1D - Political divisions and experiments: Republicanism and the Rump
Removing monarchy left the victors divided about the source and limits of political authority. This lesson examines the Rump's republican government, its conflict with the army and the attempt to create godly rule through the Parliament of Saints in 1653.
Republicanism and legitimacy
Republicanism supported government without a hereditary king. Its defenders could argue that laws and accountable institutions protected the public interest better than a ruler who inherited power. In 1649 this view had to justify a new order to a society in which monarchy was deeply familiar and closely linked to law and religion.
The Rump Parliament consisted of those members of the Long Parliament left able and willing to sit after Pride's Purge. It abolished monarchy and the Lords and declared a Commonwealth in 1649. An appointed Council of State conducted executive business, such as diplomacy and security, under parliamentary authority. The regime was therefore a civilian republic sustained by military force, rather than simply Cromwell governing alone from January 1649.
The Rump's claim to represent the people was vulnerable. Its members had been elected in 1640 under restricted and unequal electoral arrangements, and many other elected MPs had been excluded by soldiers. Ending the king's inherited authority did not repair that representative weakness. Republicans had to explain why a purged assembly could legitimately hold supreme power and when it would give way to a renewed representative body.
Even within the regime, republicanism did not imply one social programme. Henry Marten and Sir Henry Vane were prominent defenders of government without monarchy, but many Rump members were primarily concerned with preserving order and property. Others hoped military victory would open a godly reform of church, law and society. They could agree that Charles I must not return while disagreeing about what his removal should permit.
Legitimacy
The belief that a ruler or institution has a rightful authority to govern. Effective coercion can secure obedience without establishing that belief.
The Rump's achievements and continuities
The Rump sustained government during an unusually dangerous period. Taxation, administrative committees and the Council of State supported the campaigns in Ireland and Scotland and defeated the Stuart invasion at Worcester. This required coordination between civilian administrators and military commanders. A regime criticised for slowness in reform could still be effective at raising resources for survival.
Its Navigation Act of 1651 restricted the ships permitted to carry imports and aimed to promote English shipping against Dutch commercial competition. Trade and naval rivalry contributed to the First Anglo-Dutch War of 1652–54. The Commonwealth maintained and expanded naval power, showing that abolition of kingship did not mean withdrawing from international competition. Protecting trade could unite merchants and officeholders even when they differed on the constitution.
At home, much remained familiar. Local government depended heavily on property-owning officeholders, the legal system continued to protect established rights, and a ministry supported by tithes, traditional religious payments, survived. Some reforms were undertaken, and legal reform was discussed, but expectations for a comprehensive transformation were not fulfilled. Fear of disorder encouraged caution.
The Rump also suppressed challenges from the left. Leading Levellers were imprisoned in 1649, and mutinies were crushed. Their argument that Parliament should be limited by a popular agreement threatened an assembly claiming supreme power. The republic could therefore oppose both royalist restoration and demands for a more participatory constitution.
The continuity was not evidence that nothing had changed. Monarchy and the Lords were gone, and civilian government claimed new authority. Rather, political revolution at the centre coexisted with the survival of much of the social and administrative basis of power. Different criteria produce different judgements of the Rump's radicalism.
The breakdown between army and Rump
Military victory brought the army and Rump closer to a decision about the permanent settlement. Officers expected success to be followed by reform. Cromwell wanted a godly government that would improve religion and justice, while safeguarding order and the fruits of victory. Many MPs instead feared that the army was turning itself into an independent political authority sustained by expensive taxation.
The cost of the standing army made the relationship especially difficult. MPs wanted economy and civilian control; soldiers wanted wages and security against enemies still threatening the regime. Religious toleration and the speed of legal reform added further disputes. Neither army nor Rump was united internally, but each distrusted the other institution's attempt to decide the future.
The question of elections exposed the contradiction. A regime claiming representative authority needed a new Parliament, yet an open election might return royalists or other opponents. The Rump considered plans for a successor while imposing safeguards against a hostile outcome. Officers suspected that MPs would preserve their own influence and postpone genuine renewal. The precise intentions of participants and the details of the final confrontation remain disputed, so their accusations should be distinguished from proven motives.
On 20 April 1653, Cromwell entered the Commons with troops and expelled the Rump. Military force again determined which civilian body could govern. Cromwell presented the action as necessary to prevent the betrayal of reform and public safety. Republicans could instead regard it as an attack on the supremacy of elected representatives by an ambitious general.
The dissolution demonstrated a structural problem. The army had defended a civilian revolution but could also overthrow its institutions. Replacing a king who frustrated Parliament with an army that could expel Parliament had not yet produced a secure balance of authority.
Millenarianism and the Parliament of Saints
The Nominated Assembly, which met in July 1653, attempted to replace the Rump with a body chosen for godliness and commitment to reform. It is also called the Parliament of Saints or Barebone's Parliament, after the member Praisegod Barbon. Its members were nominated through the army-led process, rather than elected by the population, and included representatives from Scotland and Ireland as well as England and Wales.
Millenarian expectations helped make this experiment plausible. Believers who saw recent upheaval as a sign of Christ's approaching rule hoped that faithful saints could prepare a better society. Fifth Monarchists, including supporters associated with Thomas Harrison, expected earthly empires to give way to Christ's kingdom. They preferred authority grounded in godliness to institutions inherited from a sinful order.
The Assembly was not entirely Fifth Monarchist, and being a devout reformer did not commit a member to that movement. Its members disagreed sharply about the reach of reform. It did achieve changes, including civil marriage and registration, which placed marriage before a civil official rather than relying exclusively on church ceremonies. These measures show that it did more than argue about prophecy.
Other proposals exposed property interests and different ideas of law. Radicals attacked tithes and wanted a more accessible legal system; some sought biblical principles in place of inherited legal arrangements. Tithe rights could be property held by lay owners as well as income supporting ministers. Removing them without an agreed substitute alarmed people who feared damage to ownership and the established ministry. Disputes over law likewise concerned whether reform would remove abuses or undermine protections for property.
In December 1653 moderate members surrendered the Assembly's authority to Cromwell, while troops removed the remaining members. The failure reflected disagreement within the godly coalition, not simply the absence of a king. Nomination for shared religious commitment had not created agreement over institutions or the pace of change.
Experiments and the limits of consent
The Rump and the Nominated Assembly offered different answers to the same question: who could safely govern after regicide? The Rump relied on the surviving elected Commons and parliamentary sovereignty. The Assembly relied on nomination of godly reformers, drawing authority from the army's judgement and hopes for religious renewal. Both excluded much of the population from choosing the settlement directly.
Each arrangement had strengths that became weaknesses. The Rump's caution protected continuity in government and property, but frustrated officers and reformers and left its representative mandate stale. The Assembly's religious commitment encouraged reform, but disagreements over tithes and law threatened the interests and confidence of the Political Nation. Neither established a civilian authority that could restrain the army while satisfying its essential concerns.
The transition to a Protectorate in December 1653 sought another solution: power shared between a single head of state, a council and Parliament. It did not mean that every republican abandoned opposition or every Millenarian accepted Cromwell. The constitutional experiment changed because the alliance sustaining the previous one broke down.
Across the wider Stuart period, 1649–53 produced exceptionally rapid institutional change. Yet landed influence, religious exclusion and the need to finance coercive power persisted. Scotland and Ireland's representation in the new arrangements also followed military defeat. The republic's failure to secure broad consent cannot be understood solely as personal quarrelling in Westminster; the regimes had to reconcile incompatible ideas and govern territories subjected to force.
Neither an elected remnant nor a nominated godly elite could agree a lasting settlement with the army. The republic's military achievements outpaced its ability to establish a broadly accepted constitution.