What If - the Spanish Aramada had succeded

[Docfeelgood]

wonder if the world would have been better should it had happened?

[Barnabas]

There was no kicking the Catholics out in England, since everybody was a Catholic, and Protestantism was not a grassroots movement. It was enforced by the State, the State made the people change their religion. In Scotland it was different, the common people really became Calvinists.

The English would not be speaking Spanish nowadays, that is silly.
The onsequences would be that England would have been Catholic, England and Spain would have remained allies to keep France controlled and the British pirates would not have attacked the Spanish Colonies in the caribbean.

I think it is wrong to give too much weight to the differences in religion (especially when these different religions are all denominations of Christianity) it is not like Catholic dutch speakers from Antwerp were radically different from Calvinist ones from Amsterdam.

The reformation in continental Europe may have been crushed without the support of England, that would have been the most important consequence of the Armada.

[ColdWizard]

Worldwide tradition of siesta

[C0ckney]

i disagree with a lot of that.

firstly, the minor differences in denominations could be very important. france was busy tearing itself apart in its wars of religion. one of the main complaints of the dutch about their spanish oppressors () was the latter's attempts to suppress the former's calvinist faith. europe as a whole was soon to see the 30 years war...

secondly, while it's true to say that protestantism in england didn't start as a grassroots movement, it soon turned into one. elizabeth I introduced the act of supremacy, which made her head (well governor) of the church and led to an almost wholesale replacement of bishops and big changes in government, and the act of uniformity, which compelled all people to attend a sunday service in an anglican church and adopted a new version of the book of common prayer. while some continuity with the roman catholic past was maintained, it's clearly that this church was a protestant one. these, combined with the sheer length of elizabeth's reign ensured that by the time the spanish armada arrived, a majority of people had abandoned the catholic faith. after elizabeth's reign the religious conflict in england was to be between anglicans and the more radical puritans.

as for the reformation in general, it already had england, scotland, parts of france, whole swathes of germany, switzerland, holland, scandinavia and prussia for the protestant cause. i doubt this tide could have been turned back.

[giblets]

Yeah, I doubt the Papist hordes could have overrun Scandinavia.

[Al B. Sure!]

All those WWII threads and speculations are kind of meh - boring.

Here, the spanish armada sucessfully invades UK and turn it into a catholic hellhole, but what effects will that have ?

I still expect Martin Luther to emerge and make his disturbances.

What the hell? Martin Luther nailed his theses to the church in 1517. The Spanish Armada was defeated in 1588.

Why do you think the Spanish were so keen on invading England if not for English Protestantism?

Philip II of Spain had been co-monarch of England until the death of his wife Mary I in 1558. A devout Roman Catholic, he considered his Protestant half sister-in-law Elizabeth a heretic and illegitimate ruler of England. He had previously supported plots to have her overthrown in favour of her Catholic cousin and heir presumptive, Mary, Queen of Scots, but was thwarted when Elizabeth had Mary imprisoned, and finally executed in 1587. In addition, Elizabeth, who sought to advance the cause of Protestantism where possible, had supported the Dutch Revolt against Spain. In retaliation, Philip planned an expedition to invade England so as to overthrow the Protestant regime of Elizabeth, thereby ending the English material support for the United Provinces— that part of the Low Countries that had successfully seceded from Spanish rule — and cutting off English attacks of Spanish trade and settlements[11] in the New World. The king was supported by Pope Sixtus V, who treated the invasion as a crusade, with the promise of a subsidy should the Armada make land.[12]

[Al B. Sure!]

as for the reformation in general, it already had england, scotland, parts of france, whole swathes of germany, switzerland, holland, scandinavia and prussia for the protestant cause. i doubt this tide could have been turned back.

In 1588, Prussia had no relevancy. It was a client state of Poland-Lithuania.

[Al B. Sure!]

I think it is wrong to give too much weight to the differences in religion (especially when these different religions are all denominations of Christianity) it is not like Catholic dutch speakers from Antwerp were radically different from Calvinist ones from Amsterdam.

Dude, are you serious? Thirty Years War? The Schmalkaldic Wars? The French Wars of Religion?

From the start of the Protestant Reformation to about 1648 (the end of the Thirty Years War), there was incredible amounts of bloodshed between Catholics and Protestants. Basically all of Europe was gripped by religious wars. The differences between Catholics and Protestants were enough that they were killing over them for over a century.

[BlackCat]

Yeah, I doubt the Papist hordes could have overrun Scandinavia.

True. Sweden and Denmark wasn't excatly weak at that time.

The purpose of the thread wasn't so much papist bashing (though, no reason to miss a good opportunity ). It was more like What If Elizabeth was overthrown and replaced by a spanish regent - what impacts would that have had on the development in north america and the creation of the british empire.

[Al B. Sure!]

True. Sweden and Denmark wasn't excatly weak at that time.

The purpose of the thread wasn't so much papist bashing (though, no reason to miss a good opportunity ). It was more like What If Elizabeth was overthrown and replaced by a spanish regent - what impacts would that have had on the development in north america and the creation of the british empire.

The English would have revolted just as the Dutch did. There's no way the far-flung Spanish would be able to maintain all of England.

Plus France wouldn't have been too keen on an even more powerful Spain. Though with the brutal religious wars occurring in France at the time, they might not have been able to do much about it.

[giblets]

Well, some of the English colonists in America were people who weren't satisfied with the official religion back home. Would the Catholics have allowed Protestants to form their own colonies? I guess not, since IIRC the French Catholics wouldn't let French Protestants emigrate to New France. Many of the French Protestants went to the English colonies instead. Catholic intolerance would have retarded the growth of the British Empire significantly.

[Al B. Sure!]

I just don't see anyway England would have been maintained by Spain as a client. They would have revolted and there was nothing Spain could do about it. In fact, Protestantism might have been the vehicle to galvanize the English in defiance of the Spanish.

[Al B. Sure!]

And besides, the Spanish Armada does what it does at sea, picks up the troops from Flanders, and drops them off in England. You're talking an amphibious invasion in 1588 against a prepared English army and then a land campaign to subdue all of England... I don't see any of that working for the Spanish who were already in the midst of the war with the Dutch.

Maybe the best the Spanish could do would be to blockade England and force Protestant concessions that way.

[Dinner]

The biggest changes would be that Ireland would likely still be part of the UK and that Belgium and the Netherlands would be one country (minus the blood sucking Francophone parts of Belgium.

[Al B. Sure!]

The biggest changes would be that Ireland would likely still be part of the UK and that Belgium and the Netherlands would be one country (minus the blood sucking Francophone parts of Belgium.

Huh? How do you get either out of this. Explain the logic, please.