Having visited the Museum of London's recent exhibition on the 1666 Great Fire of London, I was surprised to learn that the English government gave serious consideration to moving the capital to Oxford as they were concerned over the length of time it was going to take to rebuild London. This led the leading merchants and residents of London to rebuild at a greater speed (interestingly, partly funded by a public appeal to other parts of the country).
As a result king Charles II and his ministers abandoned the idea.
Ok, what if they didn't and did move the capital to Oxford, what effects would this have on English history? To throw a few possible lines of thought out there
Would this have any effect on the development of, say, the rail network? Rather than radiating out of London, would the focus be on Oxford?
Would we see a 'University College London'-type institute in Oxford instead? If so,could this effect future development of new univeristies in England, perhaps with a continued focus on Oxford and Cambridge rather than new insitutions elsewhere?
Would Oxford grow like London and absorb surrounding villages? In contrast, how would London and the southeast develop? a much smaller London than OTL and the absorbed villages and towns remaining seperate?
Given Oxford's more inland position, would this lead to a different way of defending Great Britain during the Napoleonic Wars? Indeed, could this new capital have meant a different focus for coastal defences generally?
What effect, if any, would it have on Bonnie Prince Charlie's invasion of England?
and a couple of post-1900 thoughts-would the Royal Family still have changed its name to 'Windsor' or would the move of capital have meant a new primary royal residence nearer to Oxford and that becoming the family name?
In the Battle of Britain, I think London was close to the limit of the ME109's range. If so, (and assuming WW2 progresses as OTL) would the German air force have been willing to risk bombing the capital in daylight if it meant the bombers would have been without fighter escort for the last part of the outward flight?
As a result king Charles II and his ministers abandoned the idea.
Ok, what if they didn't and did move the capital to Oxford, what effects would this have on English history? To throw a few possible lines of thought out there
Would this have any effect on the development of, say, the rail network? Rather than radiating out of London, would the focus be on Oxford?
Would we see a 'University College London'-type institute in Oxford instead? If so,could this effect future development of new univeristies in England, perhaps with a continued focus on Oxford and Cambridge rather than new insitutions elsewhere?
Would Oxford grow like London and absorb surrounding villages? In contrast, how would London and the southeast develop? a much smaller London than OTL and the absorbed villages and towns remaining seperate?
Given Oxford's more inland position, would this lead to a different way of defending Great Britain during the Napoleonic Wars? Indeed, could this new capital have meant a different focus for coastal defences generally?
What effect, if any, would it have on Bonnie Prince Charlie's invasion of England?
and a couple of post-1900 thoughts-would the Royal Family still have changed its name to 'Windsor' or would the move of capital have meant a new primary royal residence nearer to Oxford and that becoming the family name?
In the Battle of Britain, I think London was close to the limit of the ME109's range. If so, (and assuming WW2 progresses as OTL) would the German air force have been willing to risk bombing the capital in daylight if it meant the bombers would have been without fighter escort for the last part of the outward flight?