The Gunpowder Plot What does the evidence suggest happened in 1605?

1. The Gunpowder Plot What does the evidence suggest happened in 1605? Year 8

2. Lord Robert Cecil, the king’s chief minister, explains what happened in the Gunpowder Plot (1605) The plan was the idea of Robert Catesby, a Catholic. Along with other Catholic gentlemen, they would blow up the Houses of Parliament when King James I went there to make a speech. In spring 1605, Thomas Percy rented a cellar nearby. It led under the House of Lords. Barrels of gunpowder were brought in and covered with wood and coal. The group brought in Guy Fawkes, a Yorkshire gentleman and ex-soldier, to set the powder off. Meanwhile, the rest went to their country homes and waited. James was due to open Parliament on 5th November. At 7 o’clock on 26th October, Lord Monteagle was about to have dinner when one of his servants brought him a letter. It had been given to him by a stranger in the street. The letter was written by Francis Tresham, one of the plotters and Lord Monteagle’s cousin. The letter warned him not to attend Parliament. ‘They shall receive,’ it said ‘a terrible blow’. Monteagle did not really know what to make of it. Even so, he took it at once to Robert Cecil, the king’s chief minister. Cecil took the letter to the king. On 4th November, the cellar was searched. They found a heap of coal and wood. There was also a man who said he was called John Johnson. That evening, the cellar was searched again. This time, they found the gunpowder too. John Johnson was arrested. In the Tower of London, he was tortured and admitted that he was Guy Fawkes. He confessed about the plot on 8th November. The other plotters were tracked down to the Midlands. A number, including Catesby and Percy, were shot dead. One, called Rokewood, was taken prisoner. The survivors, including Fawkes, were found guilty of high treason. In January 1606, they were dragged to the place of execution. There, they were hanged drawn and quartered. Their hearts were cut out and their insides burned in public.

3. How do we test if a source can be trusted or not? • We use the TANK system. • Time – When was it written? • Author – Who wrote it and why? • Nature – What kind of source is it? • Knowledge – Does it match up with what I already know about this?

4. TIME: WHEN WAS IT DRAWN? NATURE: WHAT KIND OF SOURCE IS IT? AUTHOR WHO DREW IT AND WHY? (It was drawn by a Dutch artist.) KNOWLEDGE: DOES IT MATCH UP WITH WHAT I ALREADY KNOW ABOUT THE GUNPOWDER PLOT? The Picture of the Gunpowder Plotters:How trustworthy is it as evidence for the Gunpowder Plot?

5. TIME: WHEN WAS IT WRITTEN? NATURE: WHAT KIND OF SOURCE IS IT? AUTHOR WHO WROTE IT AND WHY? KNOWLEDGE: DOES IT MATCH UP WITH WHAT I ALREADY KNOW ABOUT THE GUNPOWDER PLOT? The Letter sent to Lord Monteagle:How trustworthy is it as evidence for the Gunpowder Plot? My Lord, out of the love I bear to some of your friends, I have a care of your preservation. Therefore I would advise you, as you tender your life, to devise some escape, to shift your attendance at this parliament. For God and man have concurred to punish the wickedness of this time and think not slightly of this advertisement but retire yourself into your country where you may espy of the event in safety. For though there be no appearance of any stir yet I say they shall receive a terrible blow this parliament and yet they shall not see who hurts them. This counsel is not to be continued because it may do you good and can do you no harm for the danger is passed as soon as you have burned the letter and I hope God will give you the grace to make good use of it to whose holy protection I commend you. To the right honourable the Lord Monteagle

6. Other Evidence for the Gunpowder Plot – what does it suggest really happened? • Evidence 1: The plotters bought 36 barrels of gunpowder, yet the only place you could buy gunpowder was from the government, under Lord Cecil. • Evidence 2: The records of the Tower of London, showing who bought gunpowder in 1604, were mysteriously destroyed. The only people who had access to the records were Cecil’s men. • Evidence 3: The plotters stored the gunpowder in barrels in a house next to Parliament. The plotters were allowed to use the house by its owner, who happened to be a friend of Lord Cecil. • Evidence 4: The Government had the plotters followed all the time and always knew where they were. Catesby had been in trouble before and Lord Cecil employed many spies and informers.

