Andrew Marvell 's `` Conflictual World View `` Essay

“upon the King’s return from oxford there appeared nothing, but dejection of mind , discontent, and secret mutiny in the army.” (a historian from the 1800s described the King’s army).

There are many interpretations of Oliver Cromwell as he lived in the 17th century, he was seen differently at that time than he is seen today. There are different interpretations because historians might have been biased because they were on one side at that time and unbiased now. Another reason could be that people at that time knew more about him then people do now. However, religion and nationality changed people’s minds too.

For example, the military wanted a radical religious reform, led by John Lambert, whereas the civilians (or parliament) wanted a more moderate, parliament endorsed regime, led by figures such as Lord Broghill. Therefore, Cromwell was a major source of division and was said to be an "ideological schizophrenic" (Worden). Furthermore "division was made worse by Oliver Cromwell" (Worden) which is seen with the fluctuation of Cromwell's views between 1649-58, beginning with the dissolution of the Rump Parliament, because he favoured the Nominated Assembly, devised by fifth-monarchist Thomas Harrison, however the Assembly was named the Barebones Parliament. Despite Cromwell initially siding with a "Godly rule" (Smith), he reverted back to the regime to protect tradition, helped by Lambert who ended the Barebones Parliament due to the fear of the increasing power of religious radicals. Therefore, it was the indecisive nature of Oliver Cromwell that led to the failure in attempting to create an acceptable settlement in politics and religion.

Throughout history, authentic sources have made kings seem like, either, tyrannical beings or beings that have turned a country over from a depressed past. Who the citizens celebrated or detested, but were too scared to protest because the power of the king was too overbearing to challenge his authority. King Charles II was the king of England from 1630 to 1685, and during his reign the citizens of England criticized him for his efforts, or lack of in his governing. Sir George Savile, a member of Charles’ Privy Council, in an essay, used rhetorical devices to portray King Charles II as an ordinary person, that gets to live the life of royalty.

Charles representation differs vastly to Cromwell's. The monarch, who possesses more power than Cromwell, is reduced to meek submission as he suffers his execution that is staged by Cromwell. He reflects the leader who does not represent the values of man, and is overthrown in a warlike gesture. It is once again a Hobbesian concern. However, it is possible to interpret Charles' inclusion in the poem as one that Marvell instils with grace and dignity, as ‘he bowed his comely head,' ‘nor

The concept of a ‘mid-Tudor crisis’ arrived under the scrutiny of modern scholarship largely through a priori reasoning and was first broadly promulgated by W.R.D. Jones in his 1973 book “The Mid Tudor Crisis1539-1563”. Jones attested a series of problems that “seem to have been ever-present in mid-Tudor England” (Jones, 1973, p. 6), exhibiting a “close relationship” (Jones, 1973, p. 6) with one another as a ‘crisis’. This compounded succession of agricultural volatility, deficiencies in administrative decree, specifically “the troubled shadowed reigns of Edward VI and Mary I,” (Jones, 1973, p.19) and divisive religious reformation, as Jones was to surmise, directly resulted in fluctuations

After the end of the civil war, officers of the New Model Army, formed by Cromwell, decided to put Charles on trial. Parliament voted to negotiate with the King in order to come to a peace agreement, but that was met with a fierce rebuke from Cromwell and his army. In order to kill any hope for the King and to prevent any kind of compromise between the King and Parliament, one hundred and eighty members of Parliament were excluded, and forty five were imprisoned for showing resistance. This act of purging was described simply as a coup d'état. (23 Laughland) If the king is truly guilty and hated by his people, Cromwell wouldn’t have needed to perform this despicable action of arresting and barring Parliament members from their seats. At this point, the authority of Parliament that was supported by the Roundheads, over the King’s, has lost all its legality. Parliament became a military tool in the hand of Cromwell and his army. In addition to this, Cromwell’s son-in-law, Henry Ireton, was the one who submitted a request to prosecute the King, which was naturally accepted by the one third of the Parliament left. A court with the name of ‘High Court of Justice’ was formed to be responsible for the King’s trial. (103-104 TURCHETTI)

The English had been under the combined rule of both the king and the assembly for so long that they were not ready to give all the power of government to a single person. The least influential, Charles I, was born in 1600 and died 1649 when he inherited the throne parliament was very upset with the monarchy and sought to lessen the power of the monarchy. Charles I tried to rule without consenting Parliament, but Parliament had so much control at the time that he failed to decrease its power. However, Charles believed in the divine rights of kings. Charles went on to oppress his people by levying taxes without the consent of the parliament. Many of his subjects saw him as a tyrannically oppressive leader. He created

By contrast, by the 1930’s and 1940’s many historians thought Cromwell was a cruel military dictator. This was because in the 1930s and 1940s most scholars saw him as a treacherous dictator, along the lines of Mussolini, Stalin and Hitler. In recent decades nearly all the scholars have been favourable. During his lifetime, some areas painted him as a fraud encouraged by power — for example, The Machiavellian Cromwell and The Juglers Discovered, both part of an attack on Cromwell by the Levellers after 1647; present him as a Machiavellian figure. After his death and public humiliation there were many accusations and a few encouraging descriptions, such as John Spittlehouse 's A Warning Piece Discharged which compared him to Moses, rescuing the English by taking them securely through the Red Sea of the civil wars.[8] The great royalist historian Edward Hyde, 1st Earl of Clarendon, in his History of the Rebellion and Civil Wars in England (1667) acknowledged that Cromwell "will be looked ahead by posterity as a brave bad man". Clarendon argued that Cromwell 's rise to power had been helped not only by his Great Spirit and energy, but also by his brutality. The nobility was particularly argumentative to Cromwell, in large part because of his well-built request to the ordinary yeoman.

England’s lengthy history of hereditary monarchs and abusive absolutists has led to the system of constitutionalism in 17th century English government. The encouragement of these absolutism practices triggered the need to search for a new way to govern. The reigns of the Stuart monarchy led to the shift from absolutism to constitutionalism during 17th century England. After witnessing the success of Louis XIV's of France establishment of absolutism, England would soon see that James I, and his son Charles I, will fail at establishing absolutism in England and see a constitutional government established.

Oliver Cromwell is – and has always been – one of the most controversial characters in British and Irish history. There are few people in Great Britain and Ireland today who have not yet heard of Oliver Cromwell and either loathe him or see him as a hero. Yet, the world is not black and white and so is the truth about Cromwell. In order to understand his role in both countries as a whole, one has to look at the perspective of both nations, Cromwell’s beliefs and his motives.

In response to the violence and political unrest of the French Revolution in the eighteenth century Edmund Burke, Mary Wollstonecraft, and Thomas Paine, three well known writers of this period engaged in a dialogue about the origins of the natural rights of man and the limits and responsibilities of governments to their people. Even with their beliefs differing widely, they still had much in common. While revolution is not always the appropriate answer, at certain times in any society it could be helpful and even necessary for the protection and preservation of man’s natural rights. Burke consistently spoke out against the British monarchy which is evident in his quote “Kings will be tyrants from policy when subjects are rebels from principle” (193). He tried to convince King George III and Parliament that over taxation of the American colonies would lead to rebellion.

In this essay I will be exploring the argument of whether religion was more important than politics in the failure of the interregnum regimes of 1649-1660 there are various arguments to be addressed.

It was turbulent times for England during the 17th and 18th century. England was in an unquenchable thirst for more power. “During the 17th and 18th century, England was determined to subdue all lesser countries, especially Ireland” (Stevenson, 28). At the time, England was the dominating country, looking to expand their influence across the world. War broke out constantly as the conquest for more land continued. Moreover, war was constant with the three kingdoms, England, Ireland, and Scotland. Revolts in each kingdom also affected the country’s ability to participate in the war. As

Some MP’S were alarmed by others who printed the Grande Remonstrance to the public journal in order to make people see. The Parliament did not appreciate this fact as they did not want the other people to know about the politic affairs. Adding to this, a rebellion in Ireland broke down as Catholics rose up against their Protestant rulers and 400 of the Protestants were killed. A rumour spread that Charles was behind this rebellion to make England turn into a Catholic country. Having no intention to restore Catholicism or govern without any reference to the law, Charles did not understand why the MP’s feared the Catholic tyranny.