However, the strengths of the Protectorate were undermined by the fatal internal conflicts, particularly between Protector and Parliament, this “threatened the balance on which order depended” as implied by Michael Lynch. The relations between Cromwell and Parliament began to become uneasy when the Instrument of Government (December 1653) came into place. Parliament was angered by the fact that army officers such as Lambert had imposed the constitution, thus it lacked legitimacy. Although, the Instrument of Government made provisions for the civilian members, there was still a considerable amount of army influence. In addition, the members of the First Protectorate Parliament were not submissive to Cromwell, and most had conflicts with some aspect of the constitution. Parliament refused to ratify the constitution, meaning that Cromwell’s government had no authority to continue, this weakened the relationship further which was made apparent by the dissolution of Parliament after 5 lunar months. The Second Protectorate Parliament and Cromwell also soon started to disagree particularly over the case of James Naylor. Parliament offered the Humble Petition and Advice and Crown in order to limit his power and not in the true spirit of compromise. The modified version of the Humble Petition and Advice still left the army in control. Due to the conflicts between Parliament and Cromwell, an acceptable settlement could not be established, as it would not satisfy everyone.
The presence of the army can be considered a weakness as it led to further tensions with Parliament as well as the nation. The Instrument of Government had been proposed by Lambert and other army officers thus held certain values that were beneficial to the army. In addition, the constitution made provision for army officers in the Council of State, which consisted of 7 army officers; their consent was needed on all major issues. The Instrument of Government was not able to divorce itself from those who formulated it, for example the Council of State had more powers than Parliament so the army were seen as self interested, and what made matters worse was that the army had too much power. The interference from Major Generals in ordinary life in the localities, imposition of moral behaviour and attempt to eliminate tradition and custom was very much resented. In addition, each Major General had the support of soldiers; 500 picked cavalry for each district, which caused further resentment. New Cromwellians were angered at the Influence of army in Cromwell’s decision to reject the crown. Therefore, the army was a major force within the Protectorate and were increasingly growing “wanton with their power”.
In addition, the narrow support of the Protectorate was a weakness because with minority support it would be difficult for the Protectorate to continue to exist, it also another contributory factor to the conflicting aims. The Protectorate narrowed its support by restricting the franchise to those who were 21yrs old and had property. The Commonwealth men opposed the single person element in government and felt Parliament did not enough power, and Cromwell was “accused of being both a hypocrite and a turn-coat”. In addition, royalists generally opposed the regime, particularly when the Decimation Tax was introduced as it alienated them further. The military element of the regime was resented by the gentry. Therefore, it seems Cromwell “got the worst of both worlds”, in that there were conflicting interests and aims, the “excessive demands of others” hindered Cromwell to “bring democracy to its head”.
b) Using all the evidence of the sources, and your own knowledge, explain how far you agree that “The stability and survival of the Protectorate from 1653-1658 was wholly dependent on Oliver Cromwell himself”.
It is evident that Cromwell was an ambitious and industrious character; he became Lord Protector out of the “desire to prevent mischief and evil” rather than to “serve…as a King”, this he made clear in his speech to the Second Protectorate Parliament in 1657, Source 4. Therefore, Cromwell wanted to lead “as a constable”, however Cromwell had become more involved and although he wanted to “keep the peace of the parish”, more than that as Lord Protector, he wanted to achieve his personal vision of the ‘rule of Saints’. As Cromwell’s rule progressed he became intertwined within the system, thus it is difficult to disentangle Cromwell from the Protectorate, particularly due to his initiation and contribution to the Protectorate. The fact that there was no suitable successor to the Protectorate, eventually resulting in the collapse of the republic shows that Cromwell was a significant factor in the stability and the survival of the Protectorate. But, there is debate amongst historians as to how vital Cromwell was to the stability and existence of the Protectorate.
Cromwell’s personality and ambitiousness was a factor which the Protectorate relied upon, at the time there had been no better candidate than Cromwell to become Protector, he had the political skill and had been involved in politics since the 1640’s. Moreover, Cromwell’s alliance with the army was able to provide a link between Parliament and the army, thus hope for a compromise to be reached. Cromwell stressed that he was “ready to serve…as a constable”, implying that he wanted to guide England towards godliness, he was able to do this to an extent because of his leadership skills. Although there were tensions between Parliament and army, Cromwell was able to reduce the friction as shown by the fact that there were no major rebellions or riots. Therefore, Cromwell had the skill of being able to hold the Protectorate together; it is as if he was the ‘glue’, thus ensuring stability. After his death “the fabric of government which he had designed went utterly to pieces”, this makes apparent the Protectorate’s dependence on Cromwell for both stability and survival.
