Guy Fawkes and the Gunpowder Plot

A lone figure waits in a dark cellar. He watches over barrels loaded with gunpowder, intended to blow everyone in Parliament to Kingdom come. Only time and a fuse stand between dramatically altering the course of history, a seismic shock that will plunge England into chaos and possible war.

A search party checks the cellar in question. Something’s wrong. Someone is loitering suspiciously, the same character they encountered during an earlier investigation. Why would a caretaker be working after midnight and why is there such a large quantity of firewood – beneath a house where nobody currently lives? Taciturn and resolute, perhaps guilt is writ large over the suspect’s face. When the struggle ensues there can be only one outcome. Guy Fawkes is arrested. The plot is foiled, disaster averted.

It is easy to forget that Guy Fawkes was one of thirteen conspirators who plotted to destroy the House of Lords during the State Opening of Parliament in 1605. Fawkes was not their ringleader or the mastermind behind the plot. Those dubious honours belong to Robert Catesby. But it is Fawkes, the doomed, cloaked figure, determined to the last that has endured - burning brightly in the popular imagination to this day.

It was Guy Fawkes alone of that portentous number who was caught red-handed at the scene of the crime. Fawkes highlighted just how close the plot came to its goal temporally (a few hours more and the dark deed would have been done) and spatially (the source of terror was under the very noses of those in power.)

The variation of the “devil in our midst” theme certainly served the authorities well. Fawkes the terrorist became a focus for anti-Catholic propaganda, paraded by the government as an example of what could happen if Catholics were not properly suppressed. Here was ample justification, it was argued for any extreme means necessary.

Guy Fawkes was born in Yorkshire in 1570. With a Protestant father, Guy’s early childhood could not have hinted at the radical direction his later life would take. After his father died, Guy’s Catholic mother re-married. Her second husband, Denis Bainbridge was another Catholic and it is probable that the young Guy moved in very different circles thereafter.

The other decisive influence on Guy’s formative years was his education. He attended St Peter’s School in York (as did two of the other conspirators, the brothers Jack and Kit Wright.) In the company of his fellows, away from the prying eyes of the authorities, freedom of expression could well have been enjoyed to a certain extent, behind closed doors.

Fawkes and his contemporaries would probably have shared anti-authoritarian views, sought to redress the injustice of current laws and question the attitudes of their parents’ generation (the vast majority of Catholics hoped for a peaceful solution to their troubles). Rebellion must have found its most natural voice in adolescence. Precise details of Fawkes’s early life are sketchy, though. Some commentators even suggest Fawkes briefly married although no record of the marriage survives.

One thing is clear. By the early 1590’s Guy Fawkes was ready to fight for the cause. He went abroad to Flanders, enlisting to fight for the Spanish side against the English and over the next decade made a modest reputation for himself as a soldier.

Religious conflict was not confined to English shores. In Europe, reformers such as Martin Luther had questioned the authority of the Roman Catholic Church and the Pope. Although mass circulation and mass literacy were still a long way off, the printing of religious pamphlets led to a wider distribution of new ideas among educated people, who might be inclined to speak their views in public when they felt strongly about an issue.

New knowledge fuelled intense debate and inevitably led to a backlash against the Catholic Church. Protestantism increased in popularity but as the Bible was dissected, the faithful flock split into warring factions. It was not just a case of Catholic versus Protestant, either. Over time, each faith developed fractures and schisms within.

In order to understand why the Gunpowder Plot happened we must step back in time from the 17^th century to the 16^th.  The annulment of the marriage between Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon was the catalyst, enabling Henry to re-marry but causing an irreconcilable conflict with the Pope and Rome.

Within the next decade, the Dissolution followed.  As Supreme Head of the English Church, Henry ordered the widespread destruction of the monasteries.  Goods were seized and great estates passed to the monarchy.  With their centres of faith, commerce and learning obliterated, Catholicism was marginalised and forced underground.

In England, during the comparatively brief, bloody reign of the Catholic Mary I (1553-1558), Protestants had been persecuted but when her sister Elizabeth I succeeded Mary, the pendulum swung back in the other direction.   Under the Act of Supremacy anyone in public office had to swear an Oath of Supremacy to the monarch.  Furthermore, anyone refusing to attend Anglican services was forced to pay a fine.  Devout Catholics who would not recognise the Anglican Common Book of Prayer were therefore punished financially. 

While Elizabeth I may have tolerated loyal Catholic subjects who preferred to keep their faith a private matter, there was considerable pressure from her advisers to take a harder line, given the course events were taking.  These were turbulent times.  War with Catholic Spain, the threat of foreign invasion and a number of Catholic plots to assassinate her and reinstate Mary I were discovered (the most notable being the Babington Plot which led to Mary’s execution).

When Elizabeth I died aged 70 after 44 years on the English throne, the thoughts of the people turned to her successor.  James VI of Scotland would also become James I of England.  After generations of persecution and hardship, Catholics must have been optimistic.  Here was the bright new hope they had waited so long for.  Though James was a Protestant he was also the son of the murdered Mary.  Many Catholics naturally held the belief he would be more sympathetic to their plight.

In Scotland, James made subtle hints and suggestions that Catholics would be openly tolerated during his reign in England.  James was a cunning diplomat, however, adept at giving people what they wanted to hear.  When these same words reached prominent Catholic ears it is likely they were blown out of all proportion.  Hints given could have been taken as promises.  For any persecuted minority perhaps there is nothing more dangerous than raised expectations or hopes that come to be dashed. 

Initially, at least the signs were promising.  Recusancy fines (for non-attendance of Anglican Church services) were suspended.  But this optimism proved short-lived.  Within months the fines had been reintroduced.  James had also denounced the Catholic faith [possibly to appease the Puritans – a radical sect of Protestants who were rebelling against the Church of England (which they thought was too similar to the Catholic Church) and the supposed threat of Catholic re-emergence.]  For a group of men who had never tasted religious freedom, enough was enough.             

In England, under the guidance of Robert Catesby, the Gunpowder Plot was taking shape.  Catesby is seen by historians as a charismatic figure and a strong leader, the sort of idealist who could cast a spell so powerful all who heard him would instantly fall under his influence.  Catesby had already recruited Guy Fawkes for his specialist knowledge of explosives.  A loyal soldier with a proven track record was a valuable addition to the group.

Fawkes travelled to Spain to drum up military and financial support for the cause but the King of Spain, Philip III was non-committal, preferring to seek an improvement of conditions for Catholics abroad via a diplomatic solution.  Fawkes markedly exaggerated both the strength of the English Catholic Resistance and the anti-Scottish resentment of James I (many of the favoured courtiers in the English court had come with James from Scotland – this was unpopular but hardly the trigger for a mass uprising.)

Fawkes (who changed his Christian name to Guido around this time) returned home empty-handed.  Catesby was undeterred, deciding to press on regardless.  Fawkes was installed as a caretaker in a cellar in close proximity to Parliament under the alias John Johnson.  Thirty six barrels of gunpowder were transported to the cellar.  The conspirators were ready and waiting but fear of the plague delayed the opening of Parliament for months.  While they waited, Catesby let more in on the secret.

Were the conspirators’ movements being observed by the authorities in the months leading up to the Plot?  Catesby had been caught in a previous coup against Elizabeth I’s advisers led by the Earl of Essex.  Fawkes had been a soldier abroad fighting for the enemy for roughly a decade.  Both must have been under the watchful eye of the authorities at some stage.

Espionage and subterfuge had been rife during the reign of Elizabeth I.  During the final years of Elizabeth’s reign, as her health deteriorated, her closest adviser Robert Cecil (later Lord Salisbury) had begun a secret correspondence with her most likely successor, James VI of Scotland.  Robert Cecil was, in effect, sniffing the air to sense which way the wind was blowing before hoisting his flag to the mast.

When James ascended the English throne after Elizabeth’s death, Cecil was duly rewarded.  It would be wrong therefore to suppose that the network of spies who reported to Cecil during Elizabeth’s reign would have simply been disbanded overnight.

As the numbers of the conspirators increased, so did the likelihood that their cover would be blown.  This is exactly what happened in the last days before the Gunpowder Plot.  An anonymous letter was secretly delivered to Lord Monteagle, a loyal Catholic who would be present at the opening of Parliament.  The letter warned Monteagle to stay away, stating those present would “receive a terrible blow” but not stating how this would be done.

Lord Monteagle alerted the authorities.  The Parliament buildings, including the adjoining cellars were searched, on more than one occasion.  The rest, as they say, is history.  Or, at least, the official version of events beyond the trinity of names, dates and places.  Because the authorship of the Monteagle letter has never been proved, it has encouraged many conspiracy theories, some of which have concluded the Gunpowder Plot was a complex hoax.

But this ignores the fact that the Gunpowder Plot was only the opening act, a constituent part in a much grander scheme of things.  Having wrought maximum havoc, Catesby and some of the others would ride to the Midlands, kidnap James’s nine year-old daughter, Princess Elizabeth, proclaim her Queen and install her as the next legitimate Catholic head of state.  Even when news of Fawkes’s arrest spread, Catesby refused to call off the remainder of the plan.  He was shot and killed in a gun battle with the authorities. 

Guy Fawkes faced a slower, more gruesome death.  He was tortured to extract a confession and tried for treason.  In January 1606, Guy Fawkes was hung, drawn and quartered.  According to a contemporary account Fawkes was reported as being so physically weak he could hardly climb up to the gallows.

The story did not end there, however. For Catholics, the effects of the Gunpowder Plot (or Powder Treason as it was termed soon after being discovered), were catastrophic, causing an intensified wave of persecution. In spite of a lack of evidence, the Chief Government Prosecutor, Sir Edward Coke, implicated Jesuit priests as being not only aware of the Gunpowder Plot but being actively involved in its organisation.

Consequently Catholics were discriminated against by a number of Parliamentary Acts for over two centuries. Many important rights were revoked and restrictions added. It was forbidden for a Catholic to enter the army or navy or to practise law. Further education was barred – Catholics could not go to university and could not vote in Parliamentary Elections until 1829.

The opening line of a popular rhyme instructed, “Please to remember the Fifth of November.” For Catholics living in England that ominous date was impossible to forget.

1. Antonia Fraser “The Gunpowder Plot: Terror and Faith in 1605” 2^nd paperback edition, London, Phoenix 2004. The most authoritative book on the subject. Fraser meticulously describes the religious lives and political intrigues of the period, highlighting the Catholic women who harboured priests from the authorities. There is also a detailed explanation of the split within the English Catholic Church between the Appellants (Catholics who practised their faith while also pledging loyalty to the Crown) and the Jesuits (considered a dangerous threat by the government) whose oath of loyalty was to the Pope alone.

2. G.M. Trevelyan “England under the Stuarts” London, The Folio Society 2002

3. Norman Davies “The Isles: A History” London, Macmillan 2000

4. Juliet Gardiner, ed. “The History Today: Who’s Who in British History”, London, Collins & Brown 2000

5. Una McGovern, ed. “Chambers Biographical Dictionary” Edinburgh, Chambers Harrap 2002