The promised land looked for so longingly by so many seemed in 1653 to be stubbornly remote. Legal reform blocked, religious programmes cancelled, an apparently corrupt parliament, high taxes, and still no fresh elections – rulers seemingly interested only in war and exploting power foir their own advantage. In the Army Council of Officers the resentment was mounting.

Download Podcast - 417 Kicking the Rump (Right Click and select Save Link As)

 

Transcript

Last time then, we heard about the progress of the Commonwealth outside the borders of England and Wales, in Scotland, Ireland – and the Netherlands. After 2 ½ years of war, the Commonwealth had been quite good on the military stuff – preparing the navy, getting close to winning the wars in Ireland and Scotland.  But so far it seems to have been pretty rubbish in building the brave new world the revolutionaries had hoped for; limited social reform, lots of divisive and intrusive moral reform, no end to the high taxation on the shoulders of the man in the Clapham omnicart. And possibly worst of all, the lack of fresh election made the Rump look suspiciously keen to keep themselves in power. However credible the fears that a new election would bring back a bunch of monarchists or kill liberty of conscience.

Suspicion of the Rumpers love of power was the consistent headline in many Newsbooks. Many furiously accused the Rump of corruption, of prolonging their power so that they could fill their pockets with more goodies, and land. But actually although people were utterly convinced every politician was on the take, the evidence is that they weren’t really, and certainly less than in the days before the Revolution. Blair Worden makes the point that there was simply too much faction and suspicion with in the Rump to allow it; every transfer of sequestered land was poured over by political opponents. Litigious Light really did shine into every corner.

But you can see how it looks to the country at large. And there were indeed some examples of political leaders who got away with it, who had most certainly acquired a lot of estates through corrupt means rather than the proper process. One of those unfortunately was one of the champions of parliamentary independence and sovereignty in what follows, Arthur Haselrigg.

Who better than Gerald Winstanley to give voice to criticism of the slow reform and suspicion of corruption? He warned them that it might

Appear to the view of all men that you cut off the King’s head, that you might establish yourselves in the chair of government

He asked them if they had in fact, not been seeking a better world, but instead had killed

The King for his power and government as a thief kills a true man for his money.

Harsh words. But the people nodding their heads in agreement were not just the royalists.

Cromwell was of course in a position now to do something about it. I am very keen to avoid a very common problem – which is that people start describing anything the Rump does as the work of Oliver Cromwell. And he was very much the best known figure; so much so that Milton would compose a sonnet in May 1652 about the Lord General, calling him;

Cromwell our Chief of men’

But the reality was that Cromwell is still only primus inter pares, first among equals. He was clearly primus it has to be said, and everyone knew it, and his position at the head of the Army Council gave him enormous influence. But there doesn’t appear to be obvious evidence that he expected to be in command and driving the bus. And while it is true that he was re-elected to the Council of state first in line with 118 votes; those with the second and third highest votes, Vane and Whitelocke, frequently publicly disagreed with him, and Cromwell was perfectly capable of losing the argument in Council. He was very reluctant about the Dutch war, for example.

Nor He did not expect to be financially rewarded on the scale of a quasi head of state.  So on his return from Worcester in 1651, he was voted an annual stipend of £4,000, which was a good amount, and there was never any danger he’d turn it down, he was perfectly happy to live in comfort. But it was by no means excessive or extraordinary. And at the same time he voluntarily gave up his stipend as Lord General; he appears to have had a sense of what was enough, and what was too much. The Venetian Ambassador reported that the style of this first and most famous man of the Commonwealth was of an

Unpretending manner of life, remote from all display and pomp, so different from the former fashion of the kingdom

It appears that Cromwell enjoyed and expected to have a voice commensurate with the role he had played; but did not expect to be any more than a servant of the state at this stage. Nor was he very certain of his political vision, or indeed where God was leading him; after Worcester he wrote to a friend

We need your prayers in this as much as ever. How shall we behave after such mercies? What prophecies are now fulfilling? Who is a God like ours….?

Nonetheless, some were already saying that he was aiming to get rid of the inter pares bit and become sole top dog. There are plentiful contemporary royalist ballads angrily accusing him of hypocritical secret ambition for the very Top Job, and had been for a while;

Now Oliver Ascend the throne

Feare not to tumble down

Sang the chorus in a play of 1648[1].

The Dutch also seemed to believe Cromwell was the Commonwealth – a Dutch Woodcut of 1652, which shows Cromwell with a crown and a sword attacking the good Dutch – rather than the real aggressor, the Commonwealth as a whole.