Cromwell was able to contribute to the Protectorate due to his desire to heal and settle, thus his policies and actions were able to provide the Protectorate with stability. The Protectorate was dependent on Cromwell as he was able to maintain a balance in the system of government, demonstrated by his willingness to work with Parliament and to work towards a civilian based government by making “parliament representative”. The First Protectorate Parliament was not submissive to Cromwell and each faction within Parliament was eager to challenge the Instrument of Government. Cromwell was still willing to call Parliament; he prorogued and dissolved Parliament but still did not give up on Parliament showing his faith in the institution. However, Source 5 disagrees in stating Cromwell “made up several sorts of mock parliaments” and “invented a thousand tricks”, showing that Colonel Hutchinson felt Cromwell had become irresponsible with the increased power, and was acting in self-interest. But, the modified version of the Humble Petition and Advice which Cromwell accepted showed there was a desire for healing and settling. Cromwell was able to provide a connection between Parliament and the army. It was important at the time for both Parliament and army to work together in order to create a stable country, both the groups needed to combine their power and support each other, Cromwell was needed as he was the connection between the two. With hindsight it is clear that balance and control over both Parliament and army was needed, this was what Richard Cromwell failed to achieve, resulting in his downfall. This is supported by J.P.Kenyon who believes that without Cromwell’s “military genius, the republic would have foundered”. A further contribution to the Protectorate from Cromwell were the Four Fundamentals in January 1654, where Cromwell personally defined what the constitution should rest on; government to be led by a single person and Parliament, Parliament would not be permanent but meet regularly, there should be liberty of conscience and the control of the militia would be between the single person and Parliament. The fundamentals were highly significant because it clarified what Cromwell aimed and campaigned for. Therefore, Cromwell was able to give the country direction and stability.
Cromwell’s personal aim of godly reformation was another addition to the Protectorate. Cromwell believed that all individuals should find their own relationship with God and the form of worship was not as important. Eventually all true believers would be united in Protestantism, and it was not up to individuals to impose their ways on others or ban certain beliefs unless they were socially disruptive or heretical. The system of Triers and Ejectors in 1654 was established before the First Protectorate Parliament showing Cromwell’s personal enthusiasm for godly reformation. The system was successful in that it was able to expel unfit ministers and maintain high standards of teaching. The system of Major Generals was also successful in reforming behaviour and some regions did become godly, thus helping towards godly rule. Although there was a National Church, there was a loose framework of state control, so there was a vast diversity of religious practices which were tolerated such as Jews and Catholics, thus “many sects enjoyed complete freedom of religion”. Therefore, Cromwell was the only leader who had a vision which included toleration, and due to his views Cromwell was able to prevent uprisings by granting liberty of conscience.
Although, the Protectorate was fairly dependent on Cromwell, Parliament also contributed significantly to the regime, the proposal of the Humble Petition and Advice in 1657 was an attempt to create more checks and balances and to balance power. Cromwell did need to work with Parliament, as he needed the approval of Parliament in order to make the regime legal.
Therefore, the “stability and survival of the Protectorate” did very much so depend on Cromwell, as suggested by Cyril Robinson, she identifies that the Protectorate was no longer able to survive after Cromwell’s death, because “the Protector himself had been to strong”. On the contrary, Michael Lynch believes that Cromwell never actually “pushed his authority to the point where he had a genuine controlling power”. However, there is agreement in that Cromwell did attempt to achieve “effective civilian government” and that “religious difficulties were in a large measure overcome”. But, it needs to be taken into account that as Cyril Robinson is a Whig historian, this school of thought portray as Cromwell as a strong dictator, which is not necessarily a bad criticism. Overall, the Protectorate was dependent on Oliver Cromwell, but not necessarily “wholly”, because Cromwell did have to work with Parliament in order to achieve a settlement. But, the Protectorate did heavily rely on Cromwell’s personality and political as well as military skills.
