Replies

Very likely not. There is more than a little "flight of fancy" here. Sometimes the just barely possible imaginary historical sequences are simply the most gratifying.

I remember reading that Cromwell's early regiment contained a large fraction of returning Puritans from the colonies who then acted as training cadre for what later became New Model Army doctrine. (Ten - fifteen years ago read a lot on the English Civil War.) The Protectorate was popular but not universally, shall we say. Anyway, it is hard to see how the Puritan spirit could have tolerated a Catholic king. Remember how close in time we are here to the Gunpowder Plot, to Elizabeth's Act of Supremacy and to Francis Walsingham' spy networks, secret police, torturers, and prisons. (A fascinating time and character.)

On the other hand, James Graham, 5th Earl of Montrose, came close enough to defeating the Roundheads that they feared and hated him. Treasonous Campbells, anyway!

Momentous events so finely balanced,and as my fascination with war is fascination with Statecraft (as well as strategy and tactics) I try to pick apart the historical tangled threads, contemplating long ago decisions and personalities, the trends in ideas. "Why did he or she do this and not that?"

How about Walsingham's two favorite aphorisms, "there is less danger in fearing too much than too little", and "there is nothing more dangerous than security".

The Andrews Cross on the Stars and Stripes is 99% whimsy. A reminder that history turns on small details. Since this is so, every minute is a time for optimism.

Iris, I am descended of the Scots, not the "treasonous Campbells" you speak of, however. Lol. Hence, your train of thought intrigues me. I agree with you that Cromwell and the English Civil War played a greater role in history than most realize. Maybe this is not the appropriate thread for this, but I sure would like to see this traced out in a time line. Beginning in Scotland the brave.