(no subject)
Nov. 8th, 2005 07:25 amGraham Parry reviews three books on the Gunpowder Treason.
The concluding thoughts of three of these books turn to the contemporary problem of terrorism in London. The parallels between 1605 and 2005 are striking: the perpetrators come from a religious minority that is widespread throughout the country; they are motivated by perverted religious values; they are thought to have foreign support from countries or groups hostile to this nation; they target London; and their instrument of destruction is gunpowder, in ancient or modern form. Hatred of government policies is another common factor, driving a desire for vengeance in a spectacular way that will destabilise the country. In 1605 the Catholic community immediately repudiated the conspirators and distanced itself from the plot; there were no more conspiracies for a very long time. What helped to restore confidence after the plot was the recognition by the authorities that Catesby and co were extremists and quite uncharacteristic of their fellow Catholics. There was no vindictive policy of persecution once the trial of the plotters had ended, but a sustained attempt to make allegiance to the crown a universal bond. We could learn something from that precedent.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-11-08 06:41 pm (UTC)The what now? There was a vindictive policy of persecution *before* the gunpowder plot. Not attending protestant church on sunday was a hefty fine, for example, and catholic priests had a mandatory death sentence, and harboring one was also not healthy.
The not-attending-church fines had been abolished for a while after the ascension of Elizabeth's successor, but he'd reintroduced them (when catholics were growing in number, 'taking advantage' of his leniency) and made persecution of catholics a priority again, which was actually the reason for the gunpowder plot. The plot didn't really cause much extra persecution, but it did set catholic emancipation back 300 years.