WI: The English Civil War Resulted In An Actual Democratic Republic?

[NedStark]

Without Cromwell you may get a Leveller mutiny that overthrows the grandees. After that it's mostly a matter of the new model army suppressing revolts till the end of time.

Or, having a Leveller on top of the New Model Army. And at the same time, Leveller ideology keeps spreading unchecked both among the soldiers and the common folks (IOTL, by 1648, they received support from like a third of London citizens despite only emerging in around 1646) - and having a leading Leveller commander on top of the Army would have just accelerated its spread. In the end, a mutiny probably wouldn't have been necessary. And, not just the NMA, even the Trained Bands were rife with republican/radical tendencies IOTL.

To do that you'd need a longer bloodier war, which would radicalise the moderates enough to support a republic.

Of course this will radicalize the country. Now combine this with the Leveller spreading unchecked stuff above and you would have a more than sufficient POD.

A big bonus if you can have just a few Spanish/French battalions showing up on the Royalist side - calling upon foreign support in a civil war is a surefire way for the Royalists to lose power/support very fast, especially if these guys happen to be Papists. Further bonus if these foreign troops behave like every combatant in Ireland in the same period.

You can also conveniently kill off Charles II and James II with a strayed cannonball - both showed up in Edgehill and Charles more than a few other battles IOTL.

In the long run, well, the Levellers would have certainly established a Puritan school system (not unlike the one in New England) to educate children into good Republican citizens. England at that time did not have a school system, so it is a matter of building a new one rather than replacing an existing one (mind you, the latter is more difficult).

 

[NedStark]

The second problem is support, by the time he's lord protector Cromwell he's pool of supporters is extremely narrow. The royalists and most of the anglican establishment revile him and want the king back. The moderate parliamentarians and presbyterians had just been purged by him. Finally the radicals, like the levellers have also lost faith in the grandees. Thus Cromwell can't allow open elections otherwise you would get the convention parliament.

Ironically, the Levellers's idea of expanding franchise could do the trick - assume that Cromwell is avoided. Their proposal involved expanding the suffrage to the middling groups but not lower - it is likely that their electoral reform proposal would disproportionately favoured cities and towns over the countryside, which should favour the Parliamentarians.

 

[AltoRegnant]

Ironically, the Levellers's idea of expanding franchise could do the trick - assume that Cromwell is avoided. Their proposal involved expanding the suffrage to the middling groups but not lower - it is likely that their electoral reform proposal would disproportionately favoured cities and towns over the countryside, which should favour the Parliamentarians.

What might that idea of a broader franchise so early on mean for the late renaissance to early enlightenment?

 

[Domz]

It’s interesting that the early United States’ political history indicates what a 17th century English Republic would have perhaps looked like.

 

[NedStark]

What might that idea of a broader franchise so early on mean for the late renaissance to early enlightenment?

The Enlightenment ITTL would have had a much more republican character, rather than constitutional monarchism or enlightened despotism.

It’s interesting that the early United States’ political history indicates what a 17th century English Republic would have perhaps looked like.

Well, OTOH, England would have been much more of a unitary state.

 

[AsukaEMP]

The Anglo-Dutch War(s) would have happened. The outcomes, however, would have been different with a more militarily effective England.

I mean, not necessarily. The navy wasn't negatively affected by the restoration. Reforms continued, with some of the most important changes in the history of the RN being enacted in that period. Furthermore by disbanding the New Model Army, which wouldn't have had a lot of use in a war with the Dutch anyways, Charles freed up a lot of funds for the navy.​

 

[NedStark]

I mean, not necessarily. The navy wasn't negatively affected by the restoration. Reforms continued, with some of the most important changes in the history of the RN being enacted in that period. Furthermore by disbanding the New Model Army, which wouldn't have had a lot of use in a war with the Dutch anyways, Charles freed up a lot of funds for the navy.​

Unfortunately, Charles I freed up funds for his own extravagant lifestyle. The navy under him never reached the Commonwealth's peak in terms, and towards the end of his reign its condition really declined.