Snake Plissken
Snake? Snake!? Snaaaaaaake!
Chris Benoit
Benoit for HOF 2024
Johnny
Well kent cretin and slaver
Ottoman Empire lads. Anyone reccomend any reading/documentaries on this? There was one on the BBC not long ago that I watched that got me interested
shaun.lawson
Punta del Este, Uruguay
(10-21-2015, 08:49 AM)Makween Wrote: Like I said this stuff isn't exactly clear in my mind, but a couple of things stuck out to me here:
Not sure where you're getting the bit about Scotland, or even large parts of it, being Catholic. Â IIRC there were large amounts of dissenting Protestants, but Catholicism was no more prÃvalent than in England. Â If you have a source for this I'm happy to be proven wrong, but that's my recollection.
It's worth pointing out here that pretty much everyone in British politics at this stage would have self-defined as a Whig. Â The Pittites rejected the label of 'Tory'; the distinction has largely only been accepted and applied retrospectively. Â Probably a small point in the grand scheme of things - 'Whigs vs Tories' is snappier than 'Pittites vs Foxites', but it's worth bearing in mind.
I'm going to assume that you're not including Ireland in domestic British politics here. Â Right?
Many important corrections and clarifications here: thanks!
On Scotland, the language I used was hopeless. What I should've said was: in England, Scotland was thought of as Catholic. This is because of the bizarre way in which the Jacobite rebellions, and Charles I and James II before that, led to a pretty all-encompassing mythology about 'Scotland' (inverted commas here, because I'm well aware that Culloden, for example, was nothing like England v Scotland) which just dominated matters at Westminster for generations on end.
Then, after the 1801 stitch-up, Ireland replaced Scotland as the great, looming 'threat' which had to be 'pacified'. And when I talk about nothing happening in domestic politics, what I mean principally is:
1. No Parliamentary reform until 1832 despite Britain changing dramatically: industrialising rapidly and a new rentier middle class emerging
2. No Catholic emancipation until 1829 despite the aforementioned stitch-up
3. The maintenance of the Corn Laws until 1846 despite this being so at odds with how the country was changing
I excluded Ireland from the above list because having wasted years of my life poring over manuscripts in the British Library during my PhD, it wasn't viewed as 'domestic' exactly. The ignorance on display from government ministers about this seemingly far-away place teeming with rascals and revolutionaries was breathtaking. The Lord Lieutenant, who didn't have to worry about dealing with the real world from his quarters at Dublin Castle, would send letters to government colleagues congratulating himself on keeping everything in order. It was like reading about some kind of parallel universe.
Your point on the Pittites is good and important too. Unable to alter George III's set views on Catholic emancipation, Pitt resigned in 1801 - but after his death five years later, both 'pro-Catholics' and 'anti-Catholics' used the events around his resignation to each claim to be acting according to what he would have wanted. A farcical situation ensued after 1812: ministry after ministry would declare that the Catholic question was 'open', and always include some 'pro-Catholic' and some 'anti-Catholic' ministers. This meant, inevitably, that nothing would change: even under George Canning, vociferous 'pro-Catholic' and the subject of my PhD, in 1827.
Then, just as only Nixon could go to China, only Wellington and Peel, both long known for their opposition to Catholic emancipation, could force the king's hand in 1829... and precipitate the complete implosion of the Tories. And the wonderful thing about Peel was he broke his party not once, but twice.
Incidentally, do I think we're in the early stages of a long process similar to that of 1815-32 which will finally force electoral reform and ultimately break the Tories for good? I do actually (a status quo in which the government is so wildly unrepresentative of public opinion cannot possibly hold forever)... but it's a very, very long haul.
This post was last modified: 10-22-2015, 06:46 AM by shaun.lawson.
Anyone who finds that period particularly interesting is a nailed on Blackadder the Third fan and therefore a great guy IMO.
This post was last modified: 10-22-2015, 09:53 PM by Cheeky Gnando’s.
Walter Sobchak
over the line
Fire Doinks
Unregistered
Came across this guy's Youtube a week or so ago -
He's done loads of videos, really good summaries covering a wide range of conflicts and events.
Roger H. Sterling
Category 3 Poster
Got a minute in. Content sounds dece but that guys voice/accent/audio production is horrendous.
shaun.lawson
Punta del Este, Uruguay
Fire Doinks
Unregistered
Good talk
There are some people that I could listen to on anything, Victor Davis Hanson is one of them.
Peas N Gravy
Posting Freak
You should read Hellstorm: the death of Nazi Germany. Comes from a German perspective.
|