Britannia's Religion

[vicks111.livejournal.com]

Religion has been mentioned offhand many times in Geass, but never actually stated. I started thinking about this from a review and Clovis' few chosen words. I would really like to hear everyone's opinion on this, maybe we can figure it out XD

SPOILERS FOR GEASS HISTORY AND EP 21

Ok, is the Empire christian or not? I think it was pretty much given by its name "Holy Empire of Britannia", but apparently since Julius Cesar did not conquer England, then they did not became christians. However, if you think about it, Catholicism still became big, even if England was not part of the empire. It is logical to think, that even if they were not officially christian, the Church was pretty big back in the medieval ages and renaissance and they must have had an impact.

It's interesting that the Geass history mentions Elizabeth I, which set the foundation for the Church of England. But then Elizabeth III abdicated the throne of England. She was no longer Queen and Napoleon invaded. She came to the Americas, and it's given that the rest of the Empire came under her rule.

Now, if she abdicated and there was no (mentioned) war in the Americas, she must have pulled something big to scare the Spaniards away. By the time she arrived in US, the South American colonies were starting the process of Independence. They would not have relinquished their land so easily, since they even fought war with Spain. The Central American colonies would have annexed easily, but not South America.
She was no longer Queen of England, and had no other power but loyalty from those that came with her. To be able to create such an empire as Britannia (just the continent) without turmoil, she must have had help from the Catholic church. And the Americas would have not accepted a queen that was not crowned by the Pope.

...Now I want to see if Lulu gets crowned by a priest XD
......and yes, I am a wee bit obsessive with the most random things. You can clearly see I have given this much a thought.

Comments

[klingon-jedi.livejournal.com]

I guess. It was probably because it's well known that Franklin was largely responsible for bringing in France, which essentially won the war for us thanks to the fleet they sent. It's just the whole bribe thing that doesn't sit well. Franklin never struck me as the type to betray his ideas for gold and land.

It's a fictional universe though, so I guess we can just say it was a different Franklin. One more easily bought.

[tensa-chan.livejournal.com]

Not really. Franklin, in addition to being important to the war effort, held great influence. His failure to procure French troops would have lowered morale, especially since in our world only a third of Americans supported the Revolution; a third were loyalists and the other third didn't give a shit.

Also, historical case studies have shown that if a revolution does not gain foreign help, it WILL fail, no exceptions. And that the US only won because Britain didn't give a damn- they thought we'd be crawling back after our little experiment with democracy failed, and they were more focused on India's resources, anyways.

[klingon-jedi.livejournal.com]

Wow, that's digging up old topics. ^_^ I'm well aware of Franklin's influence, and my post was in no way a be all, end all of his contributions to the war effort. So there's no need to argue on that.

My problem wasn't with them saying the Revolution failed because of his betrayal, but rather that my perception of Franklin never struck me as the type that would be bought out the way he is in this fictional timeline. So I figured they choose him because he's well known to non-scholars of the revolution and the ease of having us loose due to non foreign aid (No French fleet, Cornwallis escapes Yorktown, war continues). Though Franklin wasn't alone is persuading the French. They could have just easily had the surrender of West Point succeed, loosing the river and much of New England with it.

Though like I said, different timeline, different Franklin.

Britain was also overconfident in the field quite often. Allowing our not as trained men to use their knowledge of the land and so forth against them.