What do you think?
Rate this book
The Fall: Last Days of the English Republic
Why did England's one experiment in republican rule fail?
Oliver Cromwell's death in 1658 sparked a period of unrivaled turmoil and confusion in English history. In less than two years, there were close to ten changes of government; rival armies of Englishmen faced each other across the Scottish border; and the Long Parliament was finally dissolved after two decades. Why was this period so turbulent, and why did the republic, backed by a formidable standing army, come crashing down in such spectacular fashion?
In this fascinating history, Henry Reece explores the full story of the English republic's downfall. Questioning the accepted version of events, Reece argues that the restoration of the monarchy was far from inevitable—and that the republican regime could have survived long term. Richard Cromwell's Protectorate had deep roots in the political nation, the Rump Parliament mobilized its supporters impressively, and the country showed little interest in returning to the old order until the republic had collapsed. This is a compelling account that transforms our understanding of England's short-lived period of republican rule.
Oliver Cromwell's death in 1658 sparked a period of unrivaled turmoil and confusion in English history. In less than two years, there were close to ten changes of government; rival armies of Englishmen faced each other across the Scottish border; and the Long Parliament was finally dissolved after two decades. Why was this period so turbulent, and why did the republic, backed by a formidable standing army, come crashing down in such spectacular fashion?
In this fascinating history, Henry Reece explores the full story of the English republic's downfall. Questioning the accepted version of events, Reece argues that the restoration of the monarchy was far from inevitable—and that the republican regime could have survived long term. Richard Cromwell's Protectorate had deep roots in the political nation, the Rump Parliament mobilized its supporters impressively, and the country showed little interest in returning to the old order until the republic had collapsed. This is a compelling account that transforms our understanding of England's short-lived period of republican rule.
Audible Audio
First published June 18, 2024
2 people are currently reading
193 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
October 11, 2024
A brilliant five star history book which I only read 150 pages of because, in that very unlovely phrase, I bit off more than I could chew – WAY more. And this is where the rating system breaks down – giving 5 stars to a book I didn’t even read half of seems ridiculous. I skimmed the rest but still.
My favourite period of English history is 1640-1660 – civil war, revolution, chopping the King’s head off, religious nutjobs all over the place, what’s not to like. The end of it all, after Oliver Cromwell died, is fascinating – how could a fierce antimonarchical republic turn in the space of two years into a collection of supine rascals who could think of no more feeble solution to their politics than to invite the son of Charles I to take his place upon his father’s throne, if it please your Highness, which of course it did.
It's an exciting and bewildering tale which I wanted to think about in detail. But THIS amount of detail was just too much. What was I thinking – a 440 page book about a two year period, yeah, it’s going to be extremely detailed! Detail in the extreme!
Henry Reece inches forward, backtracks, discusses, debates, provides a zillion backstories, and best of all quotes many delicious snippets from the writings of the participants – the wonderful lopsided somewhat drunken picturesque piquant prose of the 17th century. All great, just too much for me.
So this is for specialists not us quailing lightweights.
My favourite period of English history is 1640-1660 – civil war, revolution, chopping the King’s head off, religious nutjobs all over the place, what’s not to like. The end of it all, after Oliver Cromwell died, is fascinating – how could a fierce antimonarchical republic turn in the space of two years into a collection of supine rascals who could think of no more feeble solution to their politics than to invite the son of Charles I to take his place upon his father’s throne, if it please your Highness, which of course it did.
It's an exciting and bewildering tale which I wanted to think about in detail. But THIS amount of detail was just too much. What was I thinking – a 440 page book about a two year period, yeah, it’s going to be extremely detailed! Detail in the extreme!
Henry Reece inches forward, backtracks, discusses, debates, provides a zillion backstories, and best of all quotes many delicious snippets from the writings of the participants – the wonderful lopsided somewhat drunken picturesque piquant prose of the 17th century. All great, just too much for me.
So this is for specialists not us quailing lightweights.
September 3, 2024
Henry Reece’s 'The Fall: Last Days of the English Republic' has a simple premise: to provide a narrative account of the last eighteen months of the English republic, from the death of Oliver Cromwell in September 1658 to the restoration of the monarchy in May 1660. A straightforward aim perhaps, but achieving it is somewhat more complicated. The days between the accession of Richard Cromwell and the return of the king are some of the most convoluted, confused, and chaotic in the entirety of British history. As Reece states, 'They were ... overflowing with dramatic events: at least three parliaments manhandled by military force; rival armies of Englishmen facing each other across the Scottish border; General Monck’s triumphal march south; the reversal of Pride’s Purge as the Long Parliament returned; and then the final dissolution of the Long Parliament after twenty years.' They are a swamp of rumour, faction, and misdirection, in which it is easy for even the most experienced explorer to sink with no trace. Reece quite rightly notes in his Introduction that very little space has ever been dedicated to this exceptionally important period, and this is the reason: it is nigh-on impossible to navigate through it, let alone write a coherent narrative about it.
Luckily for the reading public, Reece is not one to be dissuaded from a task purely because success is unlikely. Instead, he has pulled on his wellies, squared his shoulders, and marched with intent into the quagmire that is 1658 to 1660. He has discovered islands of sure ground, aided by years of experience, and by using those firm foundations he has built footpaths that anyone – including those unfamiliar with the period – can follow. Along the way, he has put up signposts, information boards, lights and strings of bunting, not just to illuminate the path but to make it an enjoyable, colourful, and pleasant journey. And he has emerged on the other side absolutely gleaming.
