An examination of the British republic of 1649-1660 which had so much to give but failed to deliver and the author look at the various factions during this period which gives a balanced viewpoint and looks at the later reign of Charles I

A failed experiment? ‘Republic’ by Alice Hunt

I grew up on tales from Australian and British history and like many history enthusiasts, was especially captivated by the medieaval and Tudor periods in Britain. The Civil War era of the seventeenth century was not of particualr interest – until I listened to the episodes of David Crowther’s excellent History of England podcast series recounting the events leading up to the Civil Wars and the Republican experiment. I realised that the events of this period are actually fascinating, due to the complexities of the political landscape and the radicalism of the debates.

So when I had the opportunity to review Alice Hunt’s new book about this time, I was all in.

Subtitled ‘Britain’s Revolutionary Decade 1649-1660, each chapter takes one year and examines in detail the events, characters, competing ideas of that twelve months. It begins with the execution of King Charles I, so no spoiler there. This event, in itself, was quite extraordinary: the sanctioned killing of an annointed king after a legal process found him guilty of betraying the sacred oaths taken at his coronation, and responsible for the bloody wars that divided the kingdom between ‘Royalists’ and ‘Parliamentarians’.

Then came the events that followed, all quite extraordinary in themselves: the sale of the royal family’s property and goods (a sort of vast garage sale that went on for years); the shocking violence in Ireland under Cromwell’s direction; the attempts at reconciliation between the opposing factions within the nation and within parliament; the various iterations of parliament itself; the moment when parliament offered Cromwell the chance to become king himself…just to name a few.

The author concludes that:

The civil wars did not set out to kill the king and bring down monarchy but, by their end, a republic settlement was not only entertained but also, by some, desired.

Republic p30

There are stories of some of the interesting personalities of the time, some known to me (like Christopher Wren or John Milton) and others not so much (Katherine Jones, Robert Boyle).

Amongst the explosive political and legal events were others that, while not made up of ‘grand gestures’ nevertheless had important and long-standing effects. The readmission of Jewish people to Britain was one such. The beginnings of the Quaker movement another. The rising interest in natural sciences, philosphy, language, clocks, telescopes, horticulture, laying the foundation for modern science as we think of it today. It was during this decde that ideas of representative democracy, closer to the sense we think of it today than the ancient Greek version, were widely written and talked about.

This detailed but accessible book, paints vivid images of the turmoil and chaos of this period, of how the idea of a republic was being worked out on the run.

Understanding this goes some way to modifying the astonishment I might otherwise feel, knowing that at the end of this ‘revolutionary decade’, another Stuart (Charles II) was invited back to take up the British throne once more.

On finishing this book, I did wonder if the current monarch, another Charles, will read it and if so, what he might make of the goings-on of this decade from the past? Are there lessons from these years that speak to the current threats and opportunities for the British monarchy today? Or for those who hope that their country will once again, become a republic?

Republic: Britain’s Revolutionary Decade is published in 2024 by Faber & Faber.
My thanks to the publishers and NetGalley for a review copy.

This is an excellent, well researched book on the years 1649 to 1660 covering Britain's only period of being a republic. A time when Cromwell as Lord Protector was practically king and which Royalists referred to as a 'travesty in an imitation of monarchy'. It was royalty with a difference.
The 1650s did bring us the start of Jewish settlements and the first Quakers and was a really progressive time in so many ways.
An extremely good read for history scholars and those interested in this period of history.
My thanks to Faber & Faber with NetGalley for this arc in exchange for an honest and unbiased review.

Republic is an engaging and thought-provoking biography of a revolutionary decade in British history.

It's not a period of history I knew much about beforehand, but I found the year-by-year narrative clear and easy to follow. I had a strong image of the historical figures involved thanks to Hunt's astute characterisation and analysis, which is founded on a huge amount of research and utilises the protagonists' own words. Capturing the personalities at the centre of the action is crucial to understanding how the seismic changes of the 1650s came to pass.

Despite this sharp focus, Republic still manages to encompass a broad and rich history of the period. Hunt weaves literature, science and religion into the political narrative, showing how the changes in state impacted every aspect of British culture.

Republic is the story of a real turning point in British history, vividly brought to life in all its complexity.

Republic is Alice Hunt's concise but wide-ranging year-by-year account of the rise and fall of the English Republic in the 1950s. As such, it draws cleverly on previous studies of the period and is impressive in its attempts to provide a relatively objective view of key figures such as Cromwell and Charles II, as well as identifying the significance of less known figures, such as Samuel Hartlib, and making a more balanced case for the tolerance (in some respects) of Cromwell's rule. Hunt also has a pithy turn of phrase: "The 1650s enabled opera, tolerated Jews and feared the Quakers" and offers a convincing view that the stability associated with the restoration of the royal family was neither inevitable nor really the case. A more important restoration is Hunt's emphasis on the progressivism of the time - the number of ideas (from a national health service to paper money) that Hartlib and his circle, many of whom went on (ironically) to found the Royal Society, had way ahead of their time is remarkable. On balance,Republic is very good at contesting and unsettling established wisdom. At times, such as in its discussion of Quakerism, it would have interesting to have learned more, but it is understandable that depth has sometimes to be sacrificed in order to get through the huge amount of material she has brought together and to keep things moving like a novel. Impressive.

Republic is a well-researched and meticulously written non-fiction book about Britain’s Integrregnum (1649-1660), the short-lived republic period.
The book has an excellent structure and covers all the years during the republic.
Hunt does not shy away from analysing the strengths and weakness of Britain’s experiment with being a republic - the prose is matter-of-fact, accessible and engaging, and yet, for the readers who are interested the regime under the leadership of Cromwell.
Alice Hunt is a an excellent scholar and takes her subject matter seriously. I am glad to have been introduced to Hunt’s work.
Thank you #netgalley and #faberandfaber for the eARC.