sexta-feira, 11 de abril de 2014

As monarquias planejam seus Chefes de Estado



Exemplo de educação ao Imperador Dom Pedro II do Brasil.

"Instruções para serem observadas pelos Mestres do Imperador na Educação Literária e Moral do Mesmo Augusto Senhor".

Artigo 1.

Conhece-te a ti mesmo. Esta máxima... servirá de base ao sistema de educação do Imperador, e uma base da qual os Mestres deverão tirar precisamente todos os corolários, que formem um corpo completo de doutrinas, cujo estudo possa dar ao Imperador idéias exatas de todas as coisas, a fim de que Ele, discernindo sempre do falso o verdadeiro, venha em último resultado a compreender bem o que é a dignidade da espécie humana, ante a qual o Monarca é sempre homem, sem diferença natural de qualquer outro indivíduo humano, posto que sua categoria civil o eleve acima de todas as condições sociais.

Artigo 2.

Em seguimento, os Mestres, apresentando ao Seu Augusto Discípulo este planeta que se chama terra, onde nasce, vive e morre o homem, lhe irão indicando ao mesmo tempo as relações que existem entre a humanidade e a natureza em geral, para que o Imperador, conhecendo perfeitamente a força da natureza social, venha a sentir, sem o querer mesmo, aquela necessidade absoluta de ser um Monarca bom, sábio e justo, fazendo-se garbo de ser o amigo fiel dos Representantes da Nação e o companheiro de todas as influências e homens de bem do Pais.

Artigo 3.

Farão igualmente os Mestres ver ao Imperador que a tirania, a violência da espada e o derramamento de sangue nunca fizeram bem a pessoa alguma...

Artigo 4.

Aqui deverão os Mestres se desvelar para mostrarem ao Imperador palpavelmente o acordo e harmonia da Religião com a Política, e de ambas com todas as ciências; porquanto, se a física estabelece a famosa lei da resistência na impenetrabilidade dos corpos, é verdade também que a moral funda ao mesmo tempo a tolerância e o mútuo perdão das injúrias, defeitos e erros; essa tolerância ou mútuo perdão, sobre revelar a perfeição do Cristianismo, revela também os quilates das almas boas nas relações de civilidade entre todos os povos, seja qual for sua religião e a forma do seu governo...

Artigo 5.

Lembrem-se pois os Mestres que o Imperador é homem; e partindo sempre dessa idéia fixa, tratem de lhe dar conhecimentos exatos e reais das coisas, sem gastarem o tempo com palavras e palavrões que ostentam uma erudição estéril e prejudicial, pois de outra forma virá o seu discípulo a cair no vicio que o Nosso Divino Redentor tanto combateu no Evangelho, quando clamava contra os doutores que invertiam e desfiguravam a lei, enganando as viúvas e aos homens ignorantes com discursos compridos e longas orações, e se impondo de sábios, embora sendo apenas uns pedantes faladores.

Artigo 6.

Em conseqüência os Mestres não façam o Imperador decorar um montão de palavras ou um dicionário de vocábulos sem significação, porque a educação literária não consiste decerto nas regras da gramática nem na arte de saber por meio das letras; em conseqüência os Mestres devem limitar-se a fazer com que o Imperador conheça perfeitamente cada objeto de qualquer idéia enunciada na pronunciação de cada vocábulo...

Artigo 7.

Julgo portanto inútil dizer que as preliminares de qualquer ciência devem conter-se em muito poucas regras, assim como os axiomas e doutrinas gerais. Os Mestres não gastem o tempo com teses nem mortifiquem a memória do seu discípulo com sentenças abstratas; mas descendo logo às hipóteses, classifiquem as coisas e idéias, de maneira que o Imperador, sem abraçar nunca a nuvem por Juno, compreenda bem que o pão é pão e o queijo é queijo.

Assim, por exemplo, tratando das virtudes e vícios, o Mestre de Ciências Morais deverá classificar todas as ações filhas da soberba distinguindo-as sempre de todas as ações opostas que são filhas da humildade. E não basta ensinar ao Imperador que ohomem não deve ser soberbo, mas é preciso indicar-lhe cada ação, onda exista a soberba, pois se assim não o fizer, bem pode acontecer que o Monarca venha para o futuro a praticar muitos atos de arrogância e altivez, supondo mesmo que tenha feito ações meritórias e dignas de louvor, e isto por não ter, em tempo, sabido conhecer a diferença entre a soberba e a humildade.

