If the Commonwealth of England, Scotland and Ireland had survived beyond Cromwell's death, what would likely be the religious implications? Would each jurisdiction continue to have it's own established church? Would they have all been down presbyterian lines? Given the increased zeal to convert Ireland, could she have become Prostestant? What would happen to the established churches in the American colonies?
Religious implications of a surviving Commonwealth
- Thread starter Socrates
- Start date
I can see the end of Anglicanism, with the end of the Church of England (Scotland etc) and a move to true protestism similar to Switzerland or the Nordic countries.
I am never sure why the English didn't try harder to convert the Irish as it would have saved an awful lot of trouble! As such I am not sure this would have any affect.
The main impact would be on groups like the Quakers - would they be driven out of England? Can you imagine a US without Franklin? Would the US be more violet without the pacifist Quakers, would they have been so anti-slavery in the North?
I am never sure why the English didn't try harder to convert the Irish as it would have saved an awful lot of trouble! As such I am not sure this would have any affect.
The main impact would be on groups like the Quakers - would they be driven out of England? Can you imagine a US without Franklin? Would the US be more violet without the pacifist Quakers, would they have been so anti-slavery in the North?
I apologise I meant to infer that the Quakers would stay in Britain, therefor they would not impact on American history (no Pilgrims - no Thanksgiving holiday!).
The Commonwealth was much more tolerant of religious dissenters than Crown so I suspect you'd have less American Quakers. As for the long term impact I would suggest you look at US Protestantism, i.e. hundreds of different sects and churches with no single official state Church. As for Ireland I suspect greater effort would be made to convert them, though I suspect it wouldn't be that successful, wiping out the Papists would be very expensive and require religious genocide on a scale that would be unacceptable and voluntary conversion was not going to happen.
Not necessarily, Thanksgiving as a general holiday (giving thanks to labour or crops) could come about.
Heck you could even have a holiday known as Thanksgiving that's totally unrelated to the OTL one.
Last edited:
Sounds like Harvest Festival! Is that not a religious holdiday? Are the Americans allowed those?
Thanksgiving is basically a traditional harvest celebration given a US flavour. You can find a broadly similar festival in pretty much every agricultural society at a similar point in the agricultural calendar. The only odd thing about it is that it has survived the transition from a rural society to an urban one.
Would it involve the state giving funds to the churchs? I'm pretty sure that most have stopped doing that these days, so it would make a world of difference on how things are viewed.
Not much hope for Maryland sadly. Maryland had recieved a large number of Protestant and Puritains settlers putting them in the majority against the Catholic Elite. The Calverts attempted to rig the system but after several revolts by the Protestants they converted to Protestantism.
Maybe of their had been a larger drive for Anglo Catholics, settle the Irish and bar Protestant immigration maybe.
Maybe of their had been a larger drive for Anglo Catholics, settle the Irish and bar Protestant immigration maybe.
Favouring Catholics and baring Protestant immigration would have gone down like a bucket of cold sick, England would have intervened and replaced the Colonial leadership and unlike 1776 the balance of power would have been overwhelmingly in England's favour. Not that England would have needed to send any troops across the Atlantic, a letter sent to Virginia and Massachusetts giving them the opportunity to lynch Catholics would have been sufficient.
Almost all non-Puritan English settlers were primarily motivated by economic opportunities and post-1640 non-Puritan English settlers always made up the plurality of immigrants to the 14 Colonies as a whole and a majority most of the time. So the basic demographics aren't going to change in that respect.
There is a significant difference between slavery (which only happened to Africans) and penal servitude or indenture. Both will continue and the majority of "victims" will continue to be WASPs. Remember trips across the Atlantic were expensive and selling yourself into 7 years of indenture was in many ways a smart economic decision.
Last edited:
As far as I know, there was literally Irish slavery in the Caribbean Islands by the Cromwellian times, I don't know much further than that though.
I don't see much economic opportunities outside the Southern Plantations. Most of the rest of the colonies would be just as unpopulated and unattractive as New France if it we don't have starving Germans and Huguenots. I'd guess that in the northern colonies we would have a great majority of German-speakers in the countryside with the English-speakers concentrated only in the cities.
No that's penal servitude/transportation where instead of locking up someone you ship them to the colonies and make them work for the duration of the sentence (which might be life). However penal convicts had some rights and their children were born free, unlike slaves (who were exclusively African).
Slaves= No rights, inheritable, exclusively Africans.
Penal Convicts= Very few rights, not-inheritable, from the British Isles, including Scottish and English as well as Irish.
I'm sorry but that's just wrong. The standard of living in colonial New England was considerably higher than in Old England and people knew it. The high cost of transportation meant there were basically thee ways of getting across the Atlantic, group together via a Church or Sect and hire/buy an entire boat (Puritans/Amish), be rich enough to fund it yourself (Virginia Cavaliers), or sell yourself into into indenture where someone paid for your ticket and you worked for them for a number of years (normally 3-7). The 3rd option was by far and away the most popular method of getting to the 14 Colonies and provided 80% of the white immigrants by some estimates. Most indentured were British especially in the early years due to the preferences of the employers/sponsors. Continental Europeans only started to come over in the 18th century after rising prosperity in Britain reduced the attractiveness of selling yourself into temporary servitude. So unless either the Colonies are much poorer than OTL or Britain much richer you are going to see a similar thing happen. Either way you are not going to get a German speaking America.
Last edited: