If Richard Cromwell had been as capable as his Dad?

I have always wondered what if Richard Cromwell had been as effective as a ruler/dictator as his notorious yet very successful father. Would any semblance of monarchy have been restored and if so when? Would a modern democracy been closer to happening than in our OTL? How would have this new style/form of rule been accepted abroad and how would the established powers of Europe have reacted to this prolonged dictatorship? Would other European nations throw off the shackles of monarchy and the divine right of Kings far sooner than in our OTL? Would England be more of a player on the European continent in military terms?

Also please remember I am new to this site and this is a subject which I do not know every detail. That is why I am posting here.

Thanks
 
The first thing he needs to do his get the New Model Army under control. Richard Cromwell lost his position when he lost its support. Some of the resentment came from the fact that the Richard hadn't fought in the Civil Wars, and some of it because the Army felt that Richard wasn't advocating for its position Parliament. Figure out a way for him to keep the Army's support, and that'll go a part of the way to keeping the Protectorate around.
 
The first thing he needs to do his get the New Model Army under control. Richard Cromwell lost his position when he lost its support. Some of the resentment came from the fact that the Richard hadn't fought in the Civil Wars, and some of it because the Army felt that Richard wasn't advocating for its position Parliament. Figure out a way for him to keep the Army's support, and that'll go a part of the way to keeping the Protectorate around.
Thank you that's an interesting reply and has helped certainly in the direction I was wishing to take it....
 
It would highly unlikely that he'd be as capable. Oliver Cromwell was an amazingly capable man, and that's why he was able to turn England into a Republic and keep it that way. I won't say that he was 'one of a kind' or anything, but he was way more than average.

Rarely does a Great Man have kids that match him. For several good reasons, but 'regression to the mean' is an obvious one.

Had he, or his Puritan leadership, seriously sat down and planned the future after Oliver, they'd probably have appointed someone else, say a second-in-command, or a promising rising leader out of the next generation.

Turning England back into a hereditary monarchy, just changing the title from 'king' to 'protector' was a really bad idea.
 
It would highly unlikely that he'd be as capable. Oliver Cromwell was an amazingly capable man, and that's why he was able to turn England into a Republic and keep it that way. I won't say that he was 'one of a kind' or anything, but he was way more than average.

Rarely does a Great Man have kids that match him. For several good reasons, but 'regression to the mean' is an obvious one.

Had he, or his Puritan leadership, seriously sat down and planned the future after Oliver, they'd probably have appointed someone else, say a second-in-command, or a promising rising leader out of the next generation.

Turning England back into a hereditary monarchy, just changing the title from 'king' to 'protector' was a really bad idea.
In fact the fact that Oliver needed the army to keep him in power showed how much worse the idea was. Most monarchs while having their army to guarantee their power often didn't need it to stay in power. They kept their power to large degree through a mix of tradition, legitimacy and their usefulness in dealing with foreign states. Oliver if he could have stayed in power was fundamental not any different from a modern third world dictator. He kept power only through the use of force, and the moment he would show weakness he would fall.

So if he was able to keep power, it would be because he established the army as the dominant political group. Fundamental he would need to transform England into a full junta.
 
Top