Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > War and Military History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

War and Military History War and Military History Forum - Warfare, Tactics, and Military Technology over the centuries


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 11th, 2012, 12:49 PM   #31

funakison's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Oct 2012
From: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 3,627
Blog Entries: 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sicknero View Post
I've read different estimates of what proportion of the English population were Catholic at the time, with a greater representation among the upper classes.

But of course the nature of the times meant that even devout Catholics might be reluctant to admit to it. Even so I personally tend to the belief that Phillip was completely misled as to the amount of support he could have expected had his army successfully landed in England.

I agree with you. But what exactly why did Phillip invade, was it out of some out of date desire to protect the Catholic citizens of his daed wifes regime, perhaps the invasion was 30 years too late.
funakison is offline  
Remove Ads
Old December 11th, 2012, 01:28 PM   #32

Sicknero's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: May 2012
From: Here to Eternity
Posts: 4,407

Quote:
Originally Posted by Belloc View Post
Indeed, I don't recall making any definitive estimate about how many Catholics there were at the time, I even admitted that it's difficult to accurately do so. I guess he's referring to studies I mention which might suggest a Catholic majority as late as the 17th century.
Could you point me to some of those studies..? I don't mean that in a challenging way but a sincere wish to study all sides of the debate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Belloc View Post
Even if so (ie a Catholic majority), whether that translates into direct support for a foreign power is another issue.
That's a very interesting point. I can well imagine that even many English catholics might not have seen a Spanish occupation as being in their best interests.

Quote:
Originally Posted by funakison View Post
I agree with you. But what exactly why did Phillip invade, was it out of some out of date desire to protect the Catholic citizens of his daed wifes regime, perhaps the invasion was 30 years too late.
Another interesting point. Some writers are rather sceptical about any sincere religious motivations on Phillip's part, and ascribe the attempted invasion rather to issues of secular power, precipitated by Elizabeth's support of Protestant resistance in the Spanish Netherlands and the execution of Mary Stuart.

Although Phillip supported Elizabeth's accession to the throne it seems that these factors among others (privateers for e.g.) soured the relationship and led to a state of de facto if undeclared war.
Sicknero is offline  
Old December 11th, 2012, 02:17 PM   #33

Apachewarlord's Avatar
Chief idiot
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: Hippy town U.S.A.!
Posts: 5,675
Blog Entries: 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sicknero View Post
Could you point me to some of those studies..? I don't mean that in a challenging way but a sincere wish to study all sides of the debate.



That's a very interesting point. I can well imagine that even many English catholics might not have seen a Spanish occupation as being in their best interests.



Another interesting point. Some writers are rather sceptical about any sincere religious motivations on Phillip's part, and ascribe the attempted invasion rather to issues of secular power, precipitated by Elizabeth's support of Protestant resistance in the Spanish Netherlands and the execution of Mary Stuart.

Although Phillip supported Elizabeth's accession to the throne it seems that these factors among others (privateers for e.g.) soured the relationship and led to a state of de facto if undeclared war.
Very interesting points. I especially agree with you on the last. I'm of a mind that no drastic action is taken with religion being the actual cause. I feel that most of the time there are other factors involved.
Apachewarlord is offline  
Old December 11th, 2012, 03:46 PM   #34

Belloc's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Mar 2010
From: USA
Posts: 5,144

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sicknero View Post
Could you point me to some of those studies..? I don't mean that in a challenging way but a sincere wish to study all sides of the debate.
I mainly got this from Clare Asquith when discussing her book on Catholic themes in Shakespeare's plays. This is the best I could find atm:
Quote:
Until recently it was widely assumed that Catholicism was a dwindling sect in Shakespeare's day. But the recent "revisionist" history of the period stresses the fact that in spite of persecution, most of the country was either overtly or secretly Catholic up to 1600.

And among the intelligentsia who opposed the Cecils -- Elizabeth's powerful advisers -- covert Catholicism was respectable, indeed fashionable, in the 1590s.

Outwardly "Protestant" Elizabethan figures such as Philip Sidney, Edmund Spenser, Penelope Rich and the Queen's witty godson, John Harrington, all expressed private sympathy with the undercover priests who were bringing a revived form of Counter-Reformation Catholicism to England. The attitudes and themes of Shakespeare's work suggest that one of his primary aims was to address the concerns of sophisticated, disaffected courtiers like these.

Investigating Shakespeare's Hidden Catholicism - Featured Today - Catholic Online
Unfortunately she doesn't name such historians, but the description for David N. Beauregard's Catholic Theology in Shakespeare's Plays does list the works of Christopher Haigh, Eamon Duffy, J. J. Scarisbrick among those historians arguing a thesis along these lines.

