Oliver Cromwell was a soldier and statesman born in Huntingdon, England in 1599. He led pro-parliament soldiers during the English Civil War, and made himself “Lord Protector” of England, Scotland, and Ireland from 1653 until his death in 1658. His period of rule was highly controversial and sandwiched in-between Charles I and Charles II’s reign. However, he still managed to leave his mark in his way of gaining power, maintaining power, and his accomplishments and legacy. In my work, The Prince, I described my ways of an ideal ruler in modern society. Cromwell matched my descriptions quite well, despite some fumbles. Oliver Cromwell first appeared in the history spotlight as a member of parliament. He was abrasive in his ways, passionate about the church and the way it was run. He also was a key player in ensuring that the king called the meeting of Parliament monthly. …show more content…
He helped Parliament take control of England, Ireland, and Scotland during the course of the war suppressing any radicles. Cromwell also established new ways of force and discipline onto his troops, which made them better soldiers and much better at following and carrying out commands. He always remained passionate in terms of his military background, attempting to strike many deals and proposed many ideas to improve and strengthen the military while serving as a statesman. His actions in the military already made him a prominent figure in society, allowing him to ease his way to the top of the political chain when Charles I was executed without a male heir. He was a powerful voice in the Rump Parliament, but he soon became irritated with their slow and selfish ways and resulted to military force to dissolve it and
One of them is that he ordered his army to slaughter every Catholic in Drogheda, Ireland. He heard that the Catholics were torturing the Protestants and decided to kill all the Catholics. No one was actually certain about what was going on in Ireland but Oliver Cromwell believed the Protestants. Another reason why he was viewed to be a villain was because after fighting with Parliament against the King, he closed the Parliament down himself which made him as bad as the king.
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
Repetitively, the authors announce the King’s crimes against the common man. The colonists cite him and his temperament as one of the grounds for which the want to separate. According to the authors, the King’s governance neglects an entire segment of his subjects -- the colonists. The authors showcase the King’s inability to cooperate with
Written by Brendan McConville, The Kings Three Faces: The Rise & Fall of Royal America is a masterful study of the colonial American approach toward monarchy, and the way this attitude was in political cultures just before the revolution. Just like other scholars who rush to promote their work, Brendan exaggerates his claim leading him to provide a counter thesis on the historiographical convention.
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.
Throughout history, Cromwell has been portrayed in very different lights, especially in Great Britain. It is an undeniable fact that Cromwell contributed some good to his country. For instance, numerous laws were made less severe and politics as well as justice less corrupt. In matters of religion, he granted freedom of worship. Yet, after his death Cromwell was seen as a tyrant and a king slayer and the people were tired of living under such strict rules. Regarding politics, debates arose about what effect he had on the political system after his death. It is incontrovertible that his rule was one of the turning points in British history, as Cromwell ensured that a king would never be able to rule on his own.
He was brave to keep getting up and speaking his opinion in Parliament every time he got a chance. Wilberforce would never get mad when his ideas got denied, instead he was always very slow to anger. He was a very humble man in many aspects. He would always help people in need.
“In 1649, as Harrington saw it, the people who owned the property of England deposed the kind and began to take charge of the government. Their action proved premature. Monarchy and Aristocracy turned out to be stronger than Harrington had supposed, but he gave the people (or at least those who owned property) the nerve to think that
King Henry VIII was one of the most powerful rulers in the fifteenth century, who had a very captivating life many people are not aware of. Most people know Henry VIII as a berserk king with too many wives, but there is more to Henry VIII than that. Many few people know about his life and what he truly contributed to our world. Henry VIII was an almighty leader in England who won’t soon be forgotten.
is not enough, I mean I think that we would have to see whether he
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
Henry the Fifth has been noted as England’s best King throughout history. He was loved among the common people and nobles alike for his fairness, his effectiveness on the throne, his justness, and his ability to relate to people of all classes. The kings that reigned before him, especially his father King Henry IV and King John, provide a striking contrast to Hal’s attitude on the throne. Kings of the past had not experienced the life of the common people, and chose to lead their lives in the realm of the castle. As we witnessed in I Henry IV, Hal’s father even went as far to discuss this approach to ruling at length with Hal. Henry IV believed that a king was best admired and supplicated if he was kept
The Magna Carta, also known as the “Great Charter”, is one of the best known political documents in history. It has influenced nearly every great document of note following it, including the Declaration of Independence written by the founding fathers of America. The Magna Carta was a direct result of the reigns of King Richard the Lionheart and his brother King John and was written by barons who wanted to protect their rights, albeit in a way that mostly benefitted them. Therefore, this paper will attempt to examine the historical context surrounding the Magna Carta, what concerns the document demonstrated about the reigns of Richard and John as exemplified by the demands within the charter, and how the Magna Carta changed the relationship
He entered life as one who would live in the privileged class all of his life, but he never seemed to consider himself privileged or above the people. His father was a member of the House of Lords, so he was indoctrinated into politics at an early age. But, he seemed to have an innate knack to understand the inner workings of the political and diplomatic system also. Because of this understanding he would prepare himself for the