Oliver Cromwell goes to the New World

[Melvin Loh]

Well, apparently Cromwell in his early life, before the ECW, had considered migrating to the Puritan colonies in New England. WI he had ? Would he have then made his name as a ruthless military leader intent on exterminating the NE Indians instead of with the irish at Drogheda & Wexford OTL ? Would his presence potnetially have led to other more intense Indian wars prior to Metacom's War in 1675 ? How would he have coped with frontier fighting in the NE wilderness, & would he still have formed a New Model Army-style formation for military service against the Indians (NMA meets Church's Rangers, any-1 ?) ?

[rcduggan]

All I can say to this is: Tony Jones has already done it.

[Talkie Toaster]

No, he hasn't, that TL dealt with Cromwell leaving after a failed ECW, which is a considerable difference.

I'd be more interested in the effects of his departure on the aftermath of the Civil War. Does another powerful personality take his place, or does the Parliament become less indecisive and more competent?

[Fearless Leader]

Thomas Fairfax might end up taking Cromwell's place on the battlefield. Militarily, I don't think there'll be much of a difference, the Self-Denying Ordinance will still be passed, some kind of New Model Army will be constructed, just without Cromwell.

After the civil war, things might get interesting. If indeed Fairfax ends up wielding the control of the New Model army, the English Civil War could very well end with Charles I being restored to the throne with his powers firmly checked and a Presbyterian settlement for the Church. If such a settlement is indeed accepted I'd wager large portions of the New Model Army revolt in a brief 2nd English Civil War.

As for Cromwell in the New World, his influence might be enough to keep the New England Confederation together...

[jacobus]

Come on over, Lord Protector, and welcome to America! It's not like one more humorless, stern, puritanical moralist is going to make a difference, we've got so many of those already, you'll feel right at home.

[Matthais Corvinus]

If Cromwell isn't involved in the English Civil War, I have a feeling it would turn out the same way (Charles imprisoned, Parliament and the Army victorious). I don't think Fairfax would be able to impose a settlement like that on the country though- the New Model Army was fanatically Puritan, with preachers assigned to every unit, and many commanders preached their own sermons to the troops- so I can't see them accepting Presbyterianism as the new Church.

OTL Fairfax seemed unwilling to stand in the way of the Army's politics, staying out of discussions about the monarchy's future, and physically leaving the Army when it became clear Charles I was to be executed. I don't know who would replace him, but without a very political general firmly in charge, its possible that political radicals (Levellers mainly) are able to expand their ranks in the Army.

Another possibility is that without a political general like Cromwell new elections are actually held sometime between '48 and '50. There seemed to be momentum toward that, with Pride's Purge and the events afterward derailing it. The resulting Parliament would have more legitimacy, especially if some kind of re-districting had been done prior to the elections, and that could combine with a non-political Fairfax to keep the Army out of politics.

[Fearless Leader]

Would TTL's be so fanatically Puritan without Cromwell's influence?

Also, AFAIK the English Puritans were fairly Reformed (Calvinistic) in their theology. If the new Church of England, now reorganized under a Presbyterian system of church government, espouses their beliefs I don't think they'd have a huge problem with it.

[Mark E.]

Originally Posted by jacobus

Come on over, Lord Protector, and welcome to America! It's not like one more humorless, stern, puritanical moralist is going to make a difference, we've got so many of those already, you'll feel right at home.

That's what I thought, too. He would be just another radical in Massachusetts a generation before the Salem witch hunts. The downside risk is that he might antagonize the native Americans to the point they wipe out the colony, but I don't think the rest of the settlers would let that happen. American history before 1700 would barely change.

Of course, a change of that magnitude in British history would send big butterflies into colonial history after 1700.

[Matthais Corvinus]

Originally Posted by Mark E.

That's what I thought, too. He would be just another radical in Massachusetts a generation before the Salem witch hunts. The downside risk is that he might antagonize the native Americans to the point they wipe out the colony, but I don't think the rest of the settlers would let that happen. American history before 1700 would barely change.

The King Philip's War was the knock-down drag out between New England's colonial and native populations. I agree with thinking that Cromwell presence wouldn't make any major ripples in America. The loss of Cromwell in England is going to be the huge ripples that will affect America. The English Civil War and its aftermath will be significantly changed without Cromwell.

[AirshipArmada]

Originally Posted by jacobus

Come on over, Lord Protector, and welcome to America! It's not like one more humorless, stern, puritanical moralist is going to make a difference, we've got so many of those already, you'll feel right at home.

Cromwell didn't get religion until he was in his 40's (and even then he was tollerant compared to many of his peers). If he came with the pilgrims around 1630 he would need to get religious a decade sooner. In any case he would not be Lord Protector - the point of the POD is that he come over early.

Originally Posted by Matthais Corvinus

The King Philip's War was the knock-down drag out between New England's colonial and native populations.

umm . . Cromwell would be 76 years old by the time of King Philip's War.

For all we know he may have become a defender of "praying indians" in TTL.