Artigo 8.

Da mesma sorte, tratando-se das potências e das forças delas, o Mestre de ciências físicas fará uma resenha de todos os corpos computando os grãos de força que tem cada um deles, para que venha o Imperador a compreender que o poder monárquico se limita ao estudo e observância das leis da Natureza... e que o Monarca é sempre homem e um homem tão sujeito, que nada pode contra as leis da Natureza feitas por Deus em todos os corpos, e em todos os espíritos.

Artigo 9.

Em seguimento ensinarão os Mestres ao Imperador que todos os deveres do Monarca se reduzem a sempre animar a Indústria, a Agricultura, o Comércio e as Artes; e que tudo isto só se pode conseguir estudando o mesmo Imperador, de dia e de noite, as ciências todas, das quais o primeiro e principal objeto é sempre o corpo e a alma do homem; vindo portanto a achar-se a Política e a Religião no amor dos homens. E o amor dos homens é que é o fim de todas as ciências; pois sem elas, em vez de promoverem a existência feliz da humanidade, ao contrário promovem a morte.

Artigo 10.

Entendam-me porém os Mestres do Imperador. Eu quero que o meu Augusto Pupilo seja um sábio consumado e profundamente versado em todas as ciências e artes e até mesmo nos ofícios mecânicos, para que ele saiba amar o trabalho como principio de todas as virtudes, e saiba igualmente honrar os homens laboriosos e úteis ao Estado. Mas não quererei decerto que Ele se faça um literato supersticioso para não gastar o tempo em discussões teológicas como o Imperador Justiniano; nem que seja um político frenético para não prodigalizar o dinheiro e o sangue dos brasileiros em conquistas e guerras e construção de edifícios de luxo, como fazia Luís XIV na França, todo absorvido nas idéias de grandeza; pois bem pode ser um grande Monarca o Senhor D. Pedro II sendo justo, sábio, honrado e virtuoso e amante da felicidade de seus súditos, sem ter precisão alguma de vexar os povos com tiranias e violentas extorsões de dinheiro e sangue.

Artigo 11.

Sobretudo, recomendo muito aos Mestres do Imperador, hajam de observar quanto Ele é talentoso e dócil de gênio e de muita boa índole. Assim não custa nada encaminhar-lhe o entendimento sempre para o bem e verdade, uma vez que os Mestres em suas classes respectivas tenham com efeito idéias exatas da verdade e do bem, para que as possam transmitir e inspirar ao seu Augusto Discípulo.

Eu não cessarei de repetir aos Mestres que não olhem para os livros das Escolas, mas tão somente para o livro da Natureza, corpo e alma do homem; porque fora disto só pode haver ciência de papagaio ou de menino de escola, mas não verdade nem conhecimento exato das coisas, dos homens, e de Deus.

Artigo 12.

Finalmente, não deixarão os Mestres do Imperador de lhe repetir todos os dias que um Monarca, toda a vez que não cuida seriamente dos deveres do trono, vem sempre a ser vitima dos erros, caprichos e iniqüidades dos seus ministros, cujos erros, caprichos e iniqüidades são sempre a origem das revoluções e guerras civis; e então paga o justo pelos pecadores, e o Monarca é que padece, enquanto que seus ministros sempre ficam rindo-se e cheios de dinheiro e de toda sorte de comodidades. Por isso cumpre absolutamente ao Monarca ler com atenção todos os jornais e periódicos da Corte e das Províncias e, além disto, receber com atenção todas as queixas e representações que qualquer pessoa lhe fizer contra os ministros de Estado, pois só tendo conhecimento da vida pública e privada de cada um dos seus ministros e Agentes é que cuidará da Nação. Eu cuido que não é necessário desenvolver mais amplamente estas Instruções na certeza de que cada um dos Mestres do Imperador lhe adicionará tudo quanto lhe ditarem as circunstâncias à proporção das doutrinas que no momento ensinarem. E confio grandemente na sabedoria e prudência do Muito Respeitável Senhor Padre Mestre Frei Pedro de Santa Mariana, que devendo ele presidir sempre a todos os atos letivos de Imperador como seu Aio e Primeiro Preceptor, seja o encarregado de pôr em prática estas Instruções, uniformizando o sistema da educação do Senhor Dom Pedro II, de acordo com todos os outros Mestres do Mesmo Augusto Senhor".

Paço da Boa Vista no Rio de Janeiro, 2 de dezembro de 1838


Marquês de Itanhaém - Tutor da Família Imperial

COPYRIGHT © 

Copyright © construindohistoriahoje.blogspot.com.br Você pode republicar este artigo ou partes dele sem solicitar permissão, contanto que o conteúdo não seja alterado e seja claramente atribuído a “Construindo História Hoje”. Qualquer site que publique textos completos ou grandes partes de artigos de Construindo História Hoje tem a obrigação adicional de incluir um link ativo para http:/www.construindohistoriahoje.blogspot.com.br. O link não é exigido para citações. A republicação de artigos de Construindo História Hoje que são originários de outras fontes está sujeita às condições dessas fontes e seus atributos de direitos autorais.

Você quer saber mais? 

(E-BOOKS PARA DOWNLOAD)

(REDE SOCIAL BADOO)

(AGREGADOR DELICIOUS)

(COMUNIDADE CHH NO DIHITT)

(COMUNIDADE DE NOTÍCIAS DIHITT)

(PÁGINA NO TUMBLR)

(REDE SOCIAL ASK)

(REDE SOCIAL VK)

(REDE SOCIAL STUMBLEUPON)

(REDE SOCIAL LINKED IN)

(REDE SOCIAL INSTAGRAM)

(ALBUM WEB PICASA)

(REDE SOCIAL FOURSQUARE)

(ALBUM NO FLICKR)


(CANAL NO YOUTUBE)

(MINI BLOGUE TWITTER)

(REDE SOCIAL BEHANCE)

(REDE SOCIAL PINTEREST)

(REDE SOCIAL MYSPACE)

(BLOGUE WORDPRESS HISTORIADOR NÃO MARXISTA)

(BLOGUE LIVE JOURNAL LEANDRO CLAUDIR)

(BLOGUE BLOGSPOT CONSTRUINDO PENSAMENTOS HOJE)

 (BLOGUE WORDPRESS O CONSTRUTOR DA HISTÓRIA)

(BLOGUE BLOGSPOT DESCONSTRUINDO O CAPITALISMO) 

 (BLOGUE BLOGSPOT DESCONSTRUINDO O COMUNISMO) 

(BLOGUE BLOGSPOT DESCONSTRUINDO O NAZISMO)

 (BLOGUE WORDPRESS CONSTRUINDO HISTÓRIA HOJE)

(BLOGUE BLOSPOT CONTATO)

 (REDE SOCIAL FACEBOOK CONSTRUINDO HISTÓRIA HOJE)

(REDE SOCIAL FACEBOOK LEANDRO HISTORIADOR)

(REDE SOCIAL GOOGLE + CONSTRUINDO HISTÓRIA HOJE) 

(MARCADOR DICAS DE LEITURA) 

(MARCADOR ARQUEOLOGIA) 

(MARCADOR ÁFRICA)

(MARCADOR ANTIGUIDADE)

(MARCADOR PERSONAGENS DA HISTÓRIA) 

(MARCADOR HISTÓRIA DO BRASIL) 

(MARCADOR FÉ) 

(MARCADOR COMUNISMO) 

domingo, 6 de abril de 2014

Charles I, second Stuart King of England.


Charles I in three positions - multiple portrait by Sir Anthony Van Dyck (1599-1641).

Charles I was born in Fife on 19 November 1600, the second son of James VI of Scotland (from 1603 also James I of England) and Anne of Denmark.

He became heir to the throne on the death of his brother, Prince Henry, in 1612. He succeeded, as the second Stuart King of England, in 1625.

Controversy and disputes dogged Charles throughout his reign. They eventually led to civil wars, first with the Scots from 1637 and later in England (1642-46 and 1648). The wars deeply divided people at the time, and historians still disagree about the real causes of the conflict, but it is clear that Charles was not a successful ruler.

Charles was reserved (he had a residual stammer), self-righteous and had a high concept of royal authority, believing in the divine right of kings. He was a good linguist and a sensitive man of refined tastes.

He spent a lot on the arts, inviting the artists Van Dyck and Rubens to work in England, and buying a great collection of paintings by Raphael and Titian (this collection was later dispersed under Cromwell). Charles I also instituted the post of Master of the King's Music, involving supervision of the King's large band of musicians; the post survives today.

His expenditure on his court and his picture collection greatly increased the crown's debts. Indeed, crippling lack of money was a key problem for both the early Stuart monarchs.

