Parliaments and Politics during the Cromwellian Protectorate

Cambridge Studies in Early Modern British History

by Patrick Little, David L. Smith

This volume provides a detailed book-length study of the period of the Protectorate Parliaments from September 1654 to April 1659. The study is very broad in its scope, covering topics as diverse as the British and Irish dimensions of the Protectorate Parliaments, the political and social nature of factions, problems of management, the legal and judicial aspects of Parliament's functions, foreign policy and the nature of the parliamentary franchise and elections in this period. In its wide-ranging analysis of Parliaments and politics throughout the Protectorate the book also examines both Lord Protectors, all three Protectorate Parliaments and the reasons why Oliver and Richard Cromwell were never able to achieve a stable working relationship with any Parliament. Its chronological coverage extends to the demise of the Third Protectorate Parliament in April 1659. This comprehensive account will appeal to historians of early modern British political history.

Hardcover

First published October 1, 2007

About the author

Patrick Little is Senior Research Fellow, History of Parliament Trust.

Reviews

[Debbie · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting, and necessary, review of Protectorate politics, focusing entirely on the parliaments held between 1654 and 1659. Obviously, it is not as in-depth as the eagerly awaited - and seemingly indefinitely delayed - study due to be released by the History of Parliament Trust, but it is a good stop-gap. More could be said about the individual members and constituencies, but it does provide a good overview of the parliaments themselves. The referencing is likewise superb.

In terms of historiography, it overturns many of the long-held assumptions about the 1650s: about the distance Oliver held from his parliaments; about his refusal of the crown; about factionalism, particularly between the army and the civilians; about the other two nations (i.e. not just England); and about the quality of Richard Cromwell. The arguments put forward are in the main convincing, although larger studies will be needed either to prove or disprove the theories.

The main issue with the book is the way it is laid out. It is, of course, not a primer nor a popular history, and so it expects a greater level of understanding than either of the other styles would require. But the structure, with a top-down overview providing some exposition only appearing in the middle of the book, leaves the reader reeling. Instead, we are confronted first with discussions on elections, exclusions, and factions. This, I imagine, will put the majority of readers off in the first few pages and incline many to overlook the usefulness of the book when read in a different sequence.