Perhaps one reason for his success is that Reece has started on the correct side of the bog. Instead of working his way backwards from the Restoration, assuming a safe path to be inevitable, he has entered with the belief that the return of the Stuarts was not an assured outcome of Oliver’s death. As Reece has stated, there were, indeed, many viable options open for the political nation. If certain players had made different decisions at different stages, if some had been a bit more adroit or a bit more circumspect, then the route to Restoration would have been much longer – or never have existed at all. Hindsight, so they say, is 20/20, but historians can sometimes fall into the habit of using blinkers regardless, and it would help us all to remember that. In removing the certainty of Charles II, Reece has mapped out the landscape in a much more valuable manner.
This is not to suggest that all of Reece’s conclusions are secure – there are undoubtedly a few waypoints that are shakier than others. His insistence on human agency, for example, can stray a bit too far at points. While it is fantastic that history is once again turning to stories of ‘great men’ – and women (although less so by necessity in this case) – allowance still must be made for the impact of structures. Fallible, human decisions definitely played a sizeable part in this particular story – Richard Cromwell was too ‘Tim Nice but Dim’; Arthur Hesilrige was too unmoveable; Charles Fleetwood was too inept – but it was the familial, political, and organizational structures that made them that way, and there would always be someone equally flawed to step into their place because it was society that had shaped those men.
Nevertheless, this focus on the individual over the structure is a welcome relief, and one that has often been missing from discussions of the first sixty years of the seventeenth century. Human stories by definition make the work more personable, more accessible, more understandable, and this is an absolute necessity for the last years of the republic. In theory, dry writing should help to drain the historiographical quagmire of the period, but in reality it has made the ground more impassable for almost all who venture forth. Reece has therefore offered the corrective in more than one way. He has reminded us never to assume that what happened was inevitable. But more than that, 'The Fall' has drawn the reader in enough to float over the surface, to understand the lay of the land and to navigate the impenetrable and, most importantly, to have fun while doing so.
Luckily for the reading public, Reece is not one to be dissuaded from a task purely because success is unlikely. Instead, he has pulled on his wellies, squared his shoulders, and marched with intent into the quagmire that is 1658 to 1660. He has discovered islands of sure ground, aided by years of experience, and by using those firm foundations he has built footpaths that anyone – including those unfamiliar with the period – can follow. Along the way, he has put up signposts, information boards, lights and strings of bunting, not just to illuminate the path but to make it an enjoyable, colourful, and pleasant journey. And he has emerged on the other side absolutely gleaming.
Perhaps one reason for his success is that Reece has started on the correct side of the bog. Instead of working his way backwards from the Restoration, assuming a safe path to be inevitable, he has entered with the belief that the return of the Stuarts was not an assured outcome of Oliver’s death. As Reece has stated, there were, indeed, many viable options open for the political nation. If certain players had made different decisions at different stages, if some had been a bit more adroit or a bit more circumspect, then the route to Restoration would have been much longer – or never have existed at all. Hindsight, so they say, is 20/20, but historians can sometimes fall into the habit of using blinkers regardless, and it would help us all to remember that. In removing the certainty of Charles II, Reece has mapped out the landscape in a much more valuable manner.
This is not to suggest that all of Reece’s conclusions are secure – there are undoubtedly a few waypoints that are shakier than others. His insistence on human agency, for example, can stray a bit too far at points. While it is fantastic that history is once again turning to stories of ‘great men’ – and women (although less so by necessity in this case) – allowance still must be made for the impact of structures. Fallible, human decisions definitely played a sizeable part in this particular story – Richard Cromwell was too ‘Tim Nice but Dim’; Arthur Hesilrige was too unmoveable; Charles Fleetwood was too inept – but it was the familial, political, and organizational structures that made them that way, and there would always be someone equally flawed to step into their place because it was society that had shaped those men.
Nevertheless, this focus on the individual over the structure is a welcome relief, and one that has often been missing from discussions of the first sixty years of the seventeenth century. Human stories by definition make the work more personable, more accessible, more understandable, and this is an absolute necessity for the last years of the republic. In theory, dry writing should help to drain the historiographical quagmire of the period, but in reality it has made the ground more impassable for almost all who venture forth. Reece has therefore offered the corrective in more than one way. He has reminded us never to assume that what happened was inevitable. But more than that, 'The Fall' has drawn the reader in enough to float over the surface, to understand the lay of the land and to navigate the impenetrable and, most importantly, to have fun while doing so.
September 22, 2025
A very detailed (and somewhat hard to follow) analytical history of the precipitous and improbable transition from the Protectorate under Cromwell to a restored Monarchy under Charles II despite the generally Puritan leanings of both Parliament and the citizenry of England and Scotland, which serves as a cautionary tale regarding the volatility and fragility of popular revolutions.
Read
August 21, 20256 out of 10.
Interesting narrative history about the last two years or so of the English Republic. Reece argues that its fall wasn't inevitable but after Cromwell's death in 1658 there was no one of comparable stature or competence to replace him. The result was a series of unstable civil administrations, a military coup and the eventual return of a Stuart to the throne in 1660.
Interesting narrative history about the last two years or so of the English Republic. Reece argues that its fall wasn't inevitable but after Cromwell's death in 1658 there was no one of comparable stature or competence to replace him. The result was a series of unstable civil administrations, a military coup and the eventual return of a Stuart to the throne in 1660.
January 9, 2025
Exceptional. Brilliantly researched and presented. For once, a historian not afraid to express his own views on the period and the reasons for the outcomes.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews