Wednesday, October 18, 2006

Cromwell ?

The sky is falling, and National Review Online's "the Corner" group blog, or whatever it is, has a thread going on Oliver Cromwell. Ooookay. It wouldn't be worth a comment, except that the so-called "Lord Protector" and the "English Revolution" are inhabitants of El Jefe's bad books: that villainous, regicidal, pinch-faced, self-righteous scold of a rebel criminal and his traitor friends were born to be hanged.

4 comments:

louielouie said...

In his speech at the opening of the assembly on 4 July 1653, Cromwell thanked God’s providence that he believed had brought England to this point and set out their divine mission:

fourth of july?
and the remainder of the quote sound errily familiar to phrasing in our declaration of independence. those rogues were born to hang as well.

think it possible you may be mistaken.

i had heard of a general/king that in midieval battles had addressed his foe in this language. i didn't know it was cromwell.

cromwell's head was on a spike outside westminister abbey for 25 years?
these were not nice people.
but then again, i am not the anglophile.

El Jefe Maximo said...

Nope, that they wern't (nice, that is). Most people contending for All the Marbles aren't particularly nice, which we, thank God, have been allowed, so far, to forget. Whether we will continue to be allowed to forget it I beg leave to doubt.

Cromwell utterly and honestly believed in God; was completely convinced that when he had decided to do something, that it was Right, and ordained by God. The possibilty that others genuinely believed also, but could arrive at different answers seems never to have occurred to him. He was a natural born tyrant, and an effective one.

Cromwell was also splendid soldier, and courageous, although the king's general, Prince Rupert, is much more to my liking.

I just don't like the Cromwell much, though, and I haven't much use for the Puritans or their cause. I am, after all, a wee bit royalist. I probably would have found myself on the other side.

louielouie said...

for a moment while reading your reply describing cromwell, stonewall jackson crept into my mind. as though you were decribing jackson (as well as)/(and not) cromwell. lee i believe was fond of/respected jackson.

El Jefe Maximo said...

I never would have made that association, but I can see why you get there. Stonewall was, in some ways, quite similar. Also very intolerant of human failings, and what he perceived as weakness (tell me any general in that army other than Lee he didn't have a feud of some kind with at one time or another).

A superb soldier: had he not gone down at Chancellorsville ,the Gettysburg campaign would have been very, very different. Certainly, he would not have ignored opportunity knocking on the afternoon of 1 July 1863, in front of Cemetary Hill, with the enemy in disorder to his front.

That said, I wouldn't have wanted him as a Head of State either.