A NEW STUDY OF CROMWELL

Press, Volume XCVII, Issue 28536, 15 March 1958, Page 3

A NEW STUDY OF CROMWELL

[Reviewed, by

A.R.J

HHe Greatness of Oliver Cromwell. By Maurice Ashley. Hodder and Stoughton. 382 PPThis year, 1958, marks the tercentenary of the death of Cromwell. The occasion will almost certainly be marked by the publication of any number of biographical sketches and essays. Mr Ashley’s is the first major wotK in this rising tide of interest in a man, who has already been the subject of so many biographies and studies that separate books have been devoted to “Bibliographies of Oliver Cromwell.” Mr Ashley himself, as is no doubt appropriate for the chairman of the Cromwell Association, has already written two biographies of Cromwell and a study of Cromwell’s Generals. His earlier biography, published in 1937, was entitled “Oliver Cromwell, the Conservative Dictator.” In both title and content, it reflected tne spirit of the age in which it was written, the age of Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin. Keenly aware that others were somewhat similarly influenced, Mr Ashley points out that “In Sir Winston Churchill’s ‘History of the EnglishSpeaking Peoples’, II (1956), of which the chapters on Cromwell were written in 1938-39, he is also treated more or less as a twen-tieth-century dictator.” In a sense, then, this new book on “The Greatness of Oliver Cromwell” is a reassessment in which author presents most of the essential facts fairly and well and also displays something of a tendency to redress wrongs done in the twentieth century age of dictators. If, in some respects, Mr Ashley carries this tendency too far in his, determination to restore the balance, it is not because he has falsified or tinkered with the facts but because his interpretation of them is more kindly than it was 20 years ago. In his first chapter, “When Envy is Lfiid Asleep by Time,” Mr Ashley reviews several of the better known biographies of Cromwell and appeals for a scientific historical approach, tempered by moderation and tolerance. An interesting chapter, it insists that we should clear our minds of preconceived notions about Cromwell in order that we may see more clearly where his greatness lay. But the author is too wise to believe for a minute that any writer can be absolutely impartial, objective and self-effacing. “In choosing what 'he wants to tell, the historian selects, consciously or unconsciously, the approach fitted to his own temperament and the spirit of his own age.” 7716 biographical narrative which follows is straightforward and most readable. Cromwell’s origins, background, and place in society are considered with perhaps some thought of debunking the writings of those who have sought a strictly economic interpretation of seventeenth century history. Few serious students will cavil at the conclusion that Cromwell’s awareness of religious and constitutional injustices was determined to only a limited extent by his'material circumstances, and that “his impulse towards revolutionary activity was primarily religious and not, in any direct «ense, economic.” This leads to a useful discussion of Puritanism •nd Cromwell’s religion. After

considering Cromwell’s experience in the Long Parliament, nhe biographer passes on to more detailed treatment of his military camThis is sound since, whether or not Cromwell was a conscious revolutionary (Mr Ashley thinks he was not), he was most certainly more of a man of action than a constitutional reformer or political thinker. To take the view that Cromwell developed from a dashing cavalry leader into a wise and skilful commander because he possessed the indefinable duality of leadership" which made other magnificent fighting soldiers look to and obey him is perhaps to beg the question. for his purposes in this biography, Mr Ashley covers adeWetely the battles of Marston Moor, Naseby, Dunbar, and Worcester. He stresses that Cromwell was never a strong man physically , and that malaria and dysentery undermined Ms health during the campaigns but that, although nis temper was never mild, there !s no proof that ill-health frayed it further.

Mr Ashley’s treatment of Cromwell s campaign in Ireland involves some special pleading in which the massacres at Wexford and Drogheda are seen as necessarily severe steps on the road to peace: Cromwell believed that the example of 2000 Irish killed at Drogheda—in accordance with the rules of war—would save the lives of his large army and of all the English settlers in Ireland.” This ls ln , Une with Sir Winston Churchill s justification of the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki which Mr Ashley quotes m extenuation of Cromwell’s severity. He also lists other “acts of calculated terror” which have been defended in the light of results produced. How far he will succeed with this line of argument will depend on how his readers remain open to conviction in an age when many have quite firmly made up their minds on the wisdom of such acts. Nevertheless, as if his reference back from the present was not enough, Mr Ashley tries another tack whereby Drogheda is seen as part and parcel of a cruel age and of Irish history stocked, , as it is, “with the horrors of civil war.” “It is necessary to set this story in perspective,” says Mr Ashley, of Drogheda, “because it has so often been used to picture Cromwell as a monster of cruelty.” But, again according to Mr Ashley, “Cromwell was' a humane man. His letters are filled with concern for widows, bereaved parents, and the Restitute.” Nor' doubt Cromwell was humane on occasion. He was also at times ruthless and there is no indication that he felt any humane feelings towards the Irish. Even Mr Ashley says: “Ingrained in his mind was the belief that the Irish were savages who during the sixteen-forties had spilled seas of innocent blood-.” The chapters on the Protectorate show Cromwell to have been inspired by his faith in his own admission as the chosen vessel of the Lord, “a practical ruler . . . and a Protestant idealist who saw in the spread of a liberal Christianity the right aim of government throughout the world.” Although he gave peace to the country, he failed to settle the religious organisation of the Church or to secure the full financial backing of the City of London. His constitutional experiments failed and his system broke down soo'n after his death. The concluding chapter, which has the same title as the book itself, presents Mr Ashley’s conclusion that Cromwell “was essentially a modest and dedicated man” for whom liberty of conscience was the main cause to be fought for and preserved when once won. It was a moot point how far a man is to be excused for what in others mighty be termed sins or crimes simply because he was “a great man” who quite conscientiously believed that he was called of God to execute His will. Cromwell was certainly an outstanding Puritan, a great lover of England, an imperialist who lost no chance to raise the standard of his country, and a parliamentarian who failed to master the art of managing parliaments. “Cromwell, after all, was an Elizabethan,” says Mr Ashley in a footnote.

This is a useful addition to the pile of biographies of Cromwell. It should be widely read because of its sincere attempt to do justice to a very great Englishman, but it is most assuredly not the last word on a man who is the subject of controversy simply because he was the outstanding figure of his age.