The mother load of Centruum plots!(IW)

[ericthered]

The problem with the Cromwell angle is this is one of england's weakest moments. They've been pushed off the continent by the 100 years war, are just barely starting to put colonies anywhere (this is the era of plymoth and the earliest trading posts of india), and england's nearest neighbor, france, is in the process of becoming the dominant power in europe. England will get solidly trounced if it steps foot on the continent at this point.

[Phantasm]

Originally Posted by ericthered

The problem with the Cromwell angle is this is one of england's weakest moments. They've been pushed off the continent by the 100 years war, are just barely starting to put colonies anywhere (this is the era of plymoth and the earliest trading posts of india), and england's nearest neighbor, france, is in the process of becoming the dominant power in europe. England will get solidly trounced if it steps foot on the continent at this point.

Plymouth was actually about 50 years before Cromwell (my previous post indicated which colonies were in English and Dutch hands), settled IIRC during the time of Elizabeth I or James I. I agree it'd be an uphill climb, which is why I'd think they'd work to get France on their side by supporting the Huguenots covertly. Cromwell was one of the major players in the English Civil War of 1642-1651; the Hundred Years War was 1337-1453, almost 200 years before.

Weaker than during Elizabeth I's time, maybe, but not their weakest. Cardinal Richeleau would be the primary opponent to a covert operation supporting a Protestant overthrow of Louis XIII in France.

[robkelk]

Originally Posted by tbrock1031

... but convincing Cromwell to name a successor to the position of Lord Protector who was not his son would be a an even better move, IMO. Cromwell's son wasn't half the leader his father was. Cromwell naming a successor outside primogeniture would be revolutionary, though, which could backfire. ...

All he has to do is appeal to history. "I look back to the dayes when Rome was a strong nation, when the Ceasears adopted the best men to be their heirs no matter who they wer, and I followe their example by adopting ..." Idiosyncratic spelling intentional, to evoke the feel of period-piece texts

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by ericthered

The problem with the Cromwell angle is this is one of england's weakest moments. They've been pushed off the continent by the 100 years war, are just barely starting to put colonies anywhere (this is the era of plymoth and the earliest trading posts of india), and england's nearest neighbor, france, is in the process of becoming the dominant power in europe. England will get solidly trounced if it steps foot on the continent at this point.

You could say the same about revolutionary France or Weimar Germany and look what happened there. If you could provoke a catastrophic invasion of England by France followed by a Centrum-backed rebellion in France the tide could easily turn.

[ericthered]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

You could say the same about revolutionary France or Weimar Germany and look what happened there. If you could provoke a catastrophic invasion of England by France followed by a Centrum-backed rebellion in France the tide could easily turn.

No, you can't. Revolutionary france and weimar germany were strong nations immediately before and after the points you mentioned. Weimar germany had just lost a conflict by being dogpiled by every economic power of their day. Every single one. They didn't loose much of their potential. They may have been defeated, but they were still important. I'm not sure where you're coming from by bringing up revolutionary france. Pre-revolutionary france was one of if not the strongest power of continental europe. They were the court everyone admired, and they had a strong army. And it didn't really weaken all that much during the revolution. Both of those situations were small scale and temporary defeats.

England's situation here is that of a backwater in europe. They compare with the dutch at this point. Which is to say they are a minor power at best.

Originally Posted by tbrock1031

Plymouth was actually about 50 years before Cromwell (my previous post indicated which colonies were in English and Dutch hands), settled IIRC during the time of Elizabeth I or James I. I agree it'd be an uphill climb, which is why I'd think they'd work to get France on their side by supporting the Huguenots covertly. Cromwell was one of the major players in the English Civil War of 1642-1651; the Hundred Years War was 1337-1453, almost 200 years before.

Weaker than during Elizabeth I's time, maybe, but not their weakest. Cardinal Richeleau would be the primary opponent to a covert operation supporting a Protestant overthrow of Louis XIII in France.

Yes, 200 years before was the last time england had owned good chunks of land on the continent held by conquest. This is a bench mark of how not-a-great-power england is in the 1600's.

Plymouth was founded in 1620 -- within 23 years of the start of the civil war, not 50, and the point is england really was't a colonial power then. Though they will soon become one soon enough.

If you want to try and pull off a joint prodestant rebellion in France that cromwell co-opts -- that's much harder to do, but if you can pull it off you do have a better chance of taking over europe. I can see centrum really likeing an english-headed union of the two countries. I'm not sure if nationalism between the two will make everything feasible though. And if you take europe on a prodestant swing, you've got the previously mentioned religios issues.

[Phantasm]

Still, Centrum vs Richeleau. Infinity's betting pool for the winner will be crazy. ;)

[ericthered]

Originally Posted by tbrock1031

Still, Centrum vs Richeleau. Infinity's betting pool for the winner will be crazy. ;)

I have no answer for that one! If you want to run it, run it.

[Astromancer]

Cromwell was profoundly religious and not nearly the dictator some folks say he was. Centrum might prefer to avoid him. The later Stuarts were much softer targets.

[Phantasm]

Originally Posted by Astromancer

Cromwell was profoundly religious and not nearly the dictator some folks say he was. Centrum might prefer to avoid him. The later Stuarts were much softer targets.

Maybe, but James II practically instigated a second English Civil War before abdicating when he realized that his Catholic tendencies would not work in a now predominantly Protestant England. From what I read, Charles II didn't even speak English due to being raised in the French court, and many English nobles thought he was a puppet of Richelieu's. It might even have been a case of the English preferring the "native" Cromwell over the "foreign" claimants to the throne, particularly if Charles II and James II were French puppets.

The Stuarts were not all that well liked by the English people, or even many of the nobles.

However... there is another point of divergence, if they're willing to take the time. Jane I, the Nine-Days Queen between Edward VI and Mary I, was originally supposed to be Elizabeth I's heir. Prevent the court intrigue that led to Jane's temporary crowning before Mary took the crown she was supposed to have, and Jane could have married and had children on her own, continuing the Tudor line beyond Elizabeth. The downside of this would be the lack of a joint ruler between England and Scotland, preventing the United Kingdom of Great Britain.

...

On second thought, probably not a good idea there.

The Hanoverian Dynasty, starting with George I, might be a better choice.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Astromancer

Cromwell was profoundly religious and not nearly the dictator some folks say he was. Centrum might prefer to avoid him. The later Stuarts were much softer targets.

Cromwell himself doesn't especially matter. The important thing to do is step in when he dies and keep the Restoration from happening.