Hope this helps. It's been a while since I last spent time with this subject, so I'm rusty.
Belloc is offline  
Old December 11th, 2012, 03:54 PM   #35

Sicknero's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: May 2012
From: Here to Eternity
Posts: 4,407

Thanks Belloc, interesting article which suggests other directions to research too.

My own 'pet' topic for this era is really the Powder Plot, but these things have to be studied in context of course.
Sicknero is offline  
Old December 11th, 2012, 03:58 PM   #36
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2011
From: Georgia, USA
Posts: 3,202

Quote:
Originally Posted by funakison View Post
I agree with you. But what exactly why did Phillip invade, was it out of some out of date desire to protect the Catholic citizens of his daed wifes regime, perhaps the invasion was 30 years too late.
Phillip II was a devout Catholic

He saw it as his duty to protect his faith...and extinguish all forms of heresy

He saw England as the biggest threat to Catholic hegemony.
Poly is offline  
Old December 11th, 2012, 04:02 PM   #37

Mangekyou's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jan 2010
From: UK
Posts: 6,135
Blog Entries: 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by Poly View Post
Phillip II was a devout Catholic

He saw it as his duty to protect his faith...and extinguish all forms of heresy

He saw England as the biggest threat to Catholic hegemony.
Not to mention the continuous mercenary English armies fighting in the lowlands. Led continuously by people such as Horace and Francis Vere, and John Norrys. They fought hard, and formed veteran forces for the Dutch, that were able to fight and equal the Spanish Veteran forces.
Mangekyou is offline  
Old December 11th, 2012, 04:39 PM   #38

dagul's Avatar
Rabbit of Wormhole
 
Joined: Mar 2012
From: In the bag of ecstatic squirt
Posts: 9,936

Quote:
Originally Posted by Belloc View Post
Indeed, I don't recall making any definitive estimate about how many Catholics there were at the time, I even admitted that it's difficult to accurately do so. I guess he's referring to studies I mention which might suggest a Catholic majority as late as the 17th century.

Even if so(ie a Catholic majority), whether that translates into direct support for a foreign power is another issue.
I have the same impression regarding the consideration of the Spaniards as foreign invaders by the English even if they're Catholics.
dagul is offline  
Old December 11th, 2012, 04:44 PM   #39

Mangekyou's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jan 2010
From: UK
Posts: 6,135
Blog Entries: 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by dagul View Post
I have the same impression regarding the consideration of the Spaniards as foreign invaders by the English even if they're Catholics.
Mary was close to Philip. If they appealed enough, I do not see why an insurrection would not occur. Religious tolerances opened all sorts of "canned worms".

If anyone was to exarcebate this potential frailty, it would be Alexander Farnese, who had demonstrated his ability to do just this, on the continent.

Not saying it would be easy by any stretch though.

(btw, digressing madly, It was sad to see what happened to to the "pac man", on sunday )
Mangekyou is offline  
Old December 11th, 2012, 04:51 PM   #40

dagul's Avatar
Rabbit of Wormhole
 
Joined: Mar 2012
From: In the bag of ecstatic squirt
Posts: 9,936

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mangekyou View Post
Mary was close to Philip. If they appealed enough, I do not see why an insurrection would not occur. Religious tolerances opened all sorts of "canned worms".

If anyone was to exarcebate this potential frailty, it would be Alexander Farnese, who had demonstrated his ability to do just this, on the continent.

Not saying it would be easy by any stretch though.
You could be right on this because of the possibility of lack of identity of the people as the English nationals, and may rather consider themselves with the religious denomination that they belong with, considering the form of the norm and culture of the epoch of that historical event.

Quote:
(btw, digressing madly, It was sad to see what happened to to the "pac man", on sunday )
That was boxing, he poked his head on the right wing of Marquez so he paid the price of not being careful.

..... by the way, the mother of pac-man blamed his son for becoming a Born Again Christian instead of keeping his being a Catholic, speaking of the Catholic thing in the thread
dagul is offline  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > War and Military History

Tags
1588, england, spanish, subdued


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The worst King of England and the best kings of England ? Nicklord1 Medieval and Byzantine History 151 May 12th, 2014 07:18 AM
Nova Anglia - New England .the England of the East. ANAX Medieval and Byzantine History 13 December 26th, 2012 05:05 PM
1588: Invasion Imminent! Richard Stanbery European History 10 January 2nd, 2012 03:37 AM
English Navy 1588 Vs British Navy(2005) Whiggamore Speculative History 42 November 10th, 2011 07:32 AM
England's fleet, 1588 corndog36 War and Military History 59 May 21st, 2011 10:33 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.