No English Restoration

This is something I've never seen discussed before, and I'm fascinated by it, yet it is not my area of expertise. How could we delay the end of the Commonwealth/Protectorate? What do you think the result would be?
 
keep Richard Cromwell from taking power and you're well on your way, I've heard a few time one of Oliver Cromwell's older son was going to take power but died too young leaving the job to Richard
 
Charles Fleetwood (Cromwell's son-in-law) is often held up as well.

The major problem is that the Commonwealth doesn't even have a theory behind a succession policy. They've rejected monarchy in favor of basically a military dictatorship, but haven't worked out how to replace the top man when he dies; even if Fleetwood manages to carry on, that problem will be faced every time the top man dies.

It's technically an ASB timeline, but the PoD for Orson Scott Card's Alvin Maker series appears to be Oliver Cromwell living to a spry old age of 92 (1691) - at which point he was killed by a bolt of lightning. The story then takes place in the 1820s and 1830s.
 
It's technically an ASB timeline, but the PoD for Orson Scott Card's Alvin Maker series appears to be Oliver Cromwell living to a spry old age of 92 (1691) - at which point he was killed by a bolt of lightning. The story then takes place in the 1820s and 1830s.

I view that as unlikely, he had malaria and "stones" (urinary/kidney infections) though I guess Richard lived to be 85 (older than any ruler before or since)
 
The problem is that the army could not run the country on their own, and any parliament with legitimate power was a threat to the army and would be dissolved. You need a forceful personality like Cromwell to stave off restoration, and even before he died the protectorate was falling apart.

In the end I think you'd have to have a Cromwellian restoration if you want to avoid a Stuart one.
 
The problem is that the army could not run the country on their own, and any parliament with legitimate power was a threat to the army and would be dissolved. You need a forceful personality like Cromwell to stave off restoration, and even before he died the protectorate was falling apart.

In the end I think you'd have to have a Cromwellian restoration if you want to avoid a Stuart one.


And even then, why? If we are to be ruled by a Monarch, why not the lawful one?

Only chance I can see is if something happnes to Charles II and James converts to Catholicism before 1660. But even then there are Protestants available with Royal blood, who would ahve more credibility.
 
keep Richard Cromwell from taking power and you're well on your way, I've heard a few time one of Oliver Cromwell's older son was going to take power but died too young leaving the job to Richard
Tes, Oliver Cromwells son Oliver Cromwell was generally regarded as being a lot like his father though he died as a captain during the First Civil War.

I generally think you've got to either have Oliver Cromwell Jr or Fleetwood take over from Cromwell Sr. However if you have Henry Ireton survive again he's a prime candidate (less preferable than Oliver Jr but by-far more preferable than Fleetwood).

If Cromwell Jr survives IMO (and in a TL I shall be reviving) England will become a Kingdom again under the House of Cromwell, if Fleetwood takes over it's likely England will still be ruled with an iron grip without a secure Parliament while if Ireton takes over it's likely we'll see some kind of elected monarchy come about as Ireton was a Monarchist I doubt he'd have felt comfortable having his family-line take the throne.

Just some food for thought.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
I don't think it's enough merely to have a different successor to Oliver Cromwell. The rule of the Commonwealth always seemed somewhat precarious to me, and only was able to happen because the population was tired of war. Considering the strong hand of the major generals around the country, and the resentment that they caused (which can be seen by the delight at the restoration of Charles II), you have to have much more significant changes.
 
I don't think it's enough merely to have a different successor to Oliver Cromwell. The rule of the Commonwealth always seemed somewhat precarious to me, and only was able to happen because the population was tired of war. Considering the strong hand of the major generals around the country, and the resentment that they caused (which can be seen by the delight at the restoration of Charles II), you have to have much more significant changes.
Again you need someone like Ireton or Cromwell Jr to take over after Cromwell, preferably as a Monarch. This would create further stability and also if the Humble Petition and Advice is fully accepted (as it was IOTL by Cromwell except for the Monarch part) then we'll see regular Parliaments and a minimizing of the army that would lead to less resentment.

I don't think the whole Commonwealth needs to be changed, however any successor to Cromwell needs to be careful. As mentioned before I'm writing a TL on Cromwell Jr taking over and stability coming about.
 
Top