Describing Oliver Cromwell as a self made man does not get things quite right. Discuss.

Authors Avatar

Describing Cromwell as a self-made man, risen from obscurity, does not get things quite right. Discuss.

There are conflicting views on Oliver Cromwell's rise to prominence, and whether he should be seen as a "self-made man". His prominent role in the Long parliament has lead some historians to believe that family connections were an essential factor in Cromwell being able to accumulate so much power so quickly. Despite Cromwell's political inexperience, he sat on all eighteen committees in the parliament's first session, and only six days after its start, it was him who presented the petition of John Lilburne against sentence passed on him by the star chamber. Gaunt raises the point that, as a relatively obscure figure, it seems that Cromwell must have had some assistance from within parliament in order for him to have such a prominent role in the proceedings- thus going against the concept of the "self-made man". Furthermore, Morrill questions why Lilburne would entrust Cromwell with handling his petition, barely having spoken to him before, if Cromwell had not been seen as someone with powerful friends. Although not rich himself, Cromwell had connections through birth and marriage with influential opposition leaders such as John Hampden, who could have given Cromwell the step-up he needed in order to play a significant part in the Long Parliament. Coward speculates on this view: he disagrees with the claim that there is evidence enough to say that Cromwell was close allies with the parliamentary leadership before the Long Parliament, but concedes that his family connections must have at least played a part in pulling him "into the orbit" of these influential figures at Westminster. However, Coward also stresses the danger of assuming that "family relationships are necessarily the basis for firm political alliances".

Join now!

Another problem with seeing Cromwell as a "self-made man" can be found in his seemingly questionable political skills. Adamson claims that there is little evidence before the war that Cromwell was an effective collaborator- or that people had any wish to collaborate with him. Cromwell's speeches were often longwinded and emotional (he was described by one member of parliament as "dropping tears down with his words") and he was often not seconded in parliament, implying that his motions had little support, and that as Hyde commented, he was "little taken notice of"- his motion to appoint Saye and Bedford ...

This is a preview of the whole essay