7. Other Evidence for the Gunpowder Plot – what does it suggest really happened? • Evidence 5: Lord Monteagle was tipped off by one of the plotters (Francis Tresham) on 27th October. Yet the Government did not do anything about it until 4th/5th November. • Evidence 6: One of the plotters, Francis Tresham, was not arrested straight after the plot was found out. Some people claim to have seen him with Cecil. Francis Tresham was the man who tipped off Lord Monteagle. • Evidence 7: Much later on Tresham was imprisoned in the Tower of London where he died. No-one knows how he died.

8. What might have happened? • Guy Fawkes followed Catesby’s order – he was guilty. • Guy Fawkes was framed by Cecil, who hated Catholics. He was really innocent. • Guy Fawkes was hired by Catesby. Cecil found out about the plot early on, but let it go on till the last minute for his own reasons. Fawkes was guilty, but he was trapped and used by Cecil.

9. What were the motives of key characters in this story?

10. What were the motives of key characters in this story? Robert Catesby • He wanted to make England Catholic again. He had been mixed up in plots (1601) before and had been a friend of one of Cecil’s old enemies, the Earl of Essex. • Once the king had been blown up, his young children, Elizabeth and Charles, who were staying in the Midlands at the time, would be taken hostage by the plotters. Rokewood and Digby, who lived nearby were to organise this kidnapping. • The plotters would now control the government and could make England Catholic again. • A Catholic ruler - the King of France or the King of Spain - could easily invade England during the confusion that would follow the king’s death. This could also lead to England being Catholic again.

11. What were the motives of key characters in this story? Guy Fawkes • Guy Fawkes was a Catholic from Yorkshire who had gained his knowledge of explosives as a soldier. He had fought for the Spanish army in Holland against the Protestant Dutch. • He was brought into the plot as an explosives expert, but was glad to do it as he also hoped it would make England a Catholic country again. • Even after he was tortured, he was still proud to have been involved in the plot to kill the king.

12. What were the motives of key characters in this story? James I • James disliked anyone with extreme religious views. He preferred to let people follow their own religious beliefs as long as they did not threaten him as king. • When he became king (1603) he did not want to treat the Catholics in England as harshly as Queen Elizabeth I had. • He was certain that he always knew best. He insisted that he was king by ‘divine right’ – God had chosen him to be the King of England and Scotland. He considered kings to be very special people. No one should dare to challenge their power. It was like challenging God himself. • He was horrified that Guy Fawkes did not regret trying to kill his own king.

13. What were the motives of key characters in this story? Lord Robert Cecil • Cecil had been Queen Elizabeth’s chief minister in the last 10 years of her reign. England was at war with Catholic Spain at the same time, so Cecil had become very suspicious of all Catholics in England. As a result, he used his many spies and informers to watch known troublemakers. • He had made sure that two of his old enemies, the Earl of Essex (a friend of Catesby) and Sir Walter Raleigh, had been arrested (in 1601 and 1603) when they were suspected of treason. • He was worried that King James was not suspicious enough of the Catholics in England. He thought that the king did not see them as a danger to England. Cecil was sure that they were – he believed they were loyal to the Pope, not the King.

14. Assessment Assignment: Was Guy Fawkes Framed? Year 8 History Autumn Assessment

15. How to do your assignment • Write an essay that answers the question:Was Guy Fawkes Framed? • This assignment is to be word-processed. • You will then EITHER print off your work and hand it in OR e-mail it to your teacher. • You will complete the assignment to a deadline set by your teacher. • You will talk about how you can improve your answer with other pupils and your teacher will also comment on your work, giving you advice on how to improve it, so that you can raise the level you have reached. • You will amend the assignment to a deadline set by your teacher. • Your teacher will comment on this work and give it a level.

16. Assessment Assignment: Was Guy Fawkes Framed? Introduction: • Set the scene - What was the Gunpowder Plot? Middle: • Paragraph 1 - What evidence is there that Guy Fawkes was guilty. • Paragraph 2 – What evidence is there that Guy Fawkes was framed by Cecil, who hated Catholics, even though he was really an innocent man. • Paragraph 3 – What evidence is there that Guy Fawkes was guilty, but he and the other plotters were used by Cecil for his own reasons. Conclusion: • Answer the question - Was Guy Fawkes framed? Explain why you have reached your conclusion.

17. How your work will be marked LEVEL 3 The answer does not follow the guidelines your teacher gave you for organising a history essay: an introduction; middle paragraphs for evidence; conclusion. Paragraphs are not used to introduce new points. Little evidence is used to back up points made about the Gunpowder Plot. The conclusion does not show how you have used the evidence to work out if Guy Fawkes was framed or not, including the motives of groups or individuals of the time. LEVEL 4 The answer follows the guidelines your teacher gave you for organising a history essay: an introduction; middle paragraphs for evidence; conclusion. Paragraphs are sometimes used to introduce new points. Enough evidence is used to back up points made about the gunpowder Plot, but it is not explained in detail. The conclusion shows how you have used the evidence to work out if Guy Fawkes was framed or not, which may include the motives of groups or individuals of the time. LEVEL 5 The answer follows the guidelines your teacher gave you for organising a history essay: an introduction; middle paragraphs for evidence; conclusion. Paragraphs are generally used to introduce new points. Detailed evidence is used to back up points made about the Gunpowder Plot, and it is clearly explained. The conclusion shows how you have used the evidence to work out if Guy Fawkes was framed or not, which includes the motives of groups or individuals of the time. It may also contain some discussion of how trustworthy some of the sources are (using TANK), such as the picture and letter. LEVEL 6 The answer follows the guidelines your teacher gave you for organising a history essay: an introduction; middle paragraphs for evidence; conclusion. Paragraphs are used to describe alternative views of the Gunpowder Plot. The evidence for these is explained in detail.The conclusion shows how you have used the evidence to work out if Guy Fawkes was framed or not, including the motives of groups or individuals of the time. It may also contain some discussion of how trustworthy some of the sources are (using TANK), such as the picture and letter and further background information about the reign of James I, which also backs up the conclusion.

18. What should your answer include? • Did this assignment explain what the Gunpowder Plot was and why Guy Fawkes might have been framed? • Did you trust what it told you? Why? • What needed to be added to the essay to make it more convincing? - More background detail about the Gunpowder Plot? - More detailed evidence to explain the different ways of looking at the Gunpowder plot? - More explanation of why some pieces of evidence are more trustworthy or important than others? - A better Layout to the answer – an introduction, middle section and a detailed conclusion?

19. King James was certain that he always knew best. He constantly reminded those around him that he was king by ‘divine right’ – God had chosen him to be King of England and Scotland. He considered kings to be very special people. Cecil had been Queen Elizabeth’s chief minister in the last 10 years of her reign. Persecution of Catholics was at its height at that point. It was thanks to Cecil that James took over the throne of England without any difficulty when Elizabeth died. Cecil was then chief minister to James I from 1603 to 1612. James I had already faced another plot against him in 1603. Sir Walter Raleigh, a former friend of the Earl of Essex and a rival of Cecil’s had been accused of plotting against the king. There was very little evidence against him, but he had been imprisoned in the Tower of London anyway. Guy Fawkes had gained his knowledge of explosives as a soldier. He had fought for the Spanish army in Holland against the Protestant Dutch. James disliked anyone with extreme religious views. Extreme Protestants (Puritans) upset him as much as Catholics. In 1620, to escape persecution in England some Puritans even made the dangerous journey to America, to make a new life there. James wanted to be on good terms with powerful Catholic countries like Spain & France. He even tried to arrange a marriage with a Spanish princess for his son, Charles (1623). James wrote several books. One was called Demonology (1597). He explained how people should be on their guard at all times against secret evil schemes, especially those of witches. England had been at war with Catholic Spain from 1585 to 1604. The Spanish Armada had tried to invade England in 1588. The Spanish had also tried to help Catholic rebels in Ireland in the 1590s. When James became king he made peace with Spain immediately (1604). James was quite a vain man. After 1607 he tended to reward his ‘favourites’ at court generously. These included Robert Carr and the Duke of Buckingham. As a result Cecil’s advice was often ignored by the king in the years up to Cecil’s death in 1612. Robert Catesby had been involved in a rebellion against Queen Elizabeth. It had been led by the Earl of Essex in 1601. Essex had been Cecil’s main rival at the Queen’s court. He was executed for treason after his rebellion. More about Catesby, Fawkes, Cecil and the Reign of James I