Oliver Cromwell is arguably one of the most controversial leaders in English history. Cromwell began life as a common man who later rose to power after the death of King Charles I. He had no experience in how to rule a kingdom and should be called a courageous person. Oliver Cromwell is a hero; all of his deeds were done with the ultimate goal of the betterment of England in mind.
Oliver Cromwell was a brilliant military commander. He was a military commander in the Parliament’s army in the war against King Charles I. If it was not for his command, the Parliament side would have lost and been captured by the king’s forces. First and foremost “Cromwell’s power stemmed from his military ability and his unique relationship with his troops.
…show more content…
Cromwell was just fighting for one cause he knew that was to abolish the monarchy. ”Cromwell, the only man strong enough to hold power and keep both sides in check, lost patience over lack of progress and forcibly dissolved Parliament in 1653. Later that year he proposed and received the office of Lord Protector – King in all but name. He agreed to rule with and through a Council of State and meet regularly with Parliament” (Jones). Even though he fought a hard battle to defeat King Charles, he eventually reverts back to what he knows best: a monarchy. However, if it was not for him the monarchy would still exist and people would not have the rights they have today. “While Cromwell wielded authority, Parliament and Army were kept in creative tension and peace was largely maintained. Taxes, including those levied specifically against ex-Royalists, helped to stabilise finances, pay for a standing Army and for reforms. The Navy was also enlarged” (Jones). These changes and reforms are all for the good of the English Citizen’s. Cromwell did these good deeds therefore he is a hero in the eyes of the English
Oliver Cromwell was a well known military dictator. He helped the Parliamentarians win the First Civil War and was named Lord Protector. He died in 1658 but many people still remember him as one of the best leaders in history although others believe he was a harsh tyrant and always wanted too much power for himself. Throughout the years, numerous historians have changed their views on whether he was a good leader or not. This work will look at three interpretations from different people on who Cromwell was and what he was like and compare them.
After many failed attempts to obtain a divorce from his first wife Catherine of Aragon, King Henry VIII took momentous steps that led to "The Reformation," a significant occurrence in the history of religion. Prior to the reformation, all of England's inhabitants including King Henry VIII prescribed to Catholicism. In fact, King Henry VIII was such a strong supporter that he was given the title "Defender of the Faith" by the pope for his efforts in protecting Catholicism against the Protestants. However, all these changed upon the pope's denial of Henry's request for a divorce.
The eventual breakdown of severing relations between Charles I and Parliament gave way to a brutal and bloody English Civil War. However, the extent that Parliament was to blame for the collapse of cooperation between them and ultimately war, was arguably only to a moderate extent. This is because Parliament merely acted in defiance of King Charles I’s harsh personal rule, by implementing controlling legislation, attacking his ruthless advisors and encouraging public opinion against him. These actions however only proceeded Charles I’s personal abuse of his power, which first and foremost exacerbated public opinion against his rule. This was worsened
That is not to say there was no opposition to the reformation, for it was rife and potentially serious. The opposition came from both the upper and lower classes, from the monks and nuns and from foreign European powers. This opposition however, was cleverly minimised from the outset, Cromwell’s master plan ensured court opposition was minimal and new acts, oaths and decrees prevented groups and individuals from publicly voicing their dissatisfaction. Those who continued to counter such policies were ruthlessly and swiftly dealt with, often by execution, and used as examples to discourage others. Henry’s desire for a nation free of foreign religious intervention, total sovereign independence, a yearning of church wealth and the desire for a divorce sewed the seeds for reform.
...tect his right to the throne. Ultimately, he stabilized the nation by settling the civil wars, the Wars of Roses, by marrying the apposing York family, to unite the two feuding families, the Yorks and the Lancasters. All together, King Henry VII is a new monarch for displaying all of the required traits.
To start, the death of Charles I led to scientific discoveries in England, which helped build the economy and establish the superpower status of England. During his reign, Charles I constantly oppressed ideas that went against the Church of England due to his religious ideals and belief that he could impose religious conformity across all of his lands. Between 1650 and 1659, after Charles’ beheading, both the supporters of Cromwell and the defeated monarchists turned to science and technology for its potential economic and social benefits. The commonwealth made it a priority to pay off their debts from the civil war in any way...
...rned the essential plans that a leader would need to lead him troops. He also had the morale and spirits to keep the troops ready to fight for the freedom they wanted, as well as his ability to command such troops in placement and tactics.
Nat Turner’s name throughout American history has a force all its own. Nat Turner was the leader of the most significant slave revolt in American history. The views on Nat Turner varied from a hero of oppressed people, murderer of innocent women and children, and a powerful religious leader. Although Nat Turner was a historical figure much about him and the revolt he led remains a mystery.
Throughout British Literature, there are many instances of heroism. To be considered a hero by others in the time period of 449 to 1625, you must be, “noted for feats of courage or nobility of purpose: especially, one who has risked or sacrificed his life” (Morris 618). Four characters in British Literature that portray heroic traits are Beowulf, Sir Gawain, Macbeth, and the Knight of The Canterbury Tales. Beowulf shows himself worthy of the title of being a hero when he leaves his country to help a neighboring country, Denmark and rid them of the long lasting fear of a malicious monster known as Grendel. Sir Gawain is considered a hero by many because of his loyalty to King Arthur. He even risks his life so that King Arthur would live and participates in the Green Knights challenge. Although Macbeth has got a few more faults than other heroes have in British Literature, his name is still synonymous with “hero”. Aristotle says “the tragic hero has to fall from grace … after being on top” (Chui 1). Before the three witches tell Macbeth the false prophecies, Macbeth is in held is high accord, yet afterwards, his ambition tears him down and he does anything it takes gain the role of King. The Knight, from The Canterbury Tales, excels beyond all others when it comes to being a hero. He is the most loyal and is admired by the other characters for his courage, bravery in battle and his exploits in war. He is on a religious pilgrimage not to make money or any other avaricious deed that the other characters are on the pilgrimage for, he is on the pilgrimage to worship God, which is also honored by his peers as being heroic. All four characters mentioned have heroic traits and they all are considered heroes. Although they might gain their title in different ways and for the wrong reasons, they are truly heroes. In British Literature, many stories have been influenced by the heroic traditions of their time period. The characters, although in different stories, all portray the heroic tradition in British Literature.
Oliver Cromwell was a prominent leader during the civil war. Cromwell played a leading role in capturing Charles I to trial and execution. During the civil war, Cromwell’s military abilities commit highly to the parliamentary victory which made him appointed as the new model army leader. Also, the parliaments determined that he would end the civil war as the powerful man in England. In the selection, Edmund Ludlow criticize about the new models of government. Cromwell dislikes the idea of new models of government because he feel the new models of government would destroy the power. Also, Ludlow criticizes about Cromwell’s power is being abused too much, so he feels that the nation should governed by its own. Cromwell’s responded that the government
One of the key factors that led to the civil war was the contrasting beliefs of King Charles and the parliament. The monarchy believed in the divine rights of kings, explained by Fisher (1994, p335) as a biblically-based belief that the king or queen's authority comes directly from God and that he is not subjected to the demands of the people. On the other hand, the parliament had a strong democratic stance and though they respected and recognized the king's authority, they were constantly desiring and fighting for more rights to power. Although climaxing at the reign of King Charles, their antagonism stretched for centuries long before his birth and much of the power that once belonged to the monarchy had shifted over to the parliament by the time he came into power.
After King Charles I’s execution in January 1649, Oliver Cromwell (25 April 1599 – 3 September 1658) became Lord Protector of the country. Oliver Cromwell was ruler of the country, with assistant of parliament from 25 December 1653, until his death, when his son Richard Cromwell took power. Cromwell wasn’t the king of the three kingdoms (England, Scotland and Ireland), but he had similar power. Over history it has been disputed whether he was a heroic, powerful saviour for the country, or an evil psychopath who took what they wanted. I have been looking at which one I believe that Cromwell was; a hero or a villain.
This source is from December 1656 therefore shows Cromwell is troubled by the Second Protectorate Parliament’s intolerance at the time of the case. Cromwell’s toleration makes him not a military dictator as it shows he does not supress beliefs he
In Henry V, the actions of King Henry portray him as an appalling leader. Among Henry's many negative traits, he allows himself to be influenced by people who have anterior motives. This is problematic because the decisions might not be the best decisions for the country, or neighboring countries. The bishops convinced Henry to take over France because they would be able to save land for the Church. Henry doesn't have the ability to accept responsibility for his actions, placing the blame on others. Before Henry begins to take over a French village, he tells the governor to surrender or risk having English troops terrorize civilians. This way, if the governor declines, it would be the governor's fault for the atrocities that would occur. Henry has gotten his troops to go along with the take over by manipulating them. He tells the soldiers that what they're doing is noble, and that they should be proud. In fact, they're attacking another country in order to conquer it. Henry's character comes off as coldhearted and careless. Henry shows ruthlessness towards civilians, threatening them with atrocities. He's careless with his soldiers, thoughtlessly allowing their executions, or playing hurtful games with them.
During the reign of Charles I, the people of England were divided into two groups due to their opinions on how the country should be run: The Royalists, and the Parliamentarians. The Royalists were those people who supported Charles I and his successor, while the Parliamentarians were those who supported the idea that Parliament should have a larger role in government affairs. Milton was a Parliamentarian and was an outspoken enemy of Charles I, having written numerous essays and pamphlets regarding his ideas as to how the government should be run, and “In one very famous pamphlet, he actually defended Parliament's right to behead the king should the king be found inadequate.” Charles I was seen as a corrupt and incompetent ruler, and “the Parliamentarians were fed up with their king and wanted Parliament to play a more important role in English politics and government.” This belief was held because of the unethical and tyrannical behavior of ruler Charles I. During his reign, he violated the liberties of his people and acted with hypocrisy and a general disregard for his subjects. Examples of his abuse of power in...