"British Civil War question" Topic

If civil war had broken out in Britain in the 1930s, what role would have been played by (what was left of) the aristocracy? I'm not talking about those who were simply rich, but titled landholders whose families had been prominent for generations.
In the film "Remains of the Day" Lord Darlington seems to be a very influential political figure. Didn't Mosley come from an aristocratic background? Did these people still command respect and influence?

Probably dangling from a piece of hemp about six feet long – the missed opportunity…………

I think that the aristocracy still had some following, but probably not the sort they would have had prior to WWI – I am not sure just how influential they would have been in an actual armed conflict

There was a really interesting episode of the first season of Foyle's War that dealt with aristocratic fascists in early war Britain.

Mulligan

There's an argument that the same people hold power as did 900 years ago: as a simplistic idea it will help. In the rural areas (important in terms of area if not population) the "feudal spirit" so frequently espoused by Wooster was still to the fore. Although some radicalism remained from the Labourers' Union, much had gone after the decline of faming in the '20's.

Also, they held power in important areas: the legislature and also in barrister/judge areas, in the armed forces (the hunt you rode in was still more vital than flying skills in the RAF), and in the business world (directors, etc.).

Finally, as the landed gentry still owned the patronage of who could be vicars/curates for many parishes, they could control the ideology of swathes of rural England.

Not important in Chapeltown, Ancoats, Washwood Heath, nor Bermondsey.

I wonder what "Basil Seal" would have done during a civil war?

I agree with reddrabs – where I live in NE Scotland the local lairds still now in 2009 hold not inconsiderable amounts of land, employ plenty of people and are at the heart of the 'old' community (though not dormitary residents).

You must bear in mind also that many had military backgrounds and would be either serving or retired officers and probably honory colonel of the Royal Pigchesters or similar.

I think in a civil war, they would have had a lot of clout in the shires and rural communities. People would have looked to them for direction, especially where their livelihoods, homes and the fate of the local village would be concerned.

Also what monies or credit they did have would have helped to buy arms on the international market.

Many had interests and extended family in the colonies – so you may see Lord Cowshire's 3rd cousin from Kenya turning up at Amberwick Docks with 10 cases of Chinese Mausers and 100 East African 'volunteers' from his syllabub plantations.

Cheers
Mark

It should not be imagined that the aristocracy was a small rump in the inter-war period, they were still very much in their traditional positions of local power within established rural communities, indeed this dragged on into the 1950's in more rural areas of England and Wales, and Dropship's comments do not surprise me regarding Scotland.

A very large number of aristocratic families were living well beyond their means by the 1930's and were often obliged to seek employment in an attempt to maintain their position (i.e. in the family home), but they would universally have access to the better jobs that themselves carried status and this perpatuated their influence despite the lack of cash. Most shires would have, for example, a Chief Constable who was not a professional police officer, but a local man of high birth. Ditto that for Lord Mayors, Commanding Officers of County Yeomanry/Territorial forces, County Councils, and so on.

On the other side of the coin you would have people who were not from an aristocratic background but who were immensely rich. Nobody took any notice of these people outside the cities. If they lived in the shires they would have almost no influence on the locals whereas the penniless aristocrat would have huge influence.

In industrialised cities the rich factory or mill owner would have more influence than the aristocrat, however the population generally would be more inclined to take a more egalitarian viewpoint of their own situation and take no notice of anyone just because of their social position or wealth.

Moseley was an aristocrat, his family's land was in Stafforshire and Ireland, but as a politician for many years Moseley lived in London. As such he would not have received any support in London because of his aristocratic background, whereas if he had stayed on his estate he would have done. Typically an artistocrat who lived in the country would have been looked to in times of trouble to lead the local men in defending their homes, that wouldn't happen in London.

As such for a BCW 1938 game I'd restrict Lord XYZ to commanding the local defence force with a general allegiance to the King or Chruch, but whose sole interest is actually keeping everybody else off "their land". The politicians would be the ones controlling the aggressive and nationally focussed militias.

"A very large number of aristocratic families were living well beyond their means by the 1930's and were often obliged to seek employment in an attempt to maintain their position (i.e. in the family home), but they would universally have access to the better jobs that themselves carried status and this perpatuated their influence despite the lack of cash."

I'm watching the series "Mad Men" right now, which takes place in the 1960s, and I was somewhat surprised to see that the British who buy the ad agency in NY have upper class accents – but then maybe they're just faking it

"Upper class accents" are more likely in the 1960s to be the result of their school, not their breeding.

Private education which will almost always lead to a "posh" accent is just as available to the self made millionaire as it is to the aristocrat, probably more so. However lots of people with supposedly upper class accents (like plenty or Prime Ministers) were from working class backgrounds but went to state paid for Grammar Schools where they were taught to lose their regional accent in order to become more socially and professionally mobile.

And there is then the issue that what non-Brits think sounds upper class does not sound at all upper class to us. Just some pillock being flash. 8^D

My bosses are from London – maybe I'm mistaken but they DO NOT sound upper class :)

Then you get the 'inverted snobbery' factor. I'm sure Alan Sugar only talks like that for effect!

Depends on which part of the country, Scotland, outside of major conurbations, yep Lairds still exerted a fair amount of 'muscle', employment, land owners, clan affiliatins etc.

East Anglia same, although very much in tandem with the church.

Wales, not a chance as most of English extraction.

Midlands, well outside of Birmingham yep.

South West, arguable, probable re-surgence of Cornish independents etc.

South East, I'm building a irregular force based on an Anti Edward (notorious bounder, not the right stuff at all, most of the powerful aristocrasy were very snotty albeit not to his face) local lord, eldest son RAF from Manston, Middle Son RW Kents officer and youngest son Chaplain, along with various retainers (gamekeepers, gardeners etc.) keeping their corner of Kent out of Moseleys hands.

It must be said however, I don't feel Moseley would be in effective control after the first large conflicts have taken place. Vain, seduced by continental fascism though he was, a partiot through and through, a pro-European and not intrinsically anti-semetic (thought several key members of the BUF were).

Possibly even argument for Moseley being horrified by what he helped engineer and forming Unionist splinter faction.

By the way Alan Sugar is, in real life, an effete aesthetic, smokes opium, wears cravats and has a harem of house boys dressed in lilac…Only puts the voice on for the cameras…off duty minces around like Oscar Wilde on poppers…My uncle told me…

Here's a new book on the period. It's a political/social history, but it happens to have been written by a military historian:

link

Evelyn Waugh's satires are great reading for this period.

I seem to recall from reading an account of the early war in the ME in WWII, when the Yeomanry went off to war, that they seemed to have a large proportion of officers from the "upper crust" of Society and brought their cultural affectations along, at least at first.

Frankly, I just want to see a BCW exchange with Yeoman officers introducing their officers to a local Lord and saying, "M'Lud, this is Captain…Captain…*snaps fingers* Memory like a sieve! I'll be forgetting the names of me hounds next!""

In my interpretation of AVBCW the gentry is not necessarily siding with the King nor the fascists. The King has after all broken the code and married a colonial(!) divorcee(!!!). The fascists under Mosley (half mad but that is acceptable) attracts too many louts of no or poor breeding.