Why did the Rump Parliament fail to provide lasting and stable government in England between 1649-1653?

Authors Avatar

Why did the Rump Parliament fail to provide lasting and stable government in England between 1649-1653?

The Rump was created by the purge of the Commons by the Army (Pride’s Purge, 6th December, 1648). It was the name given to the Parliament that sat after the execution of Charles I. it moved towards setting up a Republic buy abolishing the House of Lords (6 February 1649) and then abolishing the monarchy (7 February 1649). The Council of State became the executive governing body of the Republic and replaced The Privy Council on the 14th of February 1649. With such early changes to the political system of government, why did the Rump Parliament fail to last longer?

The early changes did appeal to many radical reformers but fell short to many of their other aims. While the Rump was not entirely succesful in the short-run, it did manage to tackle the majority of its obstacles in the long-run, especially in Ireland and Scotland. After that, it did begin to attract support in 1652-1653.  Unfortunately in the long-run the Rumpers remained too busy and too conservative to deal with the revolutionary interests of the minority in a through-going reformation. While it did manage to provide continuity and a modicum of stability and security at a difficult time (especially after the regicide), Oliver Cromwell finally lost patience claiming "the Lord has done with you". The Army took action after it was disillusioned with the Rump for many other reasons besides the failure to bring a greater number of reforms. The Rump became increasingly unpopular in the long-run because of unpopular reforms and the lack of reforms as well.

However, the Rump had difficulties ever since an estimated 100 MPs who were predominantly conservative, were readmitted after being absent from Pride’s Purge. They were not convinced republicans and could sway general opinion in the Rump. This was one major criticism it faced early on. It wasn’t radical enough  for those who wanted political, social and religious changes. The Rump’s nucleus of radical members were soon out-numbered with the return of many conservative MPs.

Join now!

Many MPs were not prepared to accept a government that was associated with regicide (the murder of the King). This was seen as an act of crime. This was increasingly made more difficult in The engagement where 22 MPs refused to sign it and accept the abolition of the House of Lords, the abolition of the Monarchy along with the acceptance of Pride’s Purge as being legal. They would simply not swear an oath to this. They would not accept the legitimacy of the Rump to carry out reforms and they saw the Rump as a temporary expedient that would ...

This is a preview of the whole essay