Fighting terror, 1605-style

Guy Fawkes laid the explosives

Today the government is struggling to tighten the UK's anti-terror laws amid civil liberties concerns. That was not a problem after the Gunpowder Plot of 1605.

A plot to blow up the houses of parliament, with the monarch and politicians inside, has just failed. What can the government do to restore calm?

Four hundred years ago the authorities in England faced exactly this question when they foiled a plot by disillusioned Catholics to blow up the Houses of Parliament.

Timed to coincide with the state opening of Parliament, the blast would have killed King James I and most of the ruling elite. The plotters then hoped to seize control of the country.

But the attack was averted, but it nevertheless threw up questions over security.

Sound familiar? Historian Mark Nicholls, of Cambridge University, says the Gunpowder Plot was very different to today's terror threats.

PUNISHMENTS Hanging by the neck until near the point of death 'Drawing' - disembowelling and removing genitals before burning them in front of victim, then finally taking out the heart Beheading then 'quartering' - cutting body into four parts - before displaying to the public

"The gunpowder plotters weren't looking at simply generating terror. The explosion was to have been the first step in a projected military coup.

"They were going to use the disaffected people in England. They knew they were on to a loser if they were to rely on Catholics alone. That sets them apart from the fundamentalist terrorists, where religion is the core influencing factor."

For while 17th Century England could cope should a monarch suddenly die, the mass assignation of the authorities would have left a power vacuum.

"It's very difficult to compare with circumstances today. If there was a similar plot that happened and succeeded today, things would go on more normally than they would have in the 17th Century. The early-modern state focused on the monarchy, and possessed a small bureaucracy."

Failed rebellion

Although the blast failed, the planned rebellion went ahead in the Midlands - with little success. Within a month, the conspirators had all been killed or captured.

There is some evidence that Guy Fawkes, who laid the explosives, was tortured. This was seen as legitimate in 17th-Century England if all other means of extracting information had failed.

POST-PLOT CRACKDOWN 5 November - plotters arrested and later (maybe) tortured 8 November - remaining plotters killed in battle 9 November - king says nothing has changed, order remains January 1606 - plotters tried and hanged 1606 - Catholics told to swear allegiance

But does torture work? "Victims often tell you what you want to hear, whereas the torturer - especially in this particular case - wants the facts," says Dr Nicholls.

"Torture isn't the only or indeed the best way of getting at those facts. The authorities in 1605 knew that, and used other techniques to win secrets."

Thus some suspects were given good food and fine clothes while held in the Tower of London.

The plotters went on trial in late January 1606, and they were hung, drawn and quartered. Some MPs wanted "worse" deaths, but James I objected. He had survived a previous attempt on his life, and had come to believe that a higher protective force was at work.

Dr Nicholls said: "There was a real sense of relief in the administration, that they had been very lucky. There was also a sense that God had demonstrated the error of the plotters' cause."

The powers-that-be were also keen emphasise that the plot was the work of a few hardened extremists, that the conspirators did not speak for the Catholic majority.

The "near miss" is still celebrated

But, as with the current government's reaction to the London bombings, there was a clampdown. To help ensure loyalty, from 1606 Catholics had to swear an oath of allegiance to the Crown. The king was also given the right to seize recusants' (those who refused to attend Anglican worship) lands in certain circumstances.

Today, this would be seen as repressive, but then it was comparatively liberal, and the laws were enforced very patchily. There was no repeat of the martyrdoms of the previous century, in which Protestants and Catholics had been slaughtered.

But the image of Catholics did suffer. Until 1797 no Catholic man could vote in local elections, and until 1829 in national elections.

And propaganda capital was made out of the plot, much of it decades, even centuries later.

"There was a lot of anti-Catholic rhetoric during the period of concern over the 'Popish Plots' later in the century. In 1605, there was really no such pressure. It was quite enough to show that the government had coped with it."