Charles was also deeply religious. He favoured the high Anglican form of worship, with much ritual, while many of his subjects, particularly in Scotland, wanted plainer forms.

Charles found himself ever more in disagreement on religious and financial matters with many leading citizens. Having broken an engagement to the Spanish infanta, he had married a Roman Catholic, Henrietta Maria of France, and this only made matters worse.

Although Charles had promised Parliament in 1624 that there would be no advantages for recusants (people refusing to attend Church of England services), were he to marry a Roman Catholic bride, the French insisted on a commitment to remove all disabilities upon Roman Catholic subjects.

Charles's lack of scruple was shown by the fact that this commitment was secretly added to the marriage treaty, despite his promise to Parliament.

Charles had inherited disagreements with Parliament from his father, but his own actions (particularly engaging in ill-fated wars with France and Spain at the same time) eventually brought about a crisis in 1628-29.

Two expeditions to France failed - one of which had been led by Buckingham, a royal favourite of both James I and Charles I, who had gained political influence and military power.

Such was the general dislike of Buckingham, that he was impeached by Parliament in 1628, although he was murdered by a fanatic before he could lead the second expedition to France.

The political controversy over Buckingham demonstrated that, although the monarch's right to choose his own Ministers was accepted as an essential part of the royal prerogative, Ministers had to be acceptable to Parliament or there would be repeated confrontations.

The King's chief opponent in Parliament until 1629 was Sir John Eliot, who was finally imprisoned in the Tower of London until his death in 1632.

Tensions between the King and Parliament centred around finances, made worse by the costs of war abroad, and by religious suspicions at home. Charles's marriage was seen as ominous, at a time when plots against Elizabeth I and the Gunpowder Plot in James I's reign were still fresh in the collective memory, and when the Protestant cause was going badly in the war in Europe.

In the first four years of his rule, Charles was faced with the alternative of either obtaining parliamentary funding and having his policies questioned by argumentative Parliaments who linked the issue of supply to remedying their grievances, or conducting a war without subsidies from Parliament.

Charles dismissed his fourth Parliament in March 1629 and decided to make do without either its advice or the taxes which it alone could grant legally.

Although opponents later called this period 'the Eleven Years' Tyranny', Charles's decision to rule without Parliament was technically within the King's royal prerogative, and the absence of a Parliament was less of a grievance to many people than the efforts to raise revenue by non-parliamentary means.

Charles's leading advisers, including William Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Earl of Strafford, were efficient but disliked.

For much of the 1630s, the King gained most of the income he needed from such measures as impositions, exploitation of forest laws, forced loans, wardship and, above all, ship money (extended in 1635 from ports to the whole country). These measures made him very unpopular, alienating many who were the natural supporters of the Crown.

Scotland (which Charles had left at the age of 3, returning only for his coronation in 1633) proved the catalyst for rebellion. Charles's attempt to impose a High Church liturgy and prayer book in Scotland had prompted a riot in 1637 in Edinburgh which escalated into general unrest.

Charles had to recall Parliament. However, the Short Parliament of April 1640 queried Charles's request for funds for war against the Scots and was dissolved within weeks.

The Scots occupied Newcastle and, under the treaty of Ripon, stayed in occupation of Northumberland and Durham and they were to be paid a subsidy until their grievances were redressed.

Charles was finally forced to call another Parliament in November 1640. This one, which came to be known as The Long Parliament, started with the imprisonment of Laud and Strafford (the latter was executed within six months, after a Bill of Attainder which did not allow for a defence), and the abolition of the King's Council (Star Chamber), and moved on to declare ship money and other fines illegal.

The King agreed that Parliament could not be dissolved without its own consent, and the Triennial Act of 1641 meant that no more than three years could elapse between Parliaments.

The Irish uprising of October 1641 raised tensions between the King and Parliament over the command of the Army. Parliament issued a Grand Remonstrance repeating their grievances, impeached 12 bisops and attempted to impeach the Queen.

Charles responded by entering the Commons in a failed attempt to arrest five Members of Parliament, who had fled before his arrival. Parliament reacted by passing a Militia Bill allowing troops to be raised only under officers approved by Parliament.

Finally, on 22 August 1642 at Nottingham, Charles raised the Royal Standard calling for loyal subjects to support him (Oxford was to be the King's capital during the war). The Civil War, what Sir William Waller (a Parliamentary general and moderate) called 'this war without an enemy', had begun.

The Battle of Edgehill in October 1642 showed that early on the fighting was even. Broadly speaking, Charles retained the north, west and south-west of the country, and Parliament had London, East Anglia and the south-east, although there were pockets of resistance everywhere, ranging from solitary garrisons to whole cities.

However, the Navy sided with Parliament (which made continental aid difficult), and Charles lacked the resources to hire substantial mercenary help.

Parliament had entered an armed alliance with the predominant Scottish Presbyterian group under the Solemn League and Covenant of 1643, and from 1644 onwards Parliament's armies gained the upper hand - particularly with the improved training and discipline of the New Model Army.

The Self-Denying Ordinance was passed to exclude Members of Parliament from holding army commands, thereby getting rid of vacillating or incompetent earlier Parliamentary generals. Under strong generals like Sir Thomas Fairfax and Oliver Cromwell, Parliament won victories at Marston Moor (1644) and Naseby (1645).

The capture of the King's secret correspondence after Naseby showed the extent to which he had been seeking help from Ireland and from the Continent, which alienated many moderate supporters.

In May 1646, Charles placed himself in the hands of the Scottish Army (who handed him to the English Parliament after nine months in return for arrears of payment - the Scots had failed to win Charles's support for establishing Presbyterianism in England).

Charles did not see his action as surrender, but as an opportunity to regain lost ground by playing one group off against another; he saw the monarchy as the source of stability and told parliamentary commanders 'you cannot be without me: you will fall to ruin if I do not sustain you'.

In Scotland and Ireland, factions were arguing, whilst in England there were signs of division in Parliament between the Presbyterians and the Independents, with alienation from the Army (where radical doctrines such as that of the Levellers were threatening commanders' authority).

Charles's negotiations continued from his captivity at Carisbrooke Castle on the Isle of Wight (to which he had 'escaped' from Hampton Court in November 1647) and led to the Engagement with the Scots, under which the Scots would provide an army for Charles in exchange for the imposition of the Covenant on England.

This led to the second Civil War of 1648, which ended with Cromwell's victory at Preston in August.

The Army, concluding that permanent peace was impossible whilst Charles lived, decided that the King must be put on trial and executed. In December, Parliament was purged, leaving a small rump totally dependent on the Army, and the Rump Parliament established a High Court of Justice in the first week of January 1649.

On 20 January, Charles was charged with high treason 'against the realm of England'. Charles refused to plead, saying that he did not recognise the legality of the High Court (it had been established by a Commons purged of dissent, and without the House of Lords - nor had the Commons ever acted as a judicature).

The King was sentenced to death on 27 January. Three days later, Charles was beheaded on a scaffold outside the Banqueting House in Whitehall, London.

The King asked for warm clothing before his execution: 'the season is so sharp as probably may make me shake, which some observers may imagine proceeds from fear. I would have no such imputation.'

On the scaffold, he repeated his case: 'I must tell you that the liberty and freedom [of the people] consists in having of Government, those laws by which their life and their goods may be most their own. It is not for having share in Government, Sir, that is nothing pertaining to them. A subject and a sovereign are clean different things. If I would have given way to an arbitrary way, for to have all laws changed according to the Power of the Sword, I needed not to have come here, and therefore I tell you ... that I am the martyr of the people.'

His final words were 'I go from a corruptible to an incorruptible Crown, where no disturbance can be.'

sábado, 5 de abril de 2014

Louis XVI de France


Louis XVI

Né à Versailles en 1754, mort en 1793, roi de France de 1774 à 1791, Louis XVI est le petit fils de Louis XV. Orphelin de père à onze ans et de mère à treize ans, il fut élevé par son précepteur Mgr de Coetlosquet et par le duc de La Vauguyon. Il reçut une éducation très conservatrice et très religieuse, au sein d’une cour où dominait la Marquise de Pompadour.

Ayant peu de goût pour la guerre, il se passionnait pour la chasse et les travaux artisanaux ( en particulier la serrurerie ). Le futur Louis XVI est intelligent, instruit, mais manque de caractère et sa timidité presque maladive lui fera adopter des attitudes hésitantes et contradictoires. Marié en 1770 à l’archiduchesse Marie-Antoinette, fille de François 1er empereur d’Autriche , il eut quatre enfants, mais deux mourront en bas-âge.

Sacré le 10 mai 1774, il souhaite rompre avec les habitudes de débauche de la Cour, et ce roi de vingt ans, vertueux, un peu maladroit s’attire en ce début de règne, les sympathies et l’affection du peuple. Il forme une nouvelle équipe gouvernementale avec Turgot aux finances. Cependant, il se refuse à effectuer les réformes modernistes proposées.

        Turgot fut renvoyé en mai 1776. Le Genevois Jacques Necker, fut nommé directeur général des finances en 1777, mais il ne parvint pas plus que son prédécesseur à imposer les réformes nécessaires et la publication en 1781 de son Compte-Rendu décrivant l’état exact des finances du royaume lui valut son renvoi.

La politique extérieure, permet de retrouver le prestige perdu par les défaites successives du règne précédent. La lutte des treize colonies d’Amérique obtient le soutien officiel du gouvernement. Louis XVI signe avec Benjamin Franklin un traité d’amitié en 1778, tandis que de jeune aristocrates comme La Fayette ou Rochambeau, s’engagent activement dans les mouvements de libération. Les Français apportent une aide réelle à Georges Washington. Cette politique menée également aux Indes et en Europe entraîne un déficit budgétaire important ( 1 milliard de livres ont été dépensées rien que pour l’indépendance américaine !)


Louis XVI et Benjamin Franklin

La crise financière se double d’une crise morale, politique et sociale. Les débordements et le gaspillage de la Cour, la baisse des revenus agricoles, le manque de réformes fiscales, font que le mécontentement populaire s’accentue porté par des oeuvres comme « le mariage de Figaro » de Beaumarchais et amplifié par des scandales comme l’affaire du Collier de la Reine 1785.

Le roi mal entouré, d’une indécision constante, ne sut pas faire face à la montée révolutionnaire. Face à une agitation grandissante charge Loménie de Brienne de convoquer les Etats Généraux. Dès la convocation faite, Louis XVI le renvoie et rappelle Necker.

Par un Edit du 8 août 1788, Brienne convoque les Etats Généraux pour le 1er Mai 1789. Lors de leur ouverture , le 5 mai 1789, Louis XVI refuse de répondre à la question du système de vote ( par ordre ou par tête ).


Arrestation aux Tuileries

Ce qui provoque une totale désillusion au sein de la bourgeoisie, et impuissant devant la contestation, il accepte alors la proclamation des Etat Généraux en Assembler Nationale, invitant la Noblesse et le Clergé à s’y associer.

Le 17 juin 1789 les Communes décident de se transformer en l’Assemblée Nationale, ce qui sonne le glas de l’absolutisme royal : la Révolution est en marche. Le 9 juillet l’Assemblée nationale se proclame constituante. Le 17 juillet 1789 Louis XVI renvoie Necker pour la seconde fois et le remplace par la baron de Breteuil, un contre-révolutionnaire notoire. Cette provocation ajoutée aux problèmes économiques rencontrés par les parisiens, déclenche les évènements de juillet.

En octobre le peuple se rend à Versailles pour ramener la famille royale à Paris, et le 14 juillet 1790 le roi prête serment de fidélité à la Nation durant la fête de la Fédération, mais la Constitution Civile du Clergé heurte sa conscience de chrétien.


Exécution de Louis XVI

Il décide de fuir à l’étranger mais est arrêté à Varennes la nuit du 20 au 21 juin 1791. Suspendu de ses fonctions durant un mois, il devient « rois des français » le 14 septembre 1791 après avoir juré fidélité à la Constitution.

sábado, 29 de março de 2014

Lord Protector Oliver Cromwell



Portrait of Oliver  Cromwell, 1599-1658.

Rose from obscurity to become the most successful military and political leader of the Civil Wars. Lord Protector of England from 1654-8, he was offered—and refused—the Crown itself.


Oliver Cromwell was born in Huntingdon on 25 April 1599 and baptised at the church of St John four days later. He was the second son of the ten children of Robert Cromwell (d.1617) and Elizabeth Steward (d.1654). The family estate derived from Oliver's great-grandfather, Morgan Williams, a brewer from Glamorgan who settled in London. He married Katherine, the sister of Thomas Cromwell, who later became chancellor to Henry VIII. Williams benefited from the confiscation of church lands at the Reformation and changed his family name to Cromwell in honour of his benefactor.

Oliver attended the free school attached to the hospital of St John in Huntingdon, where he was taught by Dr Thomas Beard, then spent a year at Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge. However, his university career was cut short by the death of his father in June 1617. He returned home to manage his family estate and to look after his widowed mother and seven unmarried sisters.

Militant Puritan

In August 1620, Cromwell married Elizabeth Bourchier (1598–1665), daughter of Sir James Bourchier, a London merchant. The marriage was long and stable and produced nine children. Cromwell and his growing family settled in Huntingdon. Thanks to connections between the Cromwells and the powerful Montagu family, he was elected MP for Huntingdon in the Parliament of 1628, where he became associated with the opposition to King Charles that culminated in the declaration of the Petition of Right in June 1628. At some time during the late 1620s, following a period of illness and depression, Cromwell experienced a profound spiritual awakening that left him with deep and uncompromising Puritan beliefs.

In 1631, Cromwell's fortunes were in decline. He was forced to sell nearly all his property around Huntingdon and to lease a farmstead at St Ives, where he worked as a farmer for five years. The tide turned in 1636 when Cromwell's childless and widowed maternal uncle Sir Thomas Steward died, leaving him a substantial inheritance, including a house next to St Mary’s Church in Ely and the position of collector of tithes in the two Ely parishes of St Mary's and Holy Trinity.

Cromwell's improved social status and his connections with local Puritans led to his nomination as a freeman of the borough of Cambridge and election as MP for Cambridge in the two Parliaments of 1640. During the first week of the Long Parliament, he made a passionate speech that called attention to the injustice of the imprisonment of John Lilburne, and during the following month he was prominent in parliamentary attacks on episcopacy. Although he was not regarded as a fluent speaker, Cromwell's passion and sincerity gained him a reputation as a solid supporter of opposition leaders such as John Pym and Cromwell's own cousin, John Hampden.


Cavalry Commander

On the outbreak of the First Civil War in August 1642, Cromwell took up arms for Parliament. He led one of the earliest military actions of the war when with 200 lightly-armed volunteers he prevented the King's men from carrying off the silver plate of the Cambridge colleges. Cromwell raised a troop of sixty horsemen and effectively secured Cambridgeshire for Parliament. In October 1642, Cromwell's troop joined the army of the Earl of Essex and was present during the later stages of the battle of Edgehill. The superiority of the Royalist horse impressed upon Cromwell the need for a well-trained Parliamentarian cavalry corps. Returning to East Anglia, he was careful to recruit only "godly, honest men" as his troopers and to lead them with firm discipline. His innate skills as a cavalry commander were in evidence at the skirmishing around Gainsborough in July 1643. Having helped to secure most of East Anglia for Parliament by the summer of 1643, Cromwell was appointed governor of Ely and promoted to colonel in the new Eastern Association army raised by the Earl of Manchester.


Cromwell at Marston MoorDetail from Cromwell at Marston Moor by Ernest Crofts

Rising to prominence in the Eastern Association, Cromwell attained the rank of lieutenant-general of horse in January 1644. He played a major role in Parliament's victory at Marston Moor, where his troopers routed both Prince Rupert's and Lord Goring's cavaliers. Rupert himself is said to have coined the name "Ironside" for Cromwell, which became popular with the army and was extended to his regiment. However, Cromwell's encouragement of religious zealots among his officers and men drew criticism from Major-General Crawford, a Scottish Presbyterian attached to the Eastern Association. Cromwell became increasingly critical of the leadership of the Earl of Manchester, and denounced him before the House of Commons in November 1644 for his unwillingness to take decisive action against the Royalists.

A leading supporter of the Self-Denying Ordinance, Cromwell was one of the few Members of Parliament exempted from resigning his commission in the army under its terms. He was officially appointed lieutenant-general of horse under Sir Thomas Fairfax in the New Model Army just before the decisive Parliamentarian victory at the battle of Naseby in June 1645, during which Cromwell routed Langdale's Northern Horse and rallied the Ironsides for a charge against the Royalist infantry that decided the outcome of the battle. Despite having no military training or experience prior to 1642, Cromwell was generally regarded as one of the greatest soldiers in England by the time he and Fairfax received the surrender of Oxford in June 1646.

Army Grandee

Cromwell supported the Agitators in the conflict between the Army and Parliament of 1647. He was a firm advocate of parliamentary authority but he lost patience with those Presbyterian MPs who seemed willing to risk another civil war rather than settle the soldiers' grievances honourably. Acting independently of Fairfax, and in close association with his son-in-law Henry Ireton, he used the threat of military force to oust the Presbyterian Eleven Members from the House of Commons in August 1647. However, Cromwