AHC/WI: English "Shogunate"

What if at some point, England gets a government with a structure that is quite similar to the Japanese Shogunate, where the monarch is powerless and the military is the one calling the shots, but still pay respects to the former?
 
I suppose that if Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick, succeeds in either of his two attempts at deposing Edward IV, you'll have something very much like a shogunate: a figurehead monarch and a powerful military figure using military power to build up political power.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Neville,_16th_Earl_of_Warwick

Of the two, the better attempt for creating a shogunate is probably the one in 1469.

This attempt actually succeeded: it only took three months to destroy Edward IV's allies and make him a prisoner. Warwick and his ally, the Duke of Clarence (Edward's brother) then attempted to rule in the king's name, but forced to bow to public opinion-- news of the king's illegal imprisonment led to riots, robbery and civil disorder in London and similar problems in the countryside.

The POD could be that Warwick and Clarence actually try and ally with the other noble families of the realm, seeing as how they pretty much acted on their own in OTL. Alternately, they can try and gain credibility with the peasants: they tried this with "Robin of Redesdale", a Robin-Hood-type peasant rebel persona assumed by a steward of Warwick's. If Robin can become even more popular, it may make he public more receptive to Warwick, and pave the way for a military government exercising authority in the name of a monarch.
 
What if at some point, England gets a government with a structure that is quite similar to the Japanese Shogunate, where the monarch is powerless and the military is the one calling the shots, but still pay respects to the former?

Charles I's younger son becoming a puppet King under the guidance of the New Model Army?
 
What if at some point, England gets a government with a structure that is quite similar to the Japanese Shogunate, where the monarch is powerless and the military is the one calling the shots, but still pay respects to the former?

Didn't they try this during the Protectorate? Albeit, Cromwell wasn't exactly powerless, but perhaps if Richard's "reign" lasts more than 9 months, he would set the example of being a powerless ruler.
 
One could argue that a constitutional monarchy is similar in concept to a shogunate, but with civilian rule rather than military. The monarch gets to reign while parliament rules.
 
The problem with the examples you bring is that they arent of an institution. It could have been possible for a military leader to attain a position where he was the true decision maker of England. But for this to last longer than him, it becoming a hereditary institution with a legitimacy of its own - no chance.
 

GdwnsnHo

Banned
The issue here is that whilst Japan had the near (or outright) religious position in the Emperor, England had no such thing.

In fact, we legitimized our kings with the Witan, or elected-body-inserted-here almost every time, since the Saxons imported the concept from Germania. So perhaps this can be used in a different way.

Note : The term Witan is largely anacronistic, ala Byzantines - it is essentially an assembly, but I like the word dammit so I'm using it.

Now, what could be interesting, is if you go back to the Heptarchy period, to look at a Bretwalda, essentially an overlord - and as such not a huge leap from the Shogunate.

Say we have a grand witan at some point, perhaps in response to the Viking invasions, with all the lords of Britannia (or a significant number) are gathered to elect a single leader, a War-Lord that all obey in military matters, who helps collectively defeat the viking invaders. This leads to coastal forts, with ships, initially funded and manned by those whose land it was on, but later to be simply funded by a communal budget, but manned and led by the Bretwalda.

I can imagine that as part of this (for fear of their total dominance) the Witan makes a somewhat minor ruler the "King", backed by the church. Rather than directly send money to the Bretwalda, money goes to the King, who under exceptional circumstances would withhold the money, and because of the churches backing, and their oaths of loyalty to "Defend the King" the Bretwalda wouldn't have an easy time forcing his hand, at first. I imagine an oath somewhat like this

"I, Lord of the [Mercians], do swear to serve the Kings Peace, Defend him from his enemies, and then to serve his Bretwalda in the defense of [Albion] and her dominions".

Replace [Mercians] with the appropriate people, and [Albion] with the name of the collective realms. Personally, I like Albion as an alternative to Britannia.

Eventually this leads to a situation where the elected Bretwalda is backed by the Witan, the hereditary title of King is backed purely by the church, and reliant on the Bretwalda for protection.

Sure this might get a bit interesting when the concept of Divine Right comes along, but until then, you have something that loosely resembles the Shogunate. If you can make this somehow expand to the length of Britain, and Ireland (justified by security, an end to piracy, and the ultimate authority of the One True King of Britannia and Hibernia) then you have the interesting situation where Saxons, Gaels, Picts, Scots, and Irish elect a single Bretwalda, and all serve a single King.

+1 Vote for Bretwalda Northumbria :D

(Personally, I've always liked the idea of a Britain that fought back against the Vikings on the sea, taking the Danish longship, creating their own, and counter-pillaging the Vikings - and establishing their own forts across the North Sea to patrol Scandinavia, or exact tribute from Vikings that were allowed to raid say, Francia, Germania, or anywhere-but-my-home-thanks - doing this would make the institute of Bretwalda even more important)

Now, this isn't uniquely something that could happen after the Saxons come - it could be an unusual assembly of all the landholders of Britannia, Roman, Briton, Cumbrian, (even Saxon) when the Roman Empire leaves - in which case you could have the Consul that defends the realm, and the Dux Britannia, who is the rightful ruler. Less likely to have the dynamic you desire IMO, because it takes military duties from the Dux, rather than creating a whole new series of institutions, but you get the idea.
 
What if at some point, England gets a government with a structure that is quite similar to the Japanese Shogunate, where the monarch is powerless and the military is the one calling the shots, but still pay respects to the former?

Maybe an England, where the title king is much more only a symbol but without any worldly powers ever . The Earls on the other hand become semi-aotonomous warlords feuding each other constantly for centuries.
 
Actually, a better example might be Cromwell as a Shogun figure for a powerless king. For instance, suppose Charles I is kept in life imprisonment rather than being executed, or (more likely) Charles II and James II (&VII) die during the Civil War, and the Parliamentary forces get their hands on Henry who would be 9 at the time of his dad's OTL (and maybe TTL?) death.

Raise Henry as a Calvinist, but keep him well away from the levers of power, and voila, there you have it (well, a good start to it).
 
The issue here is that whilst Japan had the near (or outright) religious position in the Emperor, England had no such thing.

In fact, we legitimized our kings with the Witan, or elected-body-inserted-here almost every time, since the Saxons imported the concept from Germania. So perhaps this can be used in a different way.

Note : The term Witan is largely anacronistic, ala Byzantines - it is essentially an assembly, but I like the word dammit so I'm using it.

Now, what could be interesting, is if you go back to the Heptarchy period, to look at a Bretwalda, essentially an overlord - and as such not a huge leap from the Shogunate.

Say we have a grand witan at some point, perhaps in response to the Viking invasions, with all the lords of Britannia (or a significant number) are gathered to elect a single leader, a War-Lord that all obey in military matters, who helps collectively defeat the viking invaders. This leads to coastal forts, with ships, initially funded and manned by those whose land it was on, but later to be simply funded by a communal budget, but manned and led by the Bretwalda.

I can imagine that as part of this (for fear of their total dominance) the Witan makes a somewhat minor ruler the "King", backed by the church. Rather than directly send money to the Bretwalda, money goes to the King, who under exceptional circumstances would withhold the money, and because of the churches backing, and their oaths of loyalty to "Defend the King" the Bretwalda wouldn't have an easy time forcing his hand, at first. I imagine an oath somewhat like this

"I, Lord of the [Mercians], do swear to serve the Kings Peace, Defend him from his enemies, and then to serve his Bretwalda in the defense of [Albion] and her dominions".

Replace [Mercians] with the appropriate people, and [Albion] with the name of the collective realms. Personally, I like Albion as an alternative to Britannia.

Eventually this leads to a situation where the elected Bretwalda is backed by the Witan, the hereditary title of King is backed purely by the church, and reliant on the Bretwalda for protection.

Sure this might get a bit interesting when the concept of Divine Right comes along, but until then, you have something that loosely resembles the Shogunate. If you can make this somehow expand to the length of Britain, and Ireland (justified by security, an end to piracy, and the ultimate authority of the One True King of Britannia and Hibernia) then you have the interesting situation where Saxons, Gaels, Picts, Scots, and Irish elect a single Bretwalda, and all serve a single King.

+1 Vote for Bretwalda Northumbria :D

(Personally, I've always liked the idea of a Britain that fought back against the Vikings on the sea, taking the Danish longship, creating their own, and counter-pillaging the Vikings - and establishing their own forts across the North Sea to patrol Scandinavia, or exact tribute from Vikings that were allowed to raid say, Francia, Germania, or anywhere-but-my-home-thanks - doing this would make the institute of Bretwalda even more important)

Now, this isn't uniquely something that could happen after the Saxons come - it could be an unusual assembly of all the landholders of Britannia, Roman, Briton, Cumbrian, (even Saxon) when the Roman Empire leaves - in which case you could have the Consul that defends the realm, and the Dux Britannia, who is the rightful ruler. Less likely to have the dynamic you desire IMO, because it takes military duties from the Dux, rather than creating a whole new series of institutions, but you get the idea.
Without the Normans bringing over the continental ideas of nobility, would it be possible for the Witan to independently develop into a system of parallel nobility that lays the groundwork for Shogunate rule? In Japan you had the samurai separated from the court nobility. While in Russia, another region that developed independently from continental Europe feudal traditions, you had the division between boyar landed nobility and dvoryanin and druzhinik (originally) unlanded nobility by service.
 
Well, if Cromwell managed to get a puppet Stuart monarch (Prince Henry?) maybe this could happen but it's rather far fetched. Not to mention even if Oliver Cromwell pulled it off, the entire thing might just fall apart after his death, none of his potential heirs (not Richard, not even Henry Cromwell) were respected by the army. The only way is perhaps having his son in law Henry Ireton survive the Ireland campaign.
 

GdwnsnHo

Banned
Without the Normans bringing over the continental ideas of nobility, would it be possible for the Witan to independently develop into a system of parallel nobility that lays the groundwork for Shogunate rule? In Japan you had the samurai separated from the court nobility. While in Russia, another region that developed independently from continental Europe feudal traditions, you had the division between boyar landed nobility and dvoryanin and druzhinik (originally) unlanded nobility by service.

Well, the Witan was already made up from thegns and eorldermen - both not terribly distant from nobles. In fact, eorldermen were often "sub-kings" or kings who ruled on the behalf of the king who had defeated them. (Known to those in the feudal system as vassals), although typically they used the Kings authority rather than their own, formally.

With a weaker king, and a Bretwalda, I don't see why the concept couldn't emerge locally. Plus, with further trade with Francia, I'm sure the idea could be brought across, and taken advantage of by a cunning noble, or powerful Bretwalda who thinks he can use it to his benefit. I'm not sure you'll have a perfect mimicry, but you'll have the class of noble that rules the countryside, and would become Bretwalda, and the class of noble that lives in the Royal Court, made up of the lesser eorldermen, or dispossessed nobility.
 
The thing is the Shogunate functioned more as bureaucratic feudalism than anything else. There's also the issue of what kind of Shogunate are we talking about, the centralized Tokugawa Shogunate, or something as radically decentralized as the Ashikaga where the Shogun became the figurehead to another figurehead.

You would need a provincial system of some form in England, or at least something that allows regional figures to have extensive control over the areas they govern. There is also the issue, that the emperor of Japan baring the Ashikaga wresting power from one, usually wasn't touched. What is there to make the position of King so weak that no one wants it?
 
You would need a provincial system of some form in England, or at least something that allows regional figures to have extensive control over the areas they govern.

...which pretty much describes the situation during the heptarchy, but without any recognised central authority, which only developed in response to the Viking invasions. Even then, you get the impression that the big earldoms; Wessex, Mercia, Northumbria could be quasi-independent depending on the strength of the king.

The Bretwalda idea is quite interesting. So little is known about most of the Bretwaldas listed by Bede that you could make of them pretty much what you wanted to in fiction. There do seem to be big gaps - were there British Bretwaldas or equivalent? (Who Bede probably wouldn't have acknowledged.)
 
Well, the Witan was already made up from thegns and eorldermen - both not terribly distant from nobles. In fact, eorldermen were often "sub-kings" or kings who ruled on the behalf of the king who had defeated them. (Known to those in the feudal system as vassals), although typically they used the Kings authority rather than their own, formally.

With a weaker king, and a Bretwalda, I don't see why the concept couldn't emerge locally. Plus, with further trade with Francia, I'm sure the idea could be brought across, and taken advantage of by a cunning noble, or powerful Bretwalda who thinks he can use it to his benefit. I'm not sure you'll have a perfect mimicry, but you'll have the class of noble that rules the countryside, and would become Bretwalda, and the class of noble that lives in the Royal Court, made up of the lesser eorldermen, or dispossessed nobility.
If you get a shogun that far back, how long can it be before one of them does a Pipen the Short?
 

GdwnsnHo

Banned
If you get a shogun that far back, how long can it be before one of them does a Pipen the Short?

Or the King pulls a Meiji. I can't say it is permanent, every system of checks and balances at some point is thrown into disarray, it could be a couple of centuries, it could be longer - it could be 3 generations as a single Bretwalda is so powerful and sly that after receiving his stipend for the defence of the realm, turns on everyone, and wins that civil war. You could see 6 rulers and the King become 2 and the King - where if either of the two fall, the King is genuinely meaningless and overthrown.

It really depends on the impact of internal politics, which can be actively intervened against, and the impact of external politics, which can lead to repercussions that may permanently unbalance the system.
 

GdwnsnHo

Banned
What about the Divine Right of Kings?

I did not realize that James I was involved in that. Now, I don't know how that compares to the Japanese Emperors. I'm not too hot on that period of history.

Although I wouldn't immediately believe that the nobles who were protected by the Magna Carta would support his idea of divine right, beyond lip service.
 
Probably a couple of generations.

Is it possible to keep the Karlings as kings while the Capets rule as permanent regents?
With the precedence of the Karlings' usurpation of the throne from the Merovingians,will that even be an option?
 
Top