In January of 1659, King Charles I was executed publicly. It was a tragedy that touched many hearts. But why did it happen, and who was responsible? Charles I, became a prisoner of the New Model Army, who tried to make a deal with him, but because he still believed that god meant him to be a powerful king, he made a secret alliance with the Scots, (and their army), who thought that this was a good way to win control in England. As Scotland was the backdoor to England, it seemed like a good plan. A second civil war broke out in 1648, and so Cromwell and the army leaders decided that there must be a public trial and execution. There was one. The trial lasted for eight days, and Charles I lost. Basically, the king betrayed their trust, and so they felt the need to kill him. Cromwell said that he had tried to avoid division, but he felt that it had to happen. The thing that gets me, is that how Cromwell made it to be a PUBLIC EXECUTION, rather than having a quiet one. Was he doing it so that the people would see what was going on, and understand, or so that he could get all the attention he wanted? At the time, Cromwell felt that he was defending England’s rights and interests. Cromwell also felt, that it was the right thing to do. I mean-all he had, was the authority of his army. Was Cromwell right to do this? Or was Charles I a Traitor and a Tyrant? The trial could also have been a farce, as some people thought. This was because some people thought that Oliver Cromwell had killed God’s anointed one, as people believed very strongly in the Divine right of Kings. Oliver Cromwell also had his army sent out, to tell people to have him killed, and to support him, in all he did against Charles I. He made people fear him. Now, was that really the way, to gain support? Oliver Cromwell was moving out of Military stuff, and into Politics. Things were now becoming complicated, as England was now a republic. This meant that anyone could invade England anytime that they wanted. I think that Cromwell was going the wrong way because he was very good at military tactics, but those skills were not, and are not needed in the parliament, and it wasn’t very useful either.
Cromwell was also very involved in Ireland. Oliver Cromwell, was a Protestant. This meant that it must have been awkward and also frightening for the Irish. Ireland was full of many, many Catholics. As they were constantly rebelling, Cromwell needed to do something about it. This was because Ireland was the backdoor to England. Also, Irelands land was fit and Fertile, which was perfect for the English people of We could have called Oliver Cromwell a hero at this stage, for he was only protecting England’s interests. I mean-That’s what the public wanted-right? However, we could also argue, that he went too far, when he started to treat the Irish in the most cruel and heartless way possible. Oliver Cromwell would send out his army, to do everything that he wanted. In a way, he was repressing his army. I think that he had, in a way, brainwashed his army, to thinking what he wanted them to think. Some of the things that Oliver Cromwell did were terrible! One of the things that he sent his army to do was nail a baby, an innocent baby, to a church door. What was the point of that? I mean what was he trying to prove? What did that baby ever do to him? And all of this, just because he thought that it was his duty. The army also thought that it was their duty too. (Well, we all know who that was down to- don’t we!) All this (you may think) may not make him a villain, but it certainly doesn’t make him a HERO!
In 1653, Oliver Cromwell accepted the title ”Lord Protector.” This made him the official ruler of England, as England was then a Republic. Oliver Cromwell found it difficult to rule without Parliament, and so for a time, Cromwell and his army ran England. People said that at this time, Cromwell was protecting England’s interests in a time of great instability. Since England had no King or Queen, anyone could invade at any time. They were very vulnerable. At this time, Cromwell used his army to repress the English people. He even turned the catholic people out of their houses, by putting the defendants to the sword. He told the Catholics, that they could “Go to hell, or cunuct.” Meaning that he was giving them a wonderful choice…. To die, or to…well…. Die! I think that all this was partly to do with religious prejudice. As he was a Protestant and the Irish were Catholics. Cromwell said that it was his duty, to restore order. Was this the way, or could he have gone about it another way? I think so. That wasn’t it! Oh-no! There was more! He passed harsh laws. Lots of them. The worst, being ‘banning public assemblies.’ Apart from that, there were plenty more! Here we go…
- He started to collect taxes
- He banned unlawful assemblies
- He closed down pubs, theatres, gambling dens, and racemeatings.
- He started to fine people who swore, or cursed 12d.
- He put drunkards in the stocks
- And he also cancelled Christmas.
Can you imagine living in those times, and how awful it must have been for them?
Here, we come to the part where we decide what Oliver Cromwell was. Hero or Villain? I think that he was never anyone of those. I think that he was just doing what he believed in. If that meant making a few sacrifices, then so be it! I don’t think that he killed one king, just to make another, but he just did what he felt he had to do. One thing which I agree on, is that he could have gone about it a different way. Also, I agree in one thing that he said, and also believed in. That was that ”The end justifies the Means.” What he meant by that, was that no matter what happens, something good always comes out at the end, and it’s the end outcome that really matters. The words that I will leave you with, are the words of one Richard Baxter, a parliamentarian. We are not sure whether we can trust these words or not, as being a parliamentarian, he would have been a bit sympathetic to Cromwell, but it’s quite reasonable. “No man was better and worse spoken of than he…he meant honestly…and was pious…till power corrupted him…he thinketh that the end being good and necessary, the necessary means cannot be bad…”