Historians quote others; the memoirs of puritan Lucy Hutchinson speak of

The reach of ambition in his breast

Edmund Ludlow wrote in his own memoirs of Cromwell’s

Pernicious intentions

after Worcester, and that he had

Long been suspected by wise and good men[2]

The record of events in Bulstrode Whitelocke ‘s memoirs are particularly central to the narrative of the period, and appear in every single history book, and will now appear in this history podcast. They are events as central to the great theatrical story of the Revolution as, I don’t know, Charles trying to arrest the five members. There are two of these iconic moments

Number one concerns a meeting at the Speaker’s house about a new constitution, called by Cromwell one night at the backend of 1651 with MPs and Army officers in attendance, meetings that went on deep into the night, and which included this memorable statement from Cromwell

That a settlement with somewhat of monarchical power in it would be very effectual

Well! I mean – nudge nudge, wink, and if I may wink with brass knobs and flashing lights on. Really Oliver? Monarchical element is it now?

The second event takes us to St James Park, which is conveniently located close to Whitehall where a lot of politicians had lodgings; Elizabeth and Oliver Cromwell had been allocated rooms at the Cockpit in Whitehall where they lived, I think with daughters Elizabeth and Mary. So one day Whitelocke was stretching his legs before some gruelling parliamentary session or other and hey presto who should he meet but Oliver. Well that’s spooky – and the insinuation by Bulstrode is that this was not a random meeting – Cromwell had been lying in lain in wait, the little tinker.

Well. Bulstrode relates the conversation line by line, word by word – and it ain’t short. Cromwell expresses his frustration at the slow progress of the Rump in reform, the lack of elections and all that. He is not a happy Hector, and determined not to let this slide. No No, they must

‘improve the mercies & successes which God hath given us, & not to be fooled out of them again’;[3]

Sounds a bit like the Who, we won’t be fooled again. Though I am told by Steeple they were refuting John Lenon. Anyway. Anyway, they natter on – a long natter, carefully and closely recorded. Then slap bang wallop, big change of pace, Oliver pops the question

What if a man should take upon him to be king?

Whitelock recovers his jaw from his toe caps and responds

I think that remedy would be worse than the disease.

They go on from there, for quite a while and in some detail, there it is in black and white. So the first thing you think of that is well, there’s a man with a big idea on his mind, no wonder! Well actually, that’s the second thing, the first thing is golly, did Bulstrode have a notebook on him or some kind of recording equipment. But there we have it. Cromwell is impatient; he has the army pressing him for action. We already know from Bulstrode he thinks a dash of monarchical seasoning would improve the soup of state, and he thinks the seasoning might well be him.

 

 

Many in parliament feared and resented the power of the Army; especially since Cromwell identified with his soldiers, and sat at the head of the army council. And the Army were impatient for change – in 1652 they had delivered that petition, demanded reform be brought forward.

So divisions about reform and elections were widening. Even between Cromwell and his former close allies in parliament like Harry Vane, and the nature of their growing distance reflect some of the concerns.

Both Vane and Cromwell shared the belief in liberty of conscience – though even here there is a variation a variation. Vane’s toleration was limitless, extending to the frankly wild and extreme sects like Ranters, and deeply mistrusting ministers. Cromwell valued order and sobriety much more, combining his religious radicalism with his social conservatism. He distrust those he felt were taking liberty to excess, like the Ranters indeed, and he favoured a church where the congregation listened well regarded to ministers, with respect.

Both shared a fear that elections could give power to both the royalists that would seek to destroy it from within, or to the more authoritarian radical Presbyterians who wanted to destroy liberty of conscience to impose a national church. And Vane the risk was too high – and had already pinned his colours to the mast of very limited elections – basically recruiter elections for empty constituencies, and even that to be set as late as possible. Conversely, Cromwell believed the risk must be taken – it was imperative to broaden the base of support from the Commonwealth, and essential to its legitimacy.

So, more divisions were appearing. And although from all the evidence of attendance, letters and statements, Cromwell accepted his position simply as a leading, possibly the leading public figure, none the less he is the Rump’s servant. But he shared the frustration of his Army that reform was critical and it was needed faster. Parliament must accept the gift of freedom from God, and implement the promised new world, as he had written after Worcester to the Rump in 1651, so

That justice, righteousness, mercy and truth many flow from you as a thankful return to our gracious God

While Cromwell declared that constitutions were ‘dross and dung’ compared to Godliness, elections were essential to deliver on God’s gift. In September 1651 the issue of elections was forced once more; Oliver St John moved for a debate in the house; the debates ground on,  and 14th November 1651, Cromwell made a long speech, urging that a date must be fixed beyond which it would not sit. Eventually a vote was taken, and his resolution was accepted – but by a mere two votes. And when a date was agreed by the house – it was infuriating to Cromwell and those like him. The date was set for 3 years ahead, November 1654. By that time, the parliament would have sat for 14 long years. The fears of Vane, Marten and Haselrigg won out.

 

 

 

 

 

Now, the Council of Army Officers met regularly in London, always an uncomfortable reminder of this alternative source of power, and one that had declared it’s bloody sacrifice gave it a right to be heard.  The Army officers represented a wide range of views; but to boil it down we might organise the room into two. There was the more secular type – let us use John Lambert as an example – who were determined that this new commonwealth should improve the lot of the poor, implement legal reforms, and immediately hold elections so that it truly represented the nation.

But as I think I have mentioned before, the New Model Army were first and foremost a Godly army. So for just as many, it was not political reform they demanded – it was religious and moral reform. So, after Worcester, Major General Thomas Harrison also made demands of the Rump. He wanted a more moral nation, and demanded that parliament open

A wider door to publishing the everlasting gospel of our only lord and saviour, that all his enemies shall be made his footstool

Golly, Footstool eh? Ouch.

Harrison represented a fast growing sect – the Fifth Monarchists. I know you are all a bit sick of the religious sects, so I am sorry to introduce another one, but that is just the world we live in. So, here goes. The Fifth Monarchists believed that following the fall of four great empires – Babylon, Persia, Greece and Rome – the fifth monarchy was due – the thousand year rule of Christ, and that it would start very soon in England. For them, moral and religious reformation was the most important to make the world suitable for Christ’s coming. They didn’t care about fresh elections; and in fact they thought a wider franchise was a pretty terrible idea. There should instead be the rule of the saints, not the grubby masses. It opposed the constitution of the Commonwealth because

It had a parliament in it, whereby power is derived from the people, whereas all power belongs to Christ

Rule should be led by a Sanhedrin of godly men, chosen by the saints. Like our current politicians if you like.

But through 1652 there was a rising chorus of complaint from both sides of the army. Because neither were satisfied by the Rump. For the likes of Lambert, the lack of legal reform and improvements to poor relief were paramount. While Harrison and his Godly were outraged by the failure of parliament to continue the religious missions it had set up in the North and in Wales. And both through the Rumpers had their snouts in the trough, which was why they were resisting elections.

The Rumpers, like Bradshaw, Vane and Haselrig, on the other hand were thoroughly unimpressed at being lectured by the Army Council. Afterall – this was a parliament based on the power of the people not the army and they refused to be dictated to.

In this situation, Cromwell’s concern was to bring these agendas together; he remained throughout 1652 convinced as he’d always been that parliament was where authority should lie, after all it was what they had fought for. He was also in many ways a perfect bridge between the parties. And so he worked hard to act as the bridge. In August 1652 parliament debated a new petition from the Army – and did nothing.

Many, Cromwell among them recognised that the Commonwealth could not succeed unless it won acceptance, healing and settling, as Cromwell would call it. Critical to that was an Act of Oblivion; calling an end to the conflict, wiping the slate clean, and this Cromwell pushed this hard. And an Act was passed, declaring that

All rancour and Evil Will occasioned by the late differences may be buried in perpetuity

Everyone that had fought against the parliament’s cause were pardoned; the process of sequestration and compounding was drawn to a close. All good.

But  the deathwish in the Rump was strong, particularly in the heart of Arthur Haselrig; there were so many exceptions imposed on the pardon, that much of its effect was nullified. One of these was the sale of 678 sequestered royalist estates, which were now ordered to go ahead. The sale meant they could not be recovered by the original owners. Many of these sales personally affronted the officers sense of honour, because in some cases they abused terms of surrender agreed by them. The Rump once more seems suicidal; probably they had to p[ay for the Dutch war, and could see no other way. But they seemed blind to the bigger long term priority – to heal the nation and unite it behind the Commonwealth. Maybe it’s easy to be wise after the event.

Still From Cromwell laboured to keep dialogue going, arranging 12 informal meetings between MPs and Officers in the Autumn of 1652. But as 1652 turned into 1653 the temperature was rising, and no light of reform was produced, just febrile faction. The Rump seemed increasingly hostile when they closed down a newsbook favourable to the army view point. Nedham’s Mercurius Politicus came out in favour of immediate elections, which piled on the pressure. Then the Rump disbanded several Army units – a reasonable measure given cost, but the timing was not good. Then there was a rumour that Cromwell was going to be removed from his generalship, and most army members were removed from the Council of State. When the Dutch war stopped the supply of coal to London sense of crisis went up a further notch.

The strain began to tell on Cromwell; recently a letter was discovered from him to a personal friend, not sure who, dated September 1652

I can a little bewail my self, have I one friend in our society to whom I can unburden my selfe, you are absent… I am left alone, almost so, But not forsaken. lend me one shoulder, Pray for mee[4]

By March 1653, the Army Council was steaming. In April the Ministry for the propagation of the gospel in Wales was left to lapse; radical preachers in London filled the air with their thundering condemnation of the Rump. There came a rumour of plans to radically downsize the army still further; it had already been reduced from 70,000 to 57,000 – now it was proposed to go further down to just 14,500. And pay, was heavily in arrears.

An explosion was in the offing, the feel of Pride’s Purge was in the air.

But there was hope. Because earlier in the year, the Rump had agreed to reopen the debate about elections. But it dribbled on and took months, and seemed to be getting nowhere. On 11^th March, the Army Council proposed to dissolve the Rump immediately, and Cromwell had a hard time heading the proposal off[5]. On 18^th and 19^th April Cromwell held emergency meetings of the Army Council and Parliament, with about 20 MPs. At this meeting, Cromwell’s startling suggestion was that the Rump be dissolved immediately, and a caretaker government of about 40 appointed by Rump and Army Council would manage fresh elections. After an all-night sitting, Cromwell believed he had agreement, and that the proposal would be debated and passed in parliament the following day. It is very likely that he specifically had an agreement to this end from Harry Vane.

The next day, the Army Council met again for normal business – when news arrived that the Rump was not discussing that proposal at all, but their own act, and were proposing to pass that Act immediately into law. No one quite knows what the detail of this act was; Blair Worden has proved that it did include full elections.

But there was something Cromwell and the officers did not like. Very probably, while the franchise rules excluded unrepentant royalists; it did nothing to prevent the likely outcome – domination of the parliament by Presbyterians demanding an end to toleration and the imposition of a national church. Cromwell will continually try to steer a path that would enable toleration. It was a constantly hard task, and parliament was no help in this. Looking ahead, the events of the Restoration would demonstrate that Cromwell had always been the best hope for de facto toleration.[6]

Anyway, Cromwell was incredulous about this news of what he clearly saw as a betrayal of the deal he thought had been struck the night before. And he sent a second messenger to check the report was true. Yes, yes, that’s right came the answer. So a third was sent – and the same answer came back. You have got to be pulling my plonker, thought Cromwell. Or words to that effect. probably not those words specifically.

Down to parliament stormed Cromwell, after leaving orders with his officers. Into the house, and he took his normal place, while MPs watched nervously, but he did nothing and listened to the debate. The Speaker came to put the final question to the house to gain agreement for a division and a vote. Thomas Harrison heard him mutter – ‘now the time is ripe’, and Cromwell stood. Harrison tried to stop him – or so he claims – but Cromwell’s doubts were gone, released from the months of all that discussion and compromise, and he was charging into battle in the good cause, colours flying, carbine primed.

He began carefully, praising parliament for the good things they had done. But he was working himself into a lather. Because he proceeded to lose it, pretty comprehensively lose it. He moved onto berate it for its failure to deliver reform, he accused it of self seeking, of corruption, of being in hock to lawyers. Now full of righteous fury, he slapped on his hat, and strode into the centre of the house, laying into individual members as whoremasters – probably looking at Henry Marten here – drunkards and a scandal to the gospel.

In full flow he shouted

You are no parliament! You have sat here too long for any good you have been doing lately … In the name of God go.

Ooh eck, here we go. Cromwell appears to have prepared. He turned to Harrison and yelled

Call them in! Call them in!

In marched 40 musketeers, and started to clear the chamber.

This is not honest, yea it is against honesty and common honesty

Came a  cry from Cromwell’s erstwhile ally, Harry Vane

Oh Sir Henry Vane ! Sir Henry vane! The lord deliver me from Sir Henry Vane

Cromwell was really cross with Vane. He called him a juggler and accused him

You might have prevented this extraordinary course

Many MPs resisted; William Lenthall the Speaker who had seen a few things in his position refused once more to leave his seat, until Harrison quietly offered him his hand and said let me help you down from there.  Algernon Sydney had to be forcibly removed, but although most of the MPs were armed, one observer noted there was no sign of a fight. While the hubbub and outrage was going on, something caught Cromwell’s eye. It was the mace, the sacrosanct symbol that the Commons, the voice of the people, was in session.

What shall we do with this bauble? Here take it away

He said to a soldier. And as the MPs left, he turned to self justification, shouting at their retreating backs

It is you have forced me to do this for I have sought the lord night and day, that he would rather slay me than put me upon the doing of this work

As he turned he saw the offending statute the parliament had been about to pass – he snatched it up, and off he stormed.

Well there’s a thing. Cromwell had gone ballistic. The Rump was at an end, though not quite done. Later the same day, continuing in decisive mode, Cromwell, Lambert and Harrison arrived to hold a council of state meeting to think about what to do next. Sitting there were Bradshaw, Haselrigg, Thomas Scot and others. Cromwell, back in courteous mode now, told them they were welcome but that the Council of State was dissolved. In reply, Bradshaw drew himself up.

You are mistaken to think parliament is dissolved, for no power under heaven can dissolve them but themselves.[7]

Which was dignified of him. And a fair point – after all that was one of the things they’d all been fighting for all this time. And gives an indication of the damage done; a whole slew of architects of the revolution and leaders of the Commonwealth would turn their backs now on politics; Harry Vane, John Bradshaw, Arthur Haselrigg. Henry Marten had rarely got on with Cromwell, and now he wrote an angry pamphlet, fully aware of what had happened here. Pride’s Purge had been carried out to restore the power of the people to make laws he wrote; this exercise of military might denied it altogether, and comparisons with Charles start here

The same thing which the last king and his father did so long design, and attempt, your Excellency hath brought about in the morning

He never published it though. Political power was over for Henry Marten. He would be arrested for his massive debts, and spent the next few years in one of those odd areas, the Rules of Southwark, where prisoners could live out of prison on licence.

He was of course right. The dissolution of the Rump could claim no legitimacy – it was obviously illegal to everyone. Cromwell had used the power of the sword, and power now need to be maintained by the sword and would need to be given back to parliament before it was legitimate once more.

Now then, before we go, here’s a question for you all, a question which may define your attitude towards Cromwell. Was he Lucy Hutchinson’s ambitious schemer? Or was he instead infuriated  beyond measure by an illegitimate parliament, and dissolved it in a temper, intending to then have a legitimate one put in place?

 

There were others who had already accused Cromwell of hypocrisy. The Levellers’ philosopher Overton had accused Cromwell of reaching for ‘a new regality’; Lilburne had called him in 1652 ‘the grandest Tyrant and Traytor that ever England bredd’; Richard Overton wrote

You shall scarce speak to Cromwell about anything but he will lay his hand on his breast, elevate his eyes and call God to record. He will weep, howl and repent even while he doth smite you under the fifth rib.

Or should we take him at his word a man trying to do right as he saw it without personal ambition; a man whop had never planned for a  moment to seize control, but impulsively determined to act decisively when occasion demanded it; as he had said to Berkley in 1647, that

“No one rises so high as he who knows not whither he is going.

And as he would also claim when offered the throne

I sought not this place. I speak it before God, angels and men, I did not[8]

Well. Historians are undecided. So I thought I should put the argument pro and con. Ahem. The Motion is: This house Believes that Cromwell did plot to become a tyrant and king in all but name, and had been planning to seize it since Worcester at least

Here goes, the case for the prosecution – for the ayes, malice afore thought

Frankly, it seems credulous to suggest that Cromwell had not wanted to become the official leader of state – even if not king, and that his ranting and furious dismissal speech was to cover his carefully worked through design with false passion. Plenty of people had believed for some time that was what he was after. In particular, we have the evidence of Whitelock’s memoirs to prove his desire for kingship it – in the words of the song, it was always on his mind.

He was clever enough to wait his moment, as he said, until the time was ripe and the Rump had made itself unpopular enough, and then manoeuvred his compliant army officers through a confected story of Rumpers trying to perpetuate themselves. The opposing view that Cromwell did this is a fit of decisive and righteous passion falls down on at least three counts. Firstly; Cromwell half inched the statute and it was never seen again; if it had been as bad as he said, then he would have published it and he never does. Secondly, the idea of a flurry of fury does not sit well with the ‘the time is ripe’ comment before he stood and started to rant – that sounds like something planned. Ands then the coup de gace the glace cherry on the top – the fact that he called the soldiers in. Suspiciously handy was it not to have gone to the house with soldiers? Nope. In Clarendon’s words – a Brave Bad Man, the man who would be king in all but name.

Right ayes to the left. Now the case for the defence, the nays

To suggest that Cromwell had planned to seize power flies in the face of all we know about his actions after the execution of the king. He went where the Rump sent him after the execution, did not use his position then when the army was strongest. After Worcester to did not try to sow discord, but laboured hard to bring different parties together and avoid polarisation – it is due to his offices that so many Rumpers returned after Pride’s purge.

Particularly interesting are Whitelocke’s stories, and the memoirs of folk like Ludlow and Hutchinson. They should all be discounted; all were written after 1660, with knowledge of what happened – plus Ludlow’s were heavily edited in the 18th century and need to be treated with great care.

And Whitelocke? Well Dr Jonathon Fitzgibbons has recently brilliantly taken all the bunk out of them. Written in 1660, there are massive inconsistencies, and it seems Bulstrode simply copied much of a meeting that did happen in 1648 and put words into Cromwell’s mouth. The meeting in St James Park was completely made up – they very detail is convincing – how many people could remember a conversation in such detail when writing it 8 years later?  I can barely remember the names of my children. Bulstrode Whitelock in 1660 was trying to save his life and estates from Charles II’s vengeance; his job in his memoirs was show that it was all about Cromwell’s lust for power, and that he, Bulstrode, had tried to keep the idea of the return of the Stuarts open.

As far as the events of April are concerned; on the 19^th, he believed he had gained agreement from Vane and other MPs on the way forward – and saw the Rumpers own act as a betrayal of that agreement. Sure, he never published the statute – but then neither did any of the Rumpers try to publish their version of it. This shows the Rumpers also had something to hide.

As to the ‘time is ripe’ comment, all it signified is that he had heard enough to confirm his fury; and as far as the soldiers were concerned well, there were soldiers all over Whitehall, all he had to do was spend 5 minutes before he entered grabbing a detachment and telling them to wait.

Here’s what happened.

There is no doubt that Cromwell had a personal drive for power; not for the sake of power but because he was passionate that the Commonwealth succeed, that it build a Godly nation, and was done with kings. If not all that blood would not be wasted. He was increasingly frustrated by the Horlicks the Rump were making of it; since Worcester he and the army’s views had blocked and ignored, when the blood they had spilled gave them a moral right to be heard. Cromwell was not only the greatest military leader who had worked tirelessly for the cause; he was also the most talented politician too. Inherent in the Rumps plans were the heavy reduction of the Army – and possibly his removal. He saw his plans, and those of his men, being thrown away. And another compromised election was the final straw. The dams burst and months of pressure and doubt and indecision, he did what he liked most [9]– and acted.

The clincher which demonstrates this was an impulsive bursting of the dam, was that once it was done – there was no master plan waiting to be put into operation.

Nays to the right then.

Well, for what it’s worth, I incline towards the second view. I simply see no evidence of such planning, no evidence of Machiavellian manoeuvring. But then – I guess that plotting is designed to leave no trace.

What do you think? Maybe the chance has come once more to help the historians out – by voting in a History of England poll. I have no prizes sadly, just a bit of fun, but if you go to the history of England . co.uk you can find a simple two question poll there – and you can add comments of course it would be fascinating to read your views. To prepare you here are the questions:

Cromwell had sought to become head of state for some time, and planned the dissolution of the Rump well in advance

Cromwell acted on impulse in 1653. He did not expect to then become head of state, but to return the country to parliamentary rule

Choices, choices, choices.

Right that is it. Thank you everyone for listening, I hope you enjoyed the episode, and immediately head off to the history of england .co.uk to  place your vote. Thank you to my members, I love you all more than words can wield the matter. And incidentally thank you to Davie who recorded the theme music for me all those years ago. Just to remind you it is an old folk song, Irish I believe, Down by Blackwaterside. He chose it for the Led Zep connection.

[1] Hunt, A: Republic’, p146

[2] Barber, S: ‘A Revolutionary Rogue’, p36

[3] https://www.olivercromwell.org/wordpress/a-conversation-between-oliver-cromwell-and-bulstrode-whitelocke-november-1652/

[4] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-51475089

[5] Woolrych, A: ‘Britain in Revolution’, p527

[6] Worden, B: ‘The English Civil Wars, 1640-1660’, p125

[7] Keay, A: The Restless Republic’, p142

[8] Keay, A: ‘Restless Republic’, p261

[9] Gentles, I: ‘The New Model Army’, p252