“Cromwell put the king on trial; his own king. He destroyed God’s man on earth and so he is a villain. Cromwell’s place is rightfully reserved in hell.” 1649
However, the same Parliamentarian Soldier came up with a stronger argument saying:
“Cromwell did what was right for the country. He killed the king but he had no choice. Everyone realizes he was God’s man on Earth; but how can God’s man on Earth be a man of blood at the same time? How can God’s man on Earth start wars? Charles was a man of blood and such people should be chucked off the throne or even executed as what has rightfully just happened.” 1649
Nevertheless, Cromwell was still hated by many of the people who believed in Charles. Nothing could be done to change their mind. Nothing.
The king was now dead. Some people were happy; some weren’t. But one group in particular decided it would be right to bring their own idea across to someone who they thought were humble and not a miser. They were known as The Levellers. They wanted equal rights for everyone. Here is what they had to say:
“Cromwell has done the thing that has pleased the whole of my group. The king was a bad man and was selfish. He never wanted equal rights for every man; he never even took a word from our breath into consideration. Therefore Cromwell, I wish to tell you our idea. We want equal rights for every single man. We want to be fair and want justice.” 1649
Cromwell replied:
“If they want equal rights for every man...then that must mean we will have to give up our money to the poor. I’m afraid we can’t do that. Therefore, we have to get rid of such people before they spread the word. Before you know it, there will be a protest demanding equal rights and that will be another problem we’ll have to face.” 1649
And so Cromwell did just as he said. He killed four of their leaders, ensuring nothing could be spread. Enraged by this, the remaining Levellers said:
“Cromwell killed our four leaders. We helped him yet he still killed our four leaders. We prayed for him yet he still killed our four leaders. He has betrayed us.”
1649
Then, four years later on April 20th 1653, Cromwell had enough of a Parliament who was in the business of conning others and decided to eradicate them. Firstly, Cromwell entered a sitting of the Parliament and listened to a few speeches. After listening to the speeches, he stood up and disrupted the Rump Parliament:
“You have sat too long for any good you have been doing lately… Depart, I say; and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!”
He had brought along with him an army of fifty thousand and told one of his soldiers to get rid of them. This act obviously brought everybody back to the same situation on 3rd January 1642 when King Charles accused five members of High Treason and entered the HOC with an army; just like the way Cromwell did with the Rump Parliament. Many people said:
“Cromwell is a tyrant; for he is behaving like Charles. He brought an army of fifty thousand with him.” 1653
However, many also said:
“Cromwell has helped us and rescued us from a group of con-artists. They took all of our money. Also, Cromwell’s action justifies the Parliament’s nick-name; for Rump is another word for backside. Cromwell has once again saved the day.”
1653
Both the Parliamentarian and Royalist Lady had their say again into Cromwell’s actions at the sitting. The Royalist Lady once again, in a biased way, said:
“Cromwell took advantage of his power and is beginning to rule like a tyrant.”
1653
On the other hand, the Parliamentarian too, in a biased way, said:
“He is doing well and trying to assist people who are being conned. His intentions aren’t bad; there are being picked out as bad by mindless and stupid people.”
1653
For the third time, both the Soldier and the Lady have been biased. Therefore, it is fair to say that they are not reliable sources; for they are sticking to the same side again and again regardless of whether Cromwell’s actions are good or bad. And ultimately, their comments are useful, but not as useful as others.
Two years later, Cromwell put England under military rules. He split England into eleven parts and banned festivals, Christmas and forced them to stop drinking. Another factor of controversy!!! People were upset about the fact that he had taken away their social life. How can he do that?! He doesn’t have the rights?! They were the questions asked at the time. Despite this was the case, a few agreed with Cromwell’s idea. After all, he was doing it for the welfare of the English.
After another two year gap, Cromwell was offered the crown. The whole country was devastated by the offer. Cromwell – king? For the majority of the country, it wasn’t on. Even the Parliamentarian Soldier went against Cromwell on this occasion:
“I don’t want Cromwell to be king. I don’t want him to be killed like Charles; for I think he may turn out like Charles. I’ve followed him everywhere and definitely don’t want him to be king.” 1657
It seemed that the soldier was rather angry at this because he is supporting Cromwell in the war, but going against him on this occasion. The situation must have been severe enough to make Cromwell’s soldier to go against him.
Supporting that argument, without a doubt, was also the Royalist Lady. She powerfully said:
“Cromwell has a pisspot under his bed rather than going to the cesspool. He is lazy. Surely, how can he be king?” 1657
Furthermore supporting that argument was a Royalist Soldier. He said:
“I, along with the army believe Cromwell will use his position with force.”
In fact, so many people hated the idea of Cromwell being king; there were very few arguments for him. One in particular was:
“I think he will run the country well.” 1657
Because of the fact that he thought his army will let him down, he turned down the crown.
Then an Irish Lady came along and said:
“They killed the innocent: he nailed a baby to a church door, he killed my family and what’s more, he forced us from our homes. He made us lie on the streets.”
(Date unknown)
“...nailed a baby to a church door...” An excellent example of pure propaganda. Nothing can get better than this – it’s just pure propaganda. What evidence is there to prove that Cromwell nailed a baby to a church door? Therefore, this comment is classified as unreliable.
Much to the sorrow of the people who liked Cromwell, Cromwell died on 3rd September 1658. His body was buried and he was beheaded. As said in most of his actions, some enjoyed the moment whereas some didn’t. Yet, there were still comments on Cromwell – despite the fact that he was dead. James Heath said:
“They put him in a lead lined coffin and you could still smell him and his whole way of governing the country as well.” 1663
The comment gave a clear idea of how bad he ruled the country.
Another bad comment came from the Earl of Clarendon (Friend of Charles). He said:
“Cromwell made himself more powerful than king. That’s bizarre.” 1668
A final bad comment came from Christopher Hill. He was impartial and supported both sides of the argument. His bad comment read:
“Cromwell was a clever man seeking power.” 1970
However, his good comment read:
“Cromwell was a good man seeking religious government.” 1970
Despite the other bad comments, there were also a few good ones. Samuel Peeps (Charles 2nd employee) said:
“Everyone misses Cromwell.” 1667
The comment seems genuine and authentic because Samuel works for a Royalist, yet he is saying a nice thing about Cromwell. Definitely seems like a good piece of evidence.
Edmund Hudlow furthermore added to the good points of Cromwell by saying:
“Brilliant military leader but bad leader for the country.” 1698
This is classified as a supportive argument for Cromwell but also an unsupportive one as well. The reason for this is that he has mentioned Cromwell is a bad leader for the country. However, he has told the truth by mentioning a bad and good comment. Therefore, this can be classified overall, as an extremely reliable source.
And finally, the least important but somewhat relevant of points, is bedtime stories. Bedtime stories? How on earth is that associated with Cromwell? Well, in actual fact, he was. A lady named Flora Thompson, used to tell bedtime stories and Cromwell was used as a monster at night. She used to say:
“You’d better get to sleep or Oliver Cromwell will come for the dead and eat you up alive.” 1943
By this the children were so frightened; the children went to bed immediately.
It shows how many people hated Cromwell and how bad a ruler he was. Children were very much terrified by the use of his name.
Information from other websites
says “...theatres were closed by Cromwell, dancing around May poles was too, inns were shut and popular sports of bull and bear baiting were prohibited, nobody was allowed to work or play football on Sundays, Christmas was made a day of fasting and finally, if caught swearing, you would have to pay a massive fine.”
People worldwide on too had their say:
- “I think the view of Cromwell is generally positive.”
- “Most of the English folks I met dislike Cromwell intensely.”
- “By hook or by crook- a saying attributed to him.”
- “He was a damn bastard, a self righteous murderer and invader, thanks for helping me make a connection between him and one G W bush.”
- “He knew how to deal with monarchs.”
- “Good principles carried them out badly.”
Many other sites supported the same sort of ideas.
And so Cromwell’s actions have caused him both a good and a bad name by many of the people that have learnt about him or even experienced the situation at the time. Below there is a summary to help get a clearer idea of what has happened. The good points will commence - then follow up by the bad ones.
Summary
Points showing his heroism:
- Won/helped win the battle of Naseby for the Parliament
- Put King Charles on trial for persistently starting wars
- Eradicated a Parliament who were in the business of conning citizens
- Put country under military rules – splits England into 11 parts, bans festivals, and bans Christmas for the welfare of the country
- Refused the crown for the welfare of the country
- Went to Drogheda to stop the protests
Points to show his villainies’:
- Behaved like a tyrant
- Acted like Charles by entering a sitting with an army of 50,000
- Killed 3,000 in Drogheda
- Killed the king/put him on trial
- Used as a bedtime story monster, thus proving how bad he was
- Killed the Levellers
After generating a summary, this essay will be finished off with a conclusion including my opinion into what I think about Oliver Cromwell’s acts.
Conclusion
I think Cromwell is a Hero. There are many reasons as to why I have come about this decision. One may object to the fact that I have chosen this but nevertheless, it is my opinion and I have gathered strong enough evidence to prove my point.
Firstly, throughout the course of the Civil War (Battle of Naseby mainly), Cromwell routed nearly ever single army. He basically cleared the battlefield. He didn’t run off and chase after the baggage train; he continued to route other armies via the use of a side-attack. This made it hard for armies, as they would have to turn around. This point shows his heroism.
Secondly, when he put the king on trial, he did it for a reason. People misunderstood/misunderstand the fact that Cromwell put this man on trial to prevent further bloodshed; not solely on the basis of overthrowing him because of jealousy. He did what was right for the country; not for his position. It’s not as if Cromwell’s intentions were what people thought of them to be. Cromwell helped the country by killing Charles and there is no more to it.
Thirdly, once again, he didn’t kill the Levellers for “No reason.” He did it to get right off a petty, little group trying to cause problems and trying to put Cromwell under pressure. It was right to kill them because they were going to spread the word; for they were getting bigger and bigger by the second.
Next, when Cromwell entered the sitting and eradicated the Rump Parliament, he did it to stop people being conned. He did it for the welfare of the citizens. They were being conned – he didn’t like it. Therefore, he chose to do it. Anyway, they were considered a bad Parliament anyway and that is obvious just by looking at the Parliament. That simply is enough evidence to kick them out.
Also, the prevention of Ireland’s protests was dealt with by Cromwell. Okay, he took the lives of 3,000, but he did it because they didn’t surrender. The Irish Lady, along with many others, should have blamed their leader; not Cromwell.
Furthermore, the fact that he was used in his bedtime stories proves nothing. He was thought as a villain by a lot of people – that’s all. Many people dislike other people. Why wasn’t Henry 8th used instead as a bedtime monster – after all he beheaded his six wives, was a cruel man and also fitted the description; for he was a fat and ugly man. Cromwell did nothing compared to Henry – so why him?
Rumours!!! Some evil propaganda was passed on by other historians.
However, there was one thing in particular that disappointed me and that was when he put the country under military rules. Banning social life is rather cruel but I think his I intentions were not so much. I think he did it for the welfare of the country.
Nevertheless, Cromwell was a Hero because of the way in which he ruled. He wasn’t soft; he was strict and many people at the time couldn’t cope with it. Therefore, Cromwell is a Hero and will always be one in my eyes.