Was The Restoration of the English monarchy a mistake ?

notgivenaway

Ad Honorem
Jun 2015
5,745
UK
As a dyed in the wool republican I actually think that you make some good points. Oliver understood the nature of power and quite rightly took the reasonable point of view that Monarchy buttressed by the idea of Divine Right, as articulated by James I in his True Law of Free Monarchy, slammed the door in the face of the powerful men of the shires having their concerns of local issues being overwhelmed by Kingly placemen. Even worse the rising merchant class were being shut out by grants on trade handed out to court favourites. The Declaration of Breda and the Bill of Rights may have limited the power of the Monarchy on foreign policy, but Royal patronage meant that the cards were always in the hands of the King. I see your argument about Empire, but it is fair to point out that had America been negotiating with a representative government who accepted that no taxation without representation was a reasonable basis for agreement, rather than an anachronistic hereditary Monarchy the course of history may have worked out much better.
Yes, but the civil wars didn't do much to in the end to damage England's economy and standing. they showed that the power of the monarch isn't absolute, which to be fair it hadn't been for centuries before Charles's execution.
 

Lord Fairfax

Ad Honorem
Jan 2015
3,406
Changing trains at Terrapin Station...
Do you think that The Restoration of the English monarchy in 1660 was a mistake ?
No. The monarchy acted as a stabilizing force.

i don't think it was. Monarchy was the normal/natural state, and Cromwell was the man England needed once Charles I died. The lessons were learnt, that the King should tolerate all denominations, and respect Parliament. I'd argue the whole wars didn't even damage England much, since its colonies did well, and despite losing some wars to the Dutch got the American colonies and by 1700 was outdoing the Dutch.
Good answer.
 

johnincornwall

Ad Honorem
Nov 2010
7,676
Cornwall
Saves the bother/inertia of having a parliament that is one party and a President that is the other (see France and USA at times).
 
Nov 2015
545
Gehenna
May be not at that point of history, but definitely not now. It should have been long gone, and with dignity.

Now British monarchy is at best similar to a trophy wife (all nice and smiling, pleasant to look and does not speak much), or British version of Kardashian family at worst. Before, a function of the dynasty was to rule, now - to entertain. I get it why British like their monarchy - I like my toys and my pets too.
It would be so much better just to go down in a blaze of glory, like in France, or in Russia, when all crap was forgotten, and martyrdom - remembered, than to turn into entertainment for the masses. It sure feels like an ultimate revenge on them.
 

funakison

Ad Honorem
Oct 2012
5,381
Between a rock and a hard place
May be not at that point of history, but definitely not now. It should have been long gone, and with dignity.

Now British monarchy is at best similar to a trophy wife (all nice and smiling, pleasant to look and does not speak much), or British version of Kardashian family at worst. Before, a function of the dynasty was to rule, now - to entertain. I get it why British like their monarchy - I like my toys and my pets too.
It would be so much better just to go down in a blaze of glory, like in France, or in Russia, when all crap was forgotten, and martyrdom - remembered, than to turn into entertainment for the masses. It sure feels like an ultimate revenge on them.
If the British monarchy is so bad, why is the rest of the world addicted to it.
 

johnincornwall

Ad Honorem
Nov 2010
7,676
Cornwall
May be not at that point of history, but definitely not now. It should have been long gone, and with dignity.

Now British monarchy is at best similar to a trophy wife (all nice and smiling, pleasant to look and does not speak much), or British version of Kardashian family at worst. Before, a function of the dynasty was to rule, now - to entertain. I get it why British like their monarchy - I like my toys and my pets too.
It would be so much better just to go down in a blaze of glory, like in France, or in Russia, when all crap was forgotten, and martyrdom - remembered, than to turn into entertainment for the masses. It sure feels like an ultimate revenge on them.
Luckily it is only their popularity in Britain and the Commonwealth that matters, rather than experts in Gehenna.
 

jackydee

Ad Honorem
Jan 2013
4,569
Brigadoon
:)

You mean the glorious one jacky!
Yes, the Glorious one. My view of the Restoration is that it all turned out well enough in the end. A republic is the sensible system to chose, but considering what happened elsewhere in continental Europe our system has proven to have worked remarkably well. How much this was due to the Monarchy I shall let others decide.
 

Linschoten

Ad Honoris
Aug 2010
16,210
Welsh Marches
In no way. It was popular at the time, and the political settlement after the fall of James II ensured that there would be a constitutional monarchy which would not hinder political advance by progressive degrees, without any of the revolutions and discontinuities which affected comparable countries on the Continent. In modern times the monarchy has been broadly popular, and the polls since the war reveal no trend toward republicanism, with support of 75% or more for the maintenance of the institution. It has been a notable success in this period; in the middle of Queen Victoria's reign, one would have judged that things could have gone either way, and no one could have imagined how successfully the monarchy would adapt to the modern world in the 20th Century (with 'invented tradition' playing a significant part in this). Personally I cannot see that any very positive advantages would follow from the abolition of the monarchy, while Britain would on the other hand lose some of its colour, idiosoyncrasy and historical roots.
 

constantine

Ad Honorem
Oct 2012
8,545
Of course it wasn't a mistake, the mistake was allowing Cromwell an army in the first place. Republicanism is an abomination and regicide is an unforgivable crime against nature.
 
Aug 2015
20
UK & USA
Do you think that The Restoration of the English monarchy in 1660 was a mistake ?
Hi Balian

That would depend on context and specifics, plus also assuming that a YES answer would have made any difference, especially within a modern society!

Regards

Andy H