PDA

View Full Version : Glorious Revolution of 1688, a Germanic revolution?



Eternal Anglo
Wednesday, January 30th, 2019, 12:02 AM
Hey guys, I'm not making this a point about monarchy (past or current), or validity of certain governments, or whatever, just something kind of neat I noticed on a recent history kick.

So, the Stuarts were a Scottish noble family, or at least would generally be called Scottish by the time they came to the throne of England (notwithstanding the fact that it's kind of hard to assign an ethnic origin to royal houses since they intermarry so much with the other royals of Europe, James I's wife was Danish, etc.), so in that sense, Celtic, and in a direct paternal line, descendants of a Breton knight, Alan fitz Flaad, whose descendants were eventually made hereditary High Stewards of Scotland (and hence later taking the name Stuart), so along with the general identification with Scotland their direct line comes from Brittany. Brittany in turn gets its name from Britons and Romano-British leaving the island in the 400s CE when the Saxons arrived, so a very Celtic royal house. Meanwhile, the House of Hanover, whose reign in England/Britain began in 1714 (after the death of Queen Anne, daughter of James II and sister-in-law and cousin to the Dutch/Germanic William III who came over in 1688 and took the throne from James and ended any chance of England coming back under the sway of Rome) came from part of the same region of northern Germany that the Saxons left for England, and, what's more, are a cadet branch of the House of Welf, the ducal family of Saxony in the middle ages.

There's also the bit of synchronicity of the white horse used on the flag of Hanover (still part of the arms of the House of Hanover), the arms of the Duchy of Saxony, and the association of Hengist and Horsa with a white horse. From Wikipedia, quoting the 17th century work Monumenta Britannica, by John Aubrey (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Aubrey) "the White Horse was their Standard at the Conquest of Britain".
The Hanoverians, also, were much more limited in their monarchical powers, as were, I understand, the kings of pre-Norman England, at least compared to other monarchies at the time, as opposed to the would-be absolutist Stuarts.

Has this connection been made anywhere else? Maybe some points are wrong, but I just thought it was an interesting train of thought.