Were The Gunpowder Plotters Framed? There’s no doubt about it that there was a plot to blow parliament up in 1604, but was Guy Fawkes really the one to blame? I personally believe that Guy Fawkes was not to be blamed, but Robert Cecil I believe was; some of these sources back up this statement: In source A, it tells us that the cellar was rented to one of the gunpowder plotters by John Whynniard, who was a friend of Cecil’s. This could mean that Cecil had access to the cellar, being able to find the gunpowder barrels. Also, it states that Whynniard died very unexpectedly on the morning of 5th November.
This act of treason meant that anyone who disagreed with the break with Rome would be executed due to heresy. Therefore, it seems as though Henry did not fully accept the protestant beliefs, because he killed Tyndale for spreading them. And if the King could not fully accept the new Protestant religion, then how was the rest of England expected to? Therefore, this leads to the conclusion that Protestantism made only limited gains in England, due to the fact that it was not as accepted as Catholicism was. The idea shown in source 7 of Henry not being able to fully separate himself from his catholic beliefs is further back up by the evidence found in source 8.
There are, however, counter-arguments to many of the above points. Gunpowder may have been a government monopoly but just as today, there was a black market for it. The conspirators would have had the money to pay for this and it could have been smuggled in from Catholic France, for example. The south coast was riddled with smugglers havens. Fawkes could have used his contacts with Spain to acquire it.
Medieval Europe was run by petty lords, counts, and kings, and the only unifying institution was the Catholic Church. Authority was vested in men without efficient means to enforce their authority. Power was in the hands of those with money and force. This instability of institutions led to a rise in individual violence, as demonstrated with the murder of Charles the Good. Some may believe that the violence of this period was brought upon by the secular institutions, but the mere lack of these institutions proved to be the true cause.
Although it was fleeting, the fabricated "popish plot" (1678-1681) conspiracy had immediate social, political, and religious consequences for English society in the late seventeenth century. Invented by Titus Oates, this far-fetched story of a large-scale Catholic conspiracy to assassinate King Charles II and replace him with his brother James created widespread anti-Catholic hysteria among English Protestants and non-conformists at the lowest and highest levels of society. By the time the plot was proved a fiction in 1681, many English Catholics, especially Jesuits, had been harassed; some Catholics were persecuted, others were jailed, and some two dozen innocent men had already been executed. The anti-Catholic hysteria manifested itself socially, politically, and religiously in a variety of ways. Although its effects reached as far as Ireland (where some Irish Catholics such as Oliver Plunkett were executed), the popish plot had the greatest impact around London, which was England's largest city.
Through the government’s use of spies it effectively managed to infiltrate what they believed to be groups of serious radicals, therefore the government new exactly who the trouble makers were. The effective use of double agent George Edwards during the Cato street conspiracy in 1820 allowed the government to prevent a possible uprising against them. The fact it was a conspiracy to blow up the cabinet gave the government a chance to show how relevant the threat was . However it can be argued the use of spies and the way he dealt with them was an repressive measure. During the pentrich rebellion government spy Oliver persuaded local radicals to march on Nottingham where they were met with troops.
The anti-Communist Right of the Party bitterly opposed the conspiracy theory that Evatt mounted at the Petrov Royal Commission. They believed... Neglecting Crimes Of The Powerful: The Construction Of Public Ambiguity factors in the construction of ambiguity creates the risk of being associated with conspiracy theory. In a British Society of Criminology article, entitled Behind... Goldman Sachs: History & Evolution This leads Goldman to have an undue influence in the political sphere and conspiracy theories abound on how Goldman let Lehman slide for its own sins. However, it... Gangsterism to serve the interests of the Western powers.
Ideologically, Britian and the Americans had different views on everything. From their government to their religion. King James liked to think he ran the English churches which the English did not like. There were little things like economical views that were causing the American colonies to separate from the British. John Hughes and Benjamin Franklin came up with the Stamp Act which many people did not like.
These were people who protested against the Catholic church. They felt the Pope had too much power and control over England. They also complained that the Catholic church was corrupt - shown by the wealthy monasteries. Henry did not really agree with all the complaints against the Catholic church, but was determined to have a male heir. Henry used Parliament to push through his changes.
Just think if Spain still had control over Cuba and Hawaii, we would have to spend more money as a country to import sugar and pineapples. With America going to war with Spain and gaining control of Hawaii and Cuba these things are not taxed as much as they would have been. During the war however, many people in Spain and supporting Spain in the war, burnt the sugar cane fields and threatened the lives of many. People against the idea of imperialism were worried about the wars that it might entail and I cannot say that I blame them. With the Spanish American War happening because of the imperialism, this brought many people in America against the idea.