Talk:Interregnum (England)

message: The wikipedia entry on republic has "a republic is a state whose political organization rests on the principle that the citizens or electorate constitute the ultimate root of legitimacy and sovereignty." This is a reasonable description of the Commonwealth before Pride's purge and, at a stretch, even of the Commonwealth as a whole - but surely not the Protecorate which was essentially an autocracy. I have changed it to say "parliamentary and military" but that still doesn't really cover the Protectorate of Richard Cromwell should rightly be called a heriditary monarchA Geek Tragedy 16:58, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Can't believe I didn't notice this.  Thanks.  Juppiter 23:40, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

text: The Commonwealth was a de jure republic. "Protectorate" is a historical term we use, during that time it was officially the Commonwealth with a "Protector" as head of state. I wouldn't call it a "monarchy" since there was no legal line of succession (no one had a "claim" on the office of Protector, Richard got it because his father nominated him). Many modern republics are as autocratic as the English Commonwealth under the Cromwells was but we don't call them monarchies. --Zagrebo (talk) 14:49, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Republican?

message: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=English_Interregnum&diff=83551572&oldid=83508054
This revert is absolutely right, but for the avoidance of any doubt, the issue isn't whether Fifth Monarchist means anything - it does, it's a term that refers to a nonconformist sect that took an apocalyptic view of Revelation and believed Christ's kingdon on earth was imminent. However, Cromwell was not a Fifth Monarchist. Although his faith displays certain millenarian tendencies his views never drifted to this extreme and he was certainly never directly associated with the Fifth Monarchists. Greycap 06:21, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for enlightening us! —Nightstallion (?) 01:20, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Fifth Monarchist

message: Well that is a bit rich. Charles I of Scotland was murdered in 1649 and the Scots had a de facto interregnum until we could crown Charles II at Scone in 1651 and then again because of Cromwell we were forced to put up with another load of it until 1660. More Anglocentricity using Stuart monarchs here. Always good to remember that the Kings of England had to be provided from the Kingdom of Scots, both Plantagenet and Tudor did not seem to have the right bed-skills to secure their successions. There are still plenty of Royal Stuarts around, even if they had to suffer the ignominy of deposition by 18th c. puritanism, at least their fertility has never been in question. :-) Brendandh 00:27, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: '''English''' Interregnum?

message: Why is the last section in this article called 'Historical Analysis'? Although the quote from the historian could be called 'Historical Analysis', the other two paragraphs are something completely different. The first is an event which took place in the period and the second general feeling towards the English Interregnum. Although both of the paragraphs are useful I don't feel they fall under the title of 'Historical Analysis'.
PeonyRoads (talk) 10:23, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical Analysis 

message: I have some concerns with some of the terminology used in this article. Remember, Wikipedia is supposed to give a neutral POV but the article uses terms like "usurped" and "regicide" which date from a time when overthrowing and killing monarchs was seen as monstrous and against the natural order of things. Charles I was overthrown and executed; it's not the 18th century any more.
Whilst I'm on the subject, isn't "interregnum" a bit misleading in this context since it should strictly refer to a Kingdom without a monarch? England and her subject states were, from 1649 until mid 1660 not Kingdoms. It's a little like calling France from 1793 until 1804 the "French interregnum". I know that the restored Stuart line created a legal fiction whereby Charles II had always been King since 1649 but we shouldn't be in the business of perpetuating legal fictions. Since the term is used to refer to the period I'm not suggesting that this page be removed but surely a redirect to English Commonwealth would be better? --Zagrebo (talk) 15:01, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I had changed "regicide and usurpation" to "death", largely for the reasons that you mention. I need to get in the habit of checking these talk pages before editing, as yours is an excellent suggestion, and I have implemented it. 2tuntony (talk) 18:48, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outdated Terminology 

message: I've incorporated some of the points made above. Also the lead was incorrect in suggesting that Cromwell began ruling immediately after Charles's execution. There is now more consistency between this and the Commonwealth of England article. Straw Cat (talk) 14:14, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Corrections to lead 

message: :The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 18:11, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Interregnum (England) →  – The period was called the Interregnum by loyalists all across the British Isles and the period affected all 3 Kingdoms. I would also like to make this article an overview article, and have the Commonwealth of England article focus more on England. Regards, Rob (talk) 15:43, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

text: The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal.  Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
After extensive discussions at Talk:Commonwealth of England I have moved this article back to its previous name Interregnum (England) please see that talk page for details of this discussion. -- PBS (talk) 17:58, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested Move