A Parliamentarian British Isles?

With a POD either just before, during or right after the Civil War, can you imagine a potential timeline where the HoC is able to create a stable framework of Government in a Republic that doesn't require a strong man dictator (eg Cromwell) taking over?

This is before the concept of Prime Minister or "Parties" so it doesn't seem likely but it means other potential solutions could be found.

If Britain (and I'm using that term in the sense of British Isles rather than Great Britain) really does go full parliamentarian, I imaging Puritan/heavily protestant belief will be brutally enforced everywhere with a centralising state.

But I'd also posit that the Republic would be less likely or willing to set up overseas ventures nearly as much (costs lots of money, far bigger concerns etc.) and this is only a few decades after Jamestown's founding so the English Dominance of the coast is far from obvious. Perhaps more French/Dutch?

Would this damage or aid the spread of Parliaments in the world? What would Britain look like after a Century? Is it even possible?
 

Thande

Donor
I disagree with your second point: look at the Commonwealth's involvement in the wars with the Spanish and Dutch, winning us Jamaica, and that wasn't just to do with Cromwell. I think the patterns of trade and religious warfare in the seventeenth century more or less demand English colonialism somewhat like OTL regardless of whether there's anyone wearing the big sparkly hat.

For your first point: I think it is possible, but very difficult. The Parliamentarians were not a homogenous group in the Civil War, and things started to break down as soon as the royals were no longer a respectable threat to unite against. Maybe if Charles held on in Ireland with French help and was enough of a threat to keep all the groups in line long enough for a consensus to be forged? But the problem is you've got fundamentalists from many different Puritan strands who all think their way is the only true way and most of those ways are so nuts that they'd probably have the seventeenth century's equivalent of Tom Cruise as their major proponent. In that environment a military dictator to quash 'em all is almost predestined.
 
I don't know if the big spiky hat is important, but I do think an established Leader of some description helps in these issues of military intervention. If we assume Charles is killed and the Long Pariament dissolves itself (!!!) for re-election, the Knights and such elected will not be of any party description but lead by a speaker. Will this diverse group want to be raising taxes for overseas exploits?

The army, no longer under the threat of Royalist occupation now would theoretically be controlled by the collective will of the Parliament, but I imagine they will be less likely to want to be bossed about by them. There are rebellions in Scotland and Ireland to consider to keep them busy but again without an official leader like a King or Dictator, I imagine control over the military wouldn't be particularly strong.
 
I think the best bet is to have the position of Lord Protector retained in some form, to act as a presidential figure. If Cromwell can get his proposed Senate in place to balance the House, you might get a decent balance of powers.
 
Top