If Richard "Tumbledown Dick" Cromwell had not succeeded his father as Lord Protector and in his place, a more capable leader became England's de facto king (maybe John Lambert?), how long would the Commonwealth have lasted? Was the Restoration inevitable? Would the position of Lord Protector ever become an elected position?
Cromwell has a better heir-how long does England stay a republic?
- Thread starter Guildencrantz
- Start date
easiest choice would be cromwells other son Henry, who was quite capable
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Cromwell
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Cromwell
In that case we see the return of the monarchy...under the Cromwell Dynasty?
Trouble is, the Cromwell family only holds power by grace of the Army Chiefs. They followed Oliver because he was the Great Man who had led them to victory. But the Army itself was highly expensive and hence unpopular with the taxpayers. So a Cromwell had either to go along with the Army and alienate the population at large, or else fall out with the Army and get overthrown in a coup.
There's a reason why Monk went for a Free Parliament rather than setting himself up as another Protector. He knew the job offered no future to anyone without Oliver's prestige.
There's a reason why Monk went for a Free Parliament rather than setting himself up as another Protector. He knew the job offered no future to anyone without Oliver's prestige.
Last edited:
I agree with @Mikestone8 here. I don't think any of Cromwell's sons had the legitimacy to follow their father. So, is the restoration of the Stuarts inevitable? Or could we get another prestigious military commander? I said John Lambert in the OP but who else could have followed Cromwell's footsteps? Fairfax, maybe?
Fairfax had endorsed Monk. He had of course never supported the execution of Charles I, despite being named by the Army Council to be President of the Court. As his wife reportedly said at the trial when his name was called "He has more wit than to be here".
Lambert tried to seize power. He thought that defeating Booth at Winnington Bridge made him heir to Oliver's mantle. However, the taxpayers "went on strike" so that his men found themselves without pay, while the Navy repudiated him and expressed their feelings by blockading the Thames. When he went north to confront Monk, his unpaid troops deserted. Somehow I get the feeling that he wasn't really up to the job.
Perhaps if Cromwell had named Lambert his successor? But I guess then it's a question of how long he can maintain power