I know I started that Hollow Crown watchthrough a while back that I’m only three films into, but I’ll try to justify covering this one in between, because it’s sort of relevant in some sense. Or maybe I’m just bullshitting, but it’s fine — this one’s about a king of England too, so it’s close enough.
Cromwell is a 1970 big costume/war drama detailing the events of the English Civil War of the 1640s, when the country was torn between King Charles I and the rogue Parliament. Or Charles was the rogue one, which turned out to be the case as far as victor’s justice goes when he lost and got his head cut off in 1649 (sorry for the spoilers.) I’ve had my eye on this film for a long time, since the war is interesting to me for the power struggle and legal history behind it, and also for its legendary leads: Richard Harris as Oliver Cromwell and Alec Guinness as the doomed King Charles.
I should preface all the stuff below by saying as an American, I didn’t grow up with this war in my cultural consciousness the way the American Revolution and Civil War very much were. Being neither English, Scottish, Irish, nor Welsh (though I have some distant cousins in all those countries like many Americans do) and neither Catholic nor Protestant, I just don’t have a dog in the race.
That said, I don’t think Cromwell is a great film. It doesn’t seem like a lot of people do considering the ratings I’ve seen, so maybe that’s not a hot take anyway, but this movie did have some major problems. If it weren’t for Harris and Guinness especially carrying the entire film on absolute talent, or for the nice costumes and sets, there likely wouldn’t be much reason to bother with Cromwell at all.
But first, the basic plot: King Charles I of England, Scotland, and Ireland is pissed because he needs money to wage war in Ireland against his own probably pretty unwilling subjects, but to get that money he needs to convene Parliament. At this time, Parliament wasn’t anywhere near the powerful institution it would become starting in the next century, but it already had a long history as a body of England’s top guys representing the lords and the commons and approving certain vital measures presented by the monarch. This was a serious problem for Charles, however, because Parliament was pissed off at him already for his imposition of heavy taxes and arbitrary rule, and so if they were going to open the purse, it was going to be on condition that he be less of a shithead absolutist.
Charles wasn’t into that, however. In response to Parliament’s demands, he dissolved the body and ended up at war with them and their supporters, one of whom was a member of Parliament named Oliver Cromwell. This guy was a landed gentry type and a major Puritan, which meant he even hated the moderate Protestantism of Charles’ Church of England. Even worse for the Puritans, Charles had a French Catholic wife and was suspected of being a Catholic sympathizer. There’s a lot more to the religious aspect of the conflict, almost none of which figures into Cromwell, so forget about any of that high/low church controversy, the major role the Scots played in that controversy, or anything at all about William Laud, the Archbishop of Canterbury who also got his head cut off.
Cromwell ended up one of the leaders of a rebellion against the king, or the legitimate government’s fight against the rebel king as Parliament saw it. After a lot of fighting and failed diplomacy by the king, including trying to get a Catholic army from Ireland to quell Parliament, he ended up on trial for treason and convicted, sentenced to death, and beheaded (and see also King Louis XVI a century later.) Then a few years later, Cromwell was called in by Parliament, which as it turns out was full of assholes who couldn’t govern properly without an executive, and so he became Lord Protector of the new Commonwealth of England. The end.
Except there’s a lot more to it than that, like the fact that Cromwell did serve as Lord Protector for several years after Charles’ execution and that he did a hell of a lot of war crimes in Ireland that he’s remembered for there to this day. Cromwell ends far too early to touch any of that material sadly. Granted, there’s only so much you can put into a single film like this, but maybe instead of Cromwell the film should have been titled Charles I, because I think he’s more central to the film’s events than Cromwell is. That’s all aside from the other simplifications of the actual history, making Cromwell’s early role in the war larger than it actually was and doing weird stuff with the chronology.
Cromwell kind of reminds me of Richard II, about another king of England who tried to invade Ireland by taking money from people who got pissed off at him and killed him. All the more so since Shakespeare also wasn’t that concerned with historical accuracy, himself fucking around with timelines, events, and entire characters to tell the story he wanted: if he hadn’t died in the reign of Charles’ father King James, Shakespeare probably could have written a Charles I that might have been something like this in terms of the story structure.
But then character motivation is also hard to tell at times, maybe partly because of this compressed timeline. Why did the king agree to execute his buddy the Earl of Stafford, for example? That was a major event leading up to the war, but here it takes about two minutes in the film for the king to sign that warrant, and it’s not clear really why or how he was made to agree to it when it’s extensively documented in real life. The film’s battle tactics don’t make a lot of sense either as they play out, but since I’m not at all a military history guy I can’t say much about that, except that that Battle of Naseby I wrote about back in my review of King Crimson’s Lizard, partly a concept album about that battle, is also featured in this film. They even have Prince Rupert himself here, played by Timothy Dalton years before his James Bond fame:
I’m still not a fan of either this film or of Lizard, but damn if there isn’t some good acting here at least. Despite my problems with it, I think Cromwell is worth watching if only to see Richard Harris being really pissed off for an entire movie and to hear Alec Guinness talking about his authority and divine right, rolling his Rs in a way I could never get down to the disappointment of my Spanish teacher at grade school. Both were legends, and of course in any one of these clips you’ll see comments like “Dumbledore kills Obi-wan”, so hopefully the kids are getting to know their deeper bodies of work. The film also does at least address some of the struggle around whether countries need kings at all, with even a little mention of the proto-socialist Leveller movement that Parliament’s leadership crushed (though if this had gotten a full miniseries treatment like I, Claudius, that could and should have had near a full episode dedicated to it.)
I can’t address the religious controversy stuff too much, since I don’t have a dog in that race either, but I know the film glosses over a lot of both the religious and legal aspects of the conflict between king and Parliament. For a nice overview of both, I recommend Historia Civilis’ videos on YouTube here and here. The trial of Charles I was especially significant in creating a sort-of precedent, even if Charles’ son Charles II did end up coming back and blowing up the English Commonwealth shortly after when he won back his father’s throne in 1660 — even then, he was never able to exercise the kind of absolute authority his father attempted to grab.
Though considering his reputation as the Party King, Charles II might just have been too concerned with getting piss drunk with his many mistresses to care about that authority, but he was wise not to try to take it anyway since neither the common people nor the lords were putting up with an arbitrary monarch anymore, and especially not a Catholic one (see Charles II’s brother James II, who became king after Charles’ death because all his royal brother’s kids were bastards — remember those many mistresses — but who was also a barely secret Catholic and ended up ousted in favor of his possibly gay Dutch Protestant son-in-law. History takes some strange turns.)
Now that’s some diplomacy. I’d take Luxembourg, seems like a nice place.
Anyway, I said it would be a slow month, but I think when I get deep into a depressive state, on a long low end of that wave like I feel now, I always end up writing a lot more than usual. It’s the best distraction I have outside of work, and lack of sleep probably helps. Don’t take me as a role model, kids. Until next time, whether it’s more anime, history, or No Man’s Sky, I hope you’ll return.


Formed in 2009, the Archive Team (not to be confused with the archive.org Archive-It Team) is a rogue archivist collective dedicated to saving copies of rapidly dying or deleted websites for the sake of history and digital heritage. The group is 100% composed of volunteers and interested parties, and has expanded into a large amount of related projects for saving online and digital history.






























































