G7 - France vs. England

I think Jason's list is slightly exaggerating regicide. Even in the Wars of the Roses, England wasn't quite as bad as the Roman Empire! Ambitious nobles who abused their position as regent are far more common. I would add Mary Queen of Scots to the list as an example which would have still been fresh in the minds of people in 1700.

The execution of King Charles I is clearly the obvious parallel, but in this instance it was not the actions of 1 man who woke up one morning and decided to kill his king. It was a slow process taking a number of years, signed by 59 commissioners, a majority of those who supported it. However, the people of England were appalled that their betters had behaved in such a way and that Charles' son was restored to his throne was viewed as an act of atonement by Parliament.

I don't know the full details of what happened this last game turn or how the Duke of Marlborough has attempted to justify his actions. However, from the comments on this forum, I am rather surprised at any claim that King James has committed treason. As far as I remember King James' only action was to sign the 2 documents (Concorde of Bristol and Document of Accession). Under Marlborough's leadership these documents were voted upon by Parliament and passed. And by that action Parliament accepted King James. If Parliament's authority derives from the people, then I don't see how King James can have committed any kind of offence against the people (treason). It is also clear that Marlborough himself by committing regicide did not do so in the name of Parliament, so is in a far weaker position than Cromwell was. I cannot think of any example in English history of a minister of the Crown acting in this way against the expressed wish of Parliament and King; indeed it is precisely against such abuses of power that led the English system of government to limit the power of the King.

As Deacon has pointed out there were plenty of ways to sideline King James so that Marlborough and Parliament could do as they pleased, without murdering him. It seems an unnecessary gamble which pushes the game further out of history and into the realms of pure fantasy.

I agree with other comments that at the very least I would expect his honour to drop. Does honour go negative? I don't know that any Parliament could sanction his actions. Unless asked directly I will not divulge how France would have responded if I was still playing as I don't want to influence any new player who may have arrived. However, I do view his action as having great political significance outside France. He has killed a Catholic king against the wishes of Parliament. If this doesn't lead to condemnation from the Pope then what will? And with that condemnation I would expect severe Papal pressure on Austria to stop supporting William. It was always difficult for the Pope to maintain public silence when Leopold was backing a Protestant cause, but now a Catholic King has been killed I don't see how Austrian support can be justified. There may also be a reckoning for Spain whose reluctance to support King James has now indirectly led to his death. It is one thing to play for family honour, but another entirely to stand by and watch such savage behaviour against a fellow Catholic. This appears to have been as big a surprise to Basilieus as anyone so although I'm sure he was prepared to do just about anything to remove King James from power, I don't think he intended this as a solution, and certainly not so quickly!

Perhaps this is simply another example of what happens when players are free to break their word without consequence. Today you break a treaty; tomorrow you kill your king. Will anyone ever trust you again either inside England or outside? I guess the Duke of Marlborough may last even less time than other English players and he may well have done more damage to England than France did. Bit of a waste of time me trying to leave England as a playable power. Who knows, after this the English people may welcome French rule - it can't be any worse than what they've got now

I don't know about people's hero, but in real life you would expect King James to be venerated as a Catholic martyr and King Louis as a Catholic hero for backing his cause. Unintended consequences, certainly. I expect Marlborough to be impeached by Parliament if not simply assassinated by his own 'friends' before much longer. He seems to have broken Magna Carta. For those still interested in history can anyone identify which other laws/statutes of England Marlborough has acted in ignorance of?