there was, I think, probably quite a fringe extremist group in Florence who had allegedly sent someone to Edinburgh to poison James as the next Protestant heir presumptive, at least to the English throne. And the Grand Duke of Tuscany sent emissaries ahead with antidotes to James to say really be careful what happens. So I think you're absolutely right. The idea that Catholic monarchies would have prioritized Catholicism over monarchy is at best a dubious assertion.

Anna Whitelock (11:18)

And also, James had been such a skillful politician before his accession. Of course, this is only 1605, and he had promised all things to all men, really. And in Scotland, you know, in order to establish his position as the credible supported English claimant, he had, you know, made a pitch of being this sort of European peacemaker who would try and bring Catholics and Protestants together and in fact, you know, reunite Catholicism by having a general council. So actually, he was seen as this sort of quite astute diplomat who was looked to by the foreign powers of Europe as a really significant figure. And we saw that in his, you know, first Christmas in England, where all the, you know, foreign powers sent ambassadors. All eyes were on the English court at that point. And I think everybody had hopes in James. And so there wasn't this at that moment and the way that James had behaved beforehand, I think this division between Catholic and Protestant. And, of course, James had also come to terms with Spain just the year before. I think it was much more nuanced than that.

Jesse Childs (12:29)

Yeah, I think that's really important, I think. And not only Philip of Spain, but the archdukes as well, Albert and Isabella of the Spanish Netherlands. Trade is what matters. There's been 20 years of war. They don't want another war, you know, with England. And the other thing is, the Pope has, you know, he'd heard these rumors of this plot through Henry Garnet and the Jesuits. He's been sending orders, you know, from Rome, saying, you know, quell these stirs, we don't want a plot. And the other thing is, there were two popes that year. You know, there'd been one Pope, I think, in April that had only lasted a month. And then in May, you have another conclave, so it's a new Pope. I don't think he wants to get stuck in. And there was one other thing I wanted to say, just going back to whether people would have. Would have bat this. In a way, we know exactly what would have happened had the Gunpowder Plot succeeded, because Robin Catesby, when he found out that it had failed, the Midlands group, they were gathered together under the guise of a hunting party. They had horses, they had weapons, and the idea was that they would snowball and they would gather men and support and kidnap Elizabeth. He told them that the plot had succeeded and a lot of these followers actually didn't know the details of the plot. And when he told them what had happened, he said, the king has been killed. They melted away, they didn't support him. So you get sort of this Butch and Sundance moment with the key plotters holed up in Holbeach House with the sheriff around them, and there's a shootout. They have very few supporters at that.

Podcast Host / Moderator (13:58)

But let's imagine pragmatically that Princess Elizabeth is now this puppet queen and obviously everyone's had a horror of assassination, of terrorism. Can't believe this thing has happened. But there's a point at which you've got to move on. And perhaps there's a point at which Philip III of Spain or Henry IV of France, you know, both of whom are famed for their Catholicism, the latter having converted in order to be king, would perhaps have felt that it was then politic to make peace with this new version of England, Scotland and Ireland.

Gareth Russell (14:36)

I think peace, definitely. But I do think there would still have been lingering revulsion. The big problem for the new government would have been, as you mentioned at the start, finding a husband for Elizabeth and I sort of went through who their options would be. I felt slightly like an Archean matchmaker, weighing out which prince could bring the most. And there are not a lot of options for them. The Spanish only have a baby prince at this stage. He's born a few months before the Gunpowder Plot. The Austrian side of the family have sent the two useful archdukes into the church. The French and the Polish Lithuanian royal families are both Catholic. They're both very well established Catholic dynasties. They have a crown prince, Vladislav and the dauphin, Louis. But I would wonder if either of their fathers would have been prepared to send those children into such a risky environment where half the royal family, or three quarters, have just been wiped out completely. And then there's the issue that had presented itself with Mary I and Elizabeth I. And it's quite strange to think of Elizabeth Stuart as Elizabeth ii. But what happens if you marry her to the heir to another throne? There are sovereignty implications down the line. So the one candidate I could find was the fourth son of the Duke of Savoy. So there's sort of the heir, the spare and the who cares? And then there's Francesco, who they could have married her to. And he would have been Catholic. Good. You know, the Savoys have been prominent for about half a millennium at this stage, but I think they would have had to pick someone like that foreign, because I think if you marry her to an English Catholic, you're going to have problems. Like her grandmother, Mary, Queen of Scots with marrying a subject. So I think it would have been maybe Francesco. But even then, although he's fourth in line, do you send your child into such a chaotic environment? So I think peace definitely, but whether you would have seen an alliance with such an unstable regime would have taken a lot longer.

Anna Whitelock (16:25)

I. Yeah, I mean of course England and Spain, you know, were at peace by the treaty that James had secured and that was important for all kinds of self interested reasons of trade and geopolitics. So I don't think necessarily Spain would have wanted to move away from that. But I do wonder. One of the sort of often overlooked powers in Europe at this time is Denmark, Norway and of course Frederick was the brother in law of, of James and a really significant power block, a Protestant power block. And so I'm, I wonder whether Denmark, Norway that you know, again had really important trading relationships that they would want to protect. I wonder if they would have actually sort of taken a more assertive position against any potential Catholic marriage with Elizabeth. I mean, we really are moving into the hypotheticals, but I do think there was a sense of later when the 30 years war broke out that you know, Denmark, Norway and other powers were drawn into it. And of course that was, you know, initially and ironically of course that was kicked off by the, exactly. By Elizabeth's, Elizabeth's marriage. And at that point Protestants in England and Protestant countries really did weigh in, in support of her.

Jesse Childs (17:47)

So she was a tough cookie, wasn't she? I mean even, even at 9, when she would have been made the puppet queen, she apparently protested that she would rather be blown up in the Parliament House with her father than go along with this plan. And then, yes, as you say, when she's the Winter Queen and she kicks off the Thirty Years War effectively.

Anna Whitelock (18:06)

Yeah.

Jesse Childs (18:06)

Raises an interesting point about whether you could have a proxy war potentially.

Podcast Host / Moderator (18:10)

Anna, do you agree with that?

Anna Whitelock (18:11)

Well then also of course she would have had to have been educated and would have had to have. I mean also this is assuming sort of willing accomplices that people thought that this was a credible project that they wanted to support. So you know, assuming that of course Charles was still alive, he might also have become a puppet figure.

Gareth Russell (18:34)

I think that again, I think they would have gone for Charles, I think because from what I can tell, and obviously this is, I think they were unclear on this, whether Charles, because he was so young, would be at Parliament. We now know that the plan was not for him to be there and.

Anna Whitelock (18:47)

Very sickly as well.

Jesse Childs (18:49)

Only just in was it at the end of 1604.

Gareth Russell (18:52)

He's not yet turned. He'll turn five later that month. So I think he would have been a much more attractive candidate for them, a Because he's male, but also because he's younger. And they will be able to mould him into a Catholic. So I think they would have. My instinct is they would have pivoted to Charles. The problem for you mentioned Denmark, Norway. Elizabeth and Charles are half Danish on their mother's side. And the Danish royal family, there is actually very strong family ties there. They're very loyal to their kin. And I think had Queen Anna ended up among the casualty figures, you would have seen Denmark, Norway taking a very assertive line against this new Catholic government in England.

Anna Whitelock (19:31)

Yeah, I mean, and she had. Whilst in Scotland, you know, she had switched, you know, her kind of familial network, which not only sort of into Denmark, Norway, but, you know, through marriages into. Into Germany. I mean, she was a significant European figure in her own right. I mean, one thing I would kind of come back on, I think. I mean, Charles was a really sickly ill child. I mean, he had remained in Scotland when his parents and siblings had come to England. So he was only just five. And we know later that he became obviously King Charles I. But I think his life and his sort of sustainability and his health were really precarious at this point. And I wonder if that played a factor potentially.

Gareth Russell (20:13)

Although I do wonder, would that perhaps have been to their benefit? You know, I think having him as the interim placeholder, and if he lives, great, but if he is sort of sickly, they will be able potentially to pick another heir long term or maybe manipulate the succession further down the line also. He's a boy. They're gonna struggle, I think. Well, they've just blown up the monarchy, so I wonder how much precedent matters.

Podcast Host / Moderator (20:36)

We keep talking about they. Who are they? I mean, who's actually wielding power with these children on the throne?

Jesse Childs (20:42)

Well, assuming the plotters are all still alive, you've got Robert Catesby, of course, but the other key player is Thomas Percy, who is kinsman of the Earl of Northumberland, the 9th Earl of Northumberland. A lot of chatter happened afterwards. All Guy Fawkes, Thomas Winter, the people who survived were all interrogated about the Earl of Northumberland because they thought he would be the obvious protector of the regime until, or if any foreigners helped out. He actually spent 16 years in the Tower of London. They were that suspicious of him. He saw Thomas Percy the night before the 5th of November at Sion House. Percy was sort of Putting feelers out to see the anonymous tip off Monteagle letter which blew up the whole plot. Obviously not literally tipped the authorities off to the plot. Percy was trying to figure out whether Northumberland knew about this. So Northumberland is knee deep in it. He's not actually a Catholic himself, possibly a crypto Catholic. He's been defending Catholics for years and years and years. He probably would have been the Protector. So he is the sort of the figurehead.

Professor Susannah Lipscomb (21:44)

They.

Jesse Childs (21:45)

There are other Lords, Lord Monteagle, Lord Mordaunt, Lord Montague and the plotters themselves. So I think there's enough. I think the issue with Charles is really interesting. Thomas Percy was a gentleman pensioner again thanks to Northumberland, which basically means he was sort of part of the King King's bodyguard, which is why he was able to rent this ground floor vault right underneath the House of Lords without any suspicion. And he was the one who said, I'll be able to secure Charles if he doesn't go to Parliament at the State opening. I wonder, you know, if. If somehow the Protestants could get Charles across the border to Scotland, then you've got the Scots who would, who would have definitely backed him. He would have been the King of Scots, very Protestant Scotland, very Puritan. Then, you know, you're thinking there could well have been a very serious war there.

Anna Whitelock (22:34)

But the conspirators, I mean, they talked in very hostile terms about Scotland. I mean, that was one of the additional motivations that were attributed to them.

Jesse Childs (22:42)

No, but that's the point. So you've got this, you know, Scotland against England, you know, you've got a Catholic regime, you've got the Protestant Scots, you know, and then it might become a proxy war with other people intervening.

Podcast Host / Moderator (22:53)

There's a classic question that you pose to undergraduates, which is, how Protestant was England by 1603 and so how Catholic was England by 1605? In other words, what kind of support would there have been amongst ordinary people for this new regime?

Jesse Childs (23:10)

It's a really good question and it's a really hard question, because if you're a persecuted faith, you don't tend to put your hand up to be counted. Catholics were persecuted by Elizabeth. I mean, in a sense, the Gunpowder Plot is a relic of the Elizabethan persecution and by James originally, they were fined if they didn't go to Protestant church services, £20amonth, which is pretty crippling. Their priests were banned. If a priest was caught on English soil, he would be hanged or unacquarted if he was caught. Anyone who put them up, just ordinary Catholics who Put the priest up in his house would also swing for it. So people did not want to be fined, they didn't want to be imprisoned and tortured. That said, there were the hardline Catholics. They were known as recusants, from the Latin recusara, to refuse, they did put their hands up, they were fined. We know that in 1603, so two years before the Gunpowder Plot, there were around 8,500 recusants in England. John Bossy, an eminent Catholic historian, he suggested that there were probably around 40,000 Catholics. Beyond that, these were known as church papists. They went to church, they avoided the fine. Often it was the head of a household. The women would stay at home and take the sacraments, the Catholic sacraments. The men would front the household and maybe convert on their deathbed. Possibly there were 40,000, possibly more. James, I talked about potentially there being a snowball effect with the Gunpowder Plot. In other words, had it succeeded this momentum, people might have sort of gone back to Catholicism. But I think we're really, Susie, I think we're talking about five figures, not six.

Anna Whitelock (24:53)

I mean, I would slightly push back on that and question whether in fact, that is the right question, which would be my attempt to be a precocious, a level student, which would be. I'm not sure that. Because Catholics would have supported this. I mean, I think, you know, the numbers that you quote for, you know, church papists, there was a kind of outward conformity. So I really don't think we should necessarily see that, you know, surviving Catholics would have absolutely supported this. You know, I really don't think that that's the case. I think we can't underestimate the atrocity here of, you know, the entire ruling establishment, spiritual, secular, judiciary, literally all the. The elements of the state. And of course, James had suggested that he would give some toleration to Catholics. Now, obviously, Catesby and the crew, and they were a pretty motley crew. I mean, this. They weren't sort of people who had senior positions of authority. Fawkes, Guy Fawkes had been soldier in the Spanish Netherlands. But they were a very aggrieved bunch of young men. They didn't have significant contacts. They weren't members of the ruling establishment. So I'm not sure necessarily that people would really want to throw their lot in with them. They were incredibly naive. I think we've, you know, our discussion has shown that they hadn't really figured out what would happen next. And as Jesse said, spoke about earlier that their attempt to get a rising going, not reveal the fact that the, the plot in London had been foiled and the degree to which really support faded away, I think is indicative of the fact that this idea that there would be a groundswell of Catholic support probably wasn't the case.

Gareth Russell (26:46)

It's also interesting to ask how anti Catholic was England by 1605, because along with the numbers being, I think, very small to sustain a coup of that extremity, and also the fact that most of them probably wouldn't have backed it. When you look at populist anti Catholicism, it's the one thing that unites most of southern England. I mean, there is real loathing and fear and it's always bubbling beneath the surface. And you can see that with future Catholic queens consort that marry into the royal family. What I think would have happened is that you would have had the people of London, I don't want to say, I wouldn't say collectively lose their mind, but actually if someone's just blown up the Houses of Parliament, it might be an understandable gathering of your mind. But I do think you would have seen mass violence on the streets and yes, a kind of Catholic version of the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre. It's never too far from an anti Catholic riot in 17th century London. And if something on this scale happens, which is sort of the fulfillment of Protestant propaganda of what you need to be wary of with Catholics, they're just looking to do something this devilish aspect, Protestants would have seen it. I do think that it would not just have been Protestant blood on the streets. By the end of November, I mean.

Anna Whitelock (27:59)

I was really struck thinking about the succession crisis or the non succession crisis. It turned out in 1603, you know, here we have the prospect of a Scottish king taking over England, you know, as the King of England. And despite all the preparations that were taken, the sense of, you know, civil war almost being inevitable, it was a smooth succession. People wanted security, they wanted peace. And in fact, James was kind of heralded as bringing peace. That's what people wanted at the time. Not just peace with Spain, but actually internal peace. And this is only a couple of years later. And I, I just think that it's really important to not underestimate the sort of sense of legitimacy. James and, you know, Anna were the King and Queen, the ruling establishment were there. And yes, there was a fanatical bunch of young men, but I'm not sure that they would really have rallied Catholics per se.

Greenlight Advertiser (29:06)

Did you know that parents rank financial literacy as the number one most difficult life skill to teach? Meet Greenlight, the debit card and money app for families. With Greenlight, you can set up chores, automate allowance and keep an eye on your kids spending. With real time notifications, kids learn to earn, save and spend wisely. And parents can rest easy knowing their kids are learning about money. With guardrails in place. Sign up for Greenlight today@Greenlight.com podcast this.

Talkspace Advertiser (29:34)

Podcast is sponsored by Talkspace. November is Men's Health Awareness Month, so Talkspace wants guys to know that being prepared for life's biggest challenges and opportunities means prioritizing mental health too. Talkspace can help you go beyond fine tuning, fined workouts, supplements and productivity hacks. Talkspace can help you fine tune your inner life so you can succeed in being the best version of yourself in any situation. And with Talkspace, you can get therapy from anywhere and on your time. You can even text your therapist between sessions. If you're depressed, stressed, struggling with a relationship, or just need a little extra one on one support, Talkspace is here for you. Plus, Talkspace takes most insurance and most insured members have a $0 copay. Men's Health Awareness Month is the perfect time to reach out to TalkSpace. Now get $80 off your first month with promo code space80 when you go to talkspace.com match with a licensed therapist today at talkspace.com and save $80 with code space80@talkspace.com that's talkspace.com promo code space.

Anna Whitelock (30:45)

But maybe it's the opposite.

Podcast Host / Moderator (30:47)

Isn't that what you're suggesting? That actually after they have been removed there is no peace, then actually it would have been the murder of Catholics?

Gareth Russell (30:55)

I think.

Anna Whitelock (30:55)

So that's a pushback.

Gareth Russell (30:58)

And that's one of the difficult things with the history of terrorism and this, you know, had it succeeded by its own terms, the scale of that terrorist attack boggles the mind. I mean, I can't think of anything, not just in British history, but in world history where the entire elite goes in a matter of seconds. And even not just the elite, but also the people who do the practical, boring bits of day to day bureaucracy.

Jesse Childs (31:23)

And it'd be a bit like. Sorry to interrupt. It'd be a bit like 911 had Washington also.

Anna Whitelock (31:27)

I was just thinking that. Yeah, yes.

Jesse Childs (31:28)

And that yeah, the seat of, you know, finance and had every.

Gareth Russell (31:32)

Yes, exactly. And that's what I think for me is always the interesting counterfactual with terrorism. Because on the one hand it really will inspire one of two reactions. The first is that it does what the plotters hoped, which is that it terrifies the people into mute obedience because they're discombobulated, they're frightened. But more often than not, it's the odds.

Anna Whitelock (31:51)

More likely in this case, I think.

Gareth Russell (31:52)

Much more likely in this case is that it will provoke a massive sort of pan Protestant populist pushback. I think you would have seen civil war tear through England for years after the Gunpowder Plot. And what's also interesting is what will the reaction be with Scotland and Ireland. Ireland probably would have felt. I mean, we can look at what they do after the regicide in the next generation when Charles I is executed at the end of the Civil War. But Ireland might have been quite pleased to see the Gunpowder Plot succeed. It would have left their Catholic elite intact. You would have had a completely different history for Ireland. Scotland, I think, would have been rightly incandescent because this is their royal family that have been in England for just over two years and the English have wiped them out. So not just civil war, but throughout James former three kingdoms.

Anna Whitelock (32:42)

Would he be registered of the king of Scotland?

Gareth Russell (32:44)

Exactly.

Podcast Host / Moderator (32:45)

Does that mean that we don't get a union?

Gareth Russell (32:47)

Oh, I don't think there would have been a union, if there's any.

Anna Whitelock (32:50)

Certainly not that moment.

Gareth Russell (32:51)

Yeah, absolutely. I think Ireland would. I think you would have seen the Catholic aristocracy in Ireland are really just waiting for a moment that ultimately, largely because of James later in his reign does not come to them. But the Irish aristocracy still rule most of the island in a sort of aristocratic federalism. So I think a lot of those great houses, especially the o' Neill Wales in the north, would have established themselves as kings in maybe actual name. Not just all, but name. So I don't think Ireland would have gone in to the union, although it would ultimately reluctantly do. So the first union between England, England, Wales and Scotland, I don't think that would have happened. I think you would have seen a permanent separation between them.

Podcast Host / Moderator (33:32)

Might well have had a separate monarch proclaimed in Scotland, I think.

Anna Whitelock (33:36)

So I think that's very probable. And also there would have been, I think, a sort of consolidation that of religion in each country rather than. I mean, James had tried to, you know, the situation in religion had been so fluid when as James is king of Scotland and you know, similarly in in Ireland, although of course, you know, Catholic majority, everything was in some state of flux. And I think the success of the Gunpowder Plot would have absolutely consolidated the position. So we would have had a very clear picture of Protestant and Catholic countries. And so I think from a religious point of view, and as you Say, you know, politically, I think the sense that the king, the new king or Queen of England would then be adopted as the king or Queen of Scotland too was fanciful. So I think we would have this separation.

Gareth Russell (34:23)

And the tricky bit for the Scots though, which might have distracted them from launching a retaliatory attack against England. And without question, most of the great families in the Scottish aristocracy believe in the concept of a feud being predicated on honor. You look at the people like the Lindsays and the Huntleys, I think, I mean, the Marquess of Huntly had said when Mary Queen of Scots was executed, he turned up at court in Edinburgh wearing armor when everyone else was in black. And he said, this is the only mourning for a Queen of Scots who's been slain by the English. So I think there would have been a desire to do it. The problem is that the logical next in line for the Scots outside of James immediate family is his cousin, the Duke of Lennox, who also probably would have been at the opening of Parliament. So Scotland might have been distracted by who do you pick as the next King of Scots?

Jesse Childs (35:12)

Yes, and the Huntleys, the little son he was being brought up with, Charles and Henry.

Gareth Russell (35:18)

So then if you also have a lot of young Scottish nobles being held captive essentially or dying in the explosion, then I think the chaos and the fury in Scotland would have been quite a bit greater.

Jesse Childs (35:31)

Plus the plotters just could not bear the Scots. Go for Said when he was being interrogated, he wanted to blow them up back to Scotland by the heels. And Percy, quite a lot of them really detested the Scots. Incredibly xenophobic. I wanted to just pick up on Gareth's point about London because it's a really good point. You know, Parliament is in Westminster. London would have been okay. London was a corporation, you know, it's self ruled at this point. You have have all these livery companies, the trades, the guilds, the merchants. You have the Lord mayor and the aldermen. It's very well organized, they're very wealthy, they're literate, they're litigious, they have stakes in the ground. They will. I'm certain you're right. You know, there would be a bloodbath against Catholics. But then very quickly they would rally, they would restore order, they would restore trade. And you know, if there is some sort of Catholic regime, I think you're right. I think there would have been a civil war sooner. They're the guys who start the civil war effectively in the 1640s.

Anna Whitelock (36:35)

I think the balance between the core and the city and commerce would have shifted. I mean, we really, you know, we have at this point, just after James comes to England, the first ships from the first voyage of the East India Company return to England. And really trade and travel was really kicking off on this point. So, you know, England, Scotland, fledgling Britain was beginning to look outwards. And although the ruling establishment, I think, would have been, been looking inwards, or at least, you know, to England and Scotland, I think, you know, the merchants who, you know, and we know in the history that followed how important figures like, you know, Sir Thomas Smith, who was, you know, governor of so many of the different trading companies was and often overlooked. And I think people like that, you know, who were building these big residences, you know, along the banks of the Thames and, you know, England and London particularly becoming this real global trading hub, I think that would have pushed forward, forward. And actually the monarch wasn't intrinsically linked with those early projects. I think what we might not have seen is the sort of focus on establishing permanent colonies in the New World. I think there would have perhaps been a distraction from that. Although that said, depending on what followed, there would have perhaps still been the propulsion of, you know, figures who ended up boarding the Mayflower to just go to the New World to establish, you know, an alternative life and find religious freedom.

Podcast Host / Moderator (38:08)

I mean, it's really interesting to think about the fact that you've got the spiritual elite taken out at this point as well. Obviously, a year earlier, there's the Hampton Court Conference. But in terms of thinking about the production of the King James Bible, the multiple knock on effects of this extraordinary assassination and removal of all these key figures, can you think about what else might have happened in that regard, do you think?

Gareth Russell (38:35)

I think you would have seen the preemptive euthanizing of that Jacobean cultural flowering that we had under James. Because if you have a country that's in chaos, it's really not conducive to writing great plays or producing really anything artistic. So I mean, to me, obviously the big one would be that it would have killed the King James Bible project immediately. Whether they would eventually have gotten back to it and thought it was something that they should finish, I don't know.

Jesse Childs (39:02)

But it's Queen Elizabeth I should.

Gareth Russell (39:03)

Yeah, the Queen Elizabeth version, but also.

Anna Whitelock (39:06)

Figures Francis Bacon and so on would have been, you know, part of that ruling establishment that was killed, I think.

Jesse Childs (39:14)

So Shakespeare's still going.

Anna Whitelock (39:15)

Shakespeare's still.

Jesse Childs (39:16)

Macbeth would be very different. Macbeth is a Gunpowder Plot player. I mean, especially the Porter. That scene, Faith. Here's an equivocator who could weigh in both the scales against either scale, who committed treason enough for God's sake, but could not equivocate to heaven. That wonderful scene where he uses the alias of Henry Garnet, the head of the Jesuits, things like that. Macbeth would be so different. John Milton as well, obsessed with the Gunpowder Plot.

Anna Whitelock (39:41)

Absolutely. And I think it's really important to remember that Shakespeare, who we often associate with the court of Elizabeth and being Elizabethan playwright, was one of the King's men. I mean, he was appointed one of the King's men, him and his troop at the beginning of James reign. And so many of his perhaps most famous plays were Jacobean plays. So yeah, you're absolutely right. The sort of export of Englishness and English language abroad, whether it be through the King James Bible, whether it's through Shakespeare, I think that really would have been affected.

Instacart Advertiser (40:20)

A PSA from instacart It's Sunday 5pm you had a non stop weekend. You're running on empty and so is your fridge. You're in the trenches of the Sunday day scaries. You don't have it in you to go to the store, but this is your reminder. You don't have to. You can get everything you need delivered through Instacart so that you can get what you really need. More time to do whatever you want. Instacart for one less Sunday. Scary. We're here.

Talkspace Advertiser (40:51)

This podcast is sponsored by Talkspace. November is Men's Health Awareness Month, so Talkspace wants guys to know that being prepared for life's biggest challenges and opportunities means prioritizing mental health too. Talkspace can help you go beyond fine tuned workouts, supplements and productivity hacks. Talkspace can help you fine tune your inner life so you can succeed in being the best version of yourself in any situation. And with Talkspace, you can get therapy from anywhere and on your time. You can even text your therapist between sessions. If you're depressed, stressed, struggling with a relationship, or just need a little extra one on one support, Talkspace is here for you. Plus Talkspace takes most insurance and most insured members have a $0 copay. Men's Health Awareness Month is the perfect time to reach out to TalkSpace. Now get $80 off your first month with promo code space80 when you go to talkspace.com match with a licensed therapist today at talkspace.com and save $80 with code space80@talkspace.com that's talkspace.com promo code space80.

Podcast Host / Moderator (42:04)

And even if you think about architecture we think about the great Elizabethan prodigy houses, but a lot of those are Jacobean. All the people who built those would have died, so there wouldn't have been so many gorgeous houses across.

Anna Whitelock (42:15)

I mean, in.

Podcast Host / Moderator (42:16)

In so many ways, culturally, we see an impact.

Anna Whitelock (42:19)

Yeah, I think figures like, you know, Ben Johnson, Indigo Jones, figures like that, who may well have been within Parliament at that point. I mean, I think it would have extinguished something. Now, I think we wouldn't want to overstate the fact. Fact that this would have, you know, blown up, this sort of cultural flourishing, I mean, for a time. But there was, I think, a relentless and inevitable sort of tide of European influence sweeping into the country, not least through the trade and travel which still would have taken place. So I think we shouldn't overstate because I do think that these sort of forces were now taken on a momentum of their own. But certainly what the royal palaces might look like and the sense of, you know, Prince Henry, Prince Charles being really avid art collectors. And I think that obviously wouldn't have happened at that point.

Gareth Russell (43:12)

I think they probably would have struggled for a while to attract some of the great minds that they did later under James and Charles, simply because of that knock on political chaos. Who is in charge of the royal estates? Who has the money to be investing in these things? Things. So I think it would have been. I mean, as in any time of chaos or anarchy, you will have. It will take a lot longer to fix than it does to destroy. And that really at the heart of it is the problem of what the Gunpowder Plot would have done. As you say, there is staggering naivety. It's quite interesting that there's no one who has any real experience with politics in the core of this motley crew of plotters. And. And it runs through history. Sometimes people forget that a grievance is not a policy. Once you've torn something down, there's that great silence of what follows. And I don't think they really had a very clear plan of what to do. The other thing to mention about England potentially throughout the centuries, but certainly in this one, is there is a deference to hierarchy. There is an innate social conservatism that you want people from a certain background in government that obviously will. Will soften over the centuries. But in the 17th century, I think it would have been something that hung around people like Catesby and the rest of them, of actually, it shouldn't be you who's in government. So I do think we would have seen Northumberland step into the breach. I think the crypto part of his crypto, Catholicism would have been dropped pretty swiftly.

Anna Whitelock (44:38)

I mean, we can also see, of course, what happens. What, I mean, less than 50 years later with the English Civil War and the execution of Charles I, and of course that was just the King being executed and there was an immediate sense of, you know, a world turned upside down. And I think many people were like, what did we just do?

Jesse Childs (44:55)

We killed God.

Anna Whitelock (44:56)

Yeah, we killed God in a sense of what, what follows. And I think that hadn't been thought through. So I, I think it.

Jesse Childs (45:04)

But then look how well they did. I mean, the republic was in many ways this sort of electrifying period, this constitutional experiments, very creative.

Anna Whitelock (45:16)

I mean, the relationship between James and Parliament, the rise of the print press and newsletters, people were becoming more informed. I think we shouldn't underestimate the voice of the people and the articulation of that and people being more exposed to ideas in that 50 years or 45 year period from James to Charles.

Podcast Host / Moderator (45:37)

I mean, it's worth thinking about whether if James had been murdered and if we assume Charles becomes king at some point, whether his execution would have been more or less likely. It's hard, of course, because we've got to think about whether Prince Charles, from a young age now King Charles has been brought up to respect Parliament or does Parliament exist anymore?

Jesse Childs (46:00)

You know, is he Catholic, is he Protestant?

Anna Whitelock (46:02)

I mean, he might have absolutely hated Protestantism because of what happened to his parents and therefore become, you know, unambiguously Catholic.

Podcast Host / Moderator (46:10)

Or vice versa.

Anna Whitelock (46:11)

Or vice versa, exactly. And that's the vice versa bit. Yeah.

Jesse Childs (46:14)

And if he's more authoritarian, do you get more pushback from the merchants in London? Quite possibly.

Podcast Host / Moderator (46:19)

Is it unthinkable to kill a king after his father has been assassinated?

Anna Whitelock (46:25)

No.

Jesse Childs (46:25)

But then, you know, Mary Queen of Scots has been beheaded legitimately. Well, judicially at least.

Gareth Russell (46:31)

I wondered. You also said it, sorry, as the arm of God. I mean, I think sometimes I always try to remind myself of how providentialist they were, which is that, particularly if you bring this child up from four as a Catholic, they would probably do to Charles what the Presbyterians did to his father after Mary was banished. They would give him lessons saying, your father brought this upon himself. You know, the hand of God moves through the arms of men. Therefore, when your father and the entire ruling establishment of England were, were just wiped out by fire, as were the sinners in Sodom and Gomorrah, as was the plan for Nineveh, they would have ransacked the Bible for examples to prove that this was God acting through men. So it could have been that. Charles would have been very easily indoctrinated into accepting that. And you see this in the Bible as well. You know, it doesn't. Wickedness does not pass down the bloodline. They'll hold up kings like Jehoash and say Athalia and Jezebel were sinful, so God got rid of them and then picked you from the bloodline to restore it.

Anna Whitelock (47:29)

But what about the idea that James would have been this absolute martyr figure? I mean, he had, you know, survived assassination temps in Scotland in the early part of his reign. There had been Catholic plots, the buy and the main plot. And I mean, we know how Charles the First, you know, immediately as his head dropped into that basket, he becomes this great martyr figure. I mean, you know, the idea that James had had this, you know, life of where he'd been persecuted by the Catholics and had, for, you know, a number of times escaped those assassination attempts. I mean, the fact that him and his wife and the whole ruling establishment had been blown up, I mean, I just wonder what the legacy of that would have been of James as a martyr figure.

Jesse Childs (48:13)

I think. I think he would have been. But I also think. And granted, it's not the whole establishment, it's not a terrorist atrocity in the same way. But if. I think if you look after the regicide of Charles I, so we're talking about 1649, James, son Charles after the Civil War, Cromwell and co have a trial, show trial. Arguably his head is chopped off. If you look at how quickly order was restored, I think that's quite telling. And not only that, but how quickly the foreign kings and rulers acknowledge Cromwell, Oliver Cromwell's protector. There's a famous cartoon that came out of Paris which is Oliver Cromwell sitting on the loo. And you have the King of Spain and you have the King of France handing him paper to wipe his breech. And, you know, the first people to acknowledge Cromwell were the Spanish.

Gareth Russell (49:06)

Well, it's that thing. They all wring their hands in horror at the execution of the English king, but raise their hands with vigor at the auction of his former possessions. You know, they're all quite delighted. That's why you have sort of Jane Seymour in Vienna and Anne of Cleves in Paris, because all these treasures are. Are sold. So, yeah, they'll, they'll work with what's.

Anna Whitelock (49:26)

Of course, dogmatism and ultimately, you know, they've in a sense got bigger fish to fry, whether it be in the New World, whether, you know, the, the Spanish in the Netherlands, you know, they are, resources are stretched. And so I think it's, you know, it's very easy to see the center of the world being London and England and everybody completely obsessing with that. Yes, it was an important, you know, a sort of pawn in the balance of power politics in Europe. But, you know, the canvas of the world is getting broader and I think it's, you know, I ultimately think they would have been entirely self interested and having to balance their own geopolitical concerns.

Jesse Childs (50:01)

I think that's a really good point. It's an island nation. It's not that important yet. It's, it's devil land, as Claire Jackson titled her book about it. Lot of Europeans and her book was all about the, as we know, the perspective from Europe. They thought England was this watery nation. It was instable, like the element that surrounded it. It was choppy, it was unpredictable. And you know, I think if it had it been mainland Europe in the way that Bohemia was and the way Bohemia mattered so much and Bohemia by the way had been Protestant for sort of a few decades and then was successfully recatholicized by the Habsburgs. So it can happen, but it's mainland, the dynastic borders are key. Whereas England, who cares?

Gareth Russell (50:44)

Well, also probably would have been from the Spanish perspective, quite useful that England isn't going to be as active in the Americas or as active abroad. So again, it's what that great line Maria Theresa has about the partition of Poland or someone said it about her, that with one hand she was dabbing her tears and on the other she was signing the treaty to take a bit of Poland. So I think that's probably what would have happened with the Spanish and the English colonies overseas.

Jesse Childs (51:06)

And actually to pick up on that, there's another, another funny counterfactual that happened in 1582. Robert Catesby's father, William Catesby, was part of this plan to set up a colony in North America. It was going to be a Catholic colony. They got quite far with it. You know, there was sort of, there were contracts. The people who kiboshed it were the Spanish. And again, it's because they, they didn't want the English to have a foothold in the Americas. And they said if they come out here, they will have their throats cut.

Anna Whitelock (51:34)

And that's the driver at this point. I think it's if, you know, if England, Scotland, Ireland, fledgling Britain are kind of, you know, at each other and distracted, that diversion was perfect. And the Spanish would have been more than Happy?

Podcast Host / Moderator (51:46)

I was going to ask you what were the unintended consequences of this, but it feels like every consequence was unintended. Perhaps it wouldn't have been called Jamestown. That's all we've got.

Jesse Childs (51:58)

Yes. More Merrylands, I think. I mean, I think if we talk about civil war, you know, if the civil war could be prolonged and if there wasn't a civil war, if say there was an authoritarian Catholic regime for centuries, then it's possible that we would have had a revolution more in the way that the French did in the 18th century and therefore possibly no monarchy today.

Gareth Russell (52:21)

I suppose one of the great other counterfactuals as well is because it's a double counterfactual, is what would have happened to James's widow, Anna, because it's not clear that she definitely would have gone to the opening of Parliament, where it's more traditional today, that the consort does go with the sovereign. It's not totally established by the 17th century that they do go. And Anna's sort of missing from the sources about what would have happened because she has flirted pretty heavily with Catholicism and there's even been rumors in the 1590s that she's converted. And James, who's very tolerant of the Huntleys, has to exile the Marchioness of Huntly because she keeps giving Anna rosaries. And the catechism is French, which strains even his invincible affection for them. And it gets to the stage that it's so probable that Anna has become too close to Catholicism that Elizabeth I even writes to her and says, can you confirm this is not true? And Anna writes back and says, we never abandon Protestantism and I love Protestantism so much that I cannot sleep until.

Anna Whitelock (53:18)

I have your portrait, possibly more politically be attuned later. But I think, I mean, I think it's a good point and I think Jesse's point is really interesting. I mean, because of course what's striking about the civil war in England or the three kingdoms is it does come early. And I think that if the monarchy had either in a Protestant or a Catholic direction, become of more of an absolute monarchy, I think there might, it might have, the civil war might have come later and have been more decisive because of course, what's striking when we look at, at the civil wars on the continent that were much more decisive in destroying the monarchy for good, they did come later.

Podcast Host / Moderator (53:57)

So final question then. It's a two parter. To what extent has this been an easy piece of historical speculation? What has made this easy or difficult? And do you Feel like you've learned anything through the process of this conjecture?

Gareth Russell (54:14)

I think, for me, that it has been an easy counterfactual party because it's such a vast event that once you start pulling at the thread of what would have happened, or what, sorry, could have happened had the plot succeeded in November 1605, you're left with dozens of options. So it's a bit like a historical crossroad. She's getting all these clues and trying to figure out the answer. And what I have learned from me, anyway, which is quite an embarrassing thing to admit, is just. Just how vast the impact would have been. I don't think I had properly considered. Sometimes we forget about them in the House of Lords, the impact of the two archbishops of the Church of England and all the bishops going. And the spiritual frameworks were being robbed from the national faith. And also the fact that it wasn't just the lords of the bishops that actually all the men who crossed the T's and dot the I's in Jacobean government are gone. So the chaos that would have followed it, I think, has really, really impacted me, thinking about it for this.

Jesse Childs (55:12)

Yeah. I think it makes you look at things in slightly a bit like with sort of television documentaries and things you get. As a historian, you sort of get asked. You get used to the same question sometimes, and certainly when you're writing your books, you're asking yourselves the questions. It's very good to be asked different questions and to think outside the box, I suppose, to use that awful phrase. To think deeper chronologically and geographically, to spin the globe to see what else is going on and to look sort of. Yes. Further back, further forward and to consider other people. I mean, the Earl of Northumberland, you know, it's fun to read up more about him. I encourage anyone to look him up. The wizard Earl, he was. He spent his time in the Tower of London doing science experiments and he loved gardening.

Anna Whitelock (55:57)

And he's. He's quite.

Jesse Childs (55:58)

He's quite an eccentric character. This summer we haven't spoken about at all that we should, which is Princess Mary, who was a baby. They had a fourth child, James and Anne. She was only seven months old, Mary, but she was, I think, under the guard of Sir Thomas Nyvat at this point, who was one of the ones who caught Guy Fawkes. But assuming, you know, maybe she got snuck out in a warming pan, maybe she got sent over to Holland.

Anna Whitelock (56:23)

Of course she died.

Jesse Childs (56:24)

We should say she did die later. But we're talking contingencies here and hypotheticals. I Mean, what if then there was a glorious revolution which again happened on the 5th of November, the. The landing of William of Orange and Mary near Devon. So what happens if this Mary came back on the 5th of November? And we would be celebrating the 5th of November just in a very different way. So it's fun. This is a fun exercise and it's educational and helpful.

Anna Whitelock (56:50)

Well, I always think it's sort of like eating your vegetables. It's one of the things that's good for you counterfactuals, but it's not necessarily the first thing you would choose. Choose to do. But I actually think it's really instructive. I mean, the very obvious point is it reminds us that so much of history is about contingency and the kind of what ifs and so on. But I think. So, you know, when you step back and you obviously there's the initial kind of, well, what if this happened? And then you can say, well, that's ridiculous, it didn't. But also, you realize that in our writing of history we also buy into so many assumptions and actually, you know, we don't have to partake in counterfactual history to remember that when we are writing history, there are big and small assumptions that are sort of built into the narrative. And I think it's really important to just be aware of those and nod to those, perhaps those cul de sacs and those what ifs as you're writing the history that indeed happened. So the counterfactual is the kind of. Kind of extreme end. But I think being aware of the assumptions and sort of element of it just happened, but it could have gone the other way is important. So, having said, I don't like counterfactuals. I think they are good for me and I have learned something.

Podcast Host / Moderator (58:10)

Yes. What it does is it reminds us of these humans living in linear time. You can't escape the chronology and they don't know what's going to happen. So we have to imagine the past from the point of view of somebody in it, I think, to really inhabit it.

Gareth Russell (58:24)

History happens backwards, life happens forwards.

Podcast Host / Moderator (58:27)

Indeed. Well, thank you very much for indulging me, especially Anna, because she hated it so much. And thinking about what might have been, it's been really interesting and I think chiefly because it is much bigger than any of us had previously thought.

Jesse Childs (58:45)

Thank you, thank you.

Professor Susannah Lipscomb (58:48)

Thank you for listening to this episode of Not Just the Tudors from History Hit. Thank you also to my researcher, Max Wintool, my producer Rob Weinberg, and to Amy Haddow who edited this episode. We are always eager to hear from you, including receiving your brilliant ideas for subjects we can cover. So do drop us a line at not just the tudorsistoryhit.com and I look forward to joining you again for another episode Episode. Next time on Not Just the Tutors From History hit.

Greenlight Advertiser (59:24)

Take control of the numbers and supercharge your small business with Xero. That's Xero. With our easy to use accounting software with automation and reporting features, you'll spend less time on manual tasks and more time understanding how your business is doing. 87% of surveyed US customers agree Xero helps improve financial visibility. Search Xero with an x or visit xero.comacast to start your 30 day free trial. Conditions apply.

LifeLock Advertiser (59:54)

The holidays mean more travel, more shopping, more time online and more personal info in more places that could expose you more to ideas. Identity theft but LifeLock monitors millions of data points per second. If your identity is stolen, our US based restoration specialists will fix it, guaranteed your money back. Don't face drained accounts, fraudulent loans or financial losses alone. Get more holiday fun and less Holiday worry with LifeLock. Save up to 40% your first year. Visit LifeLock.com SpecialOffer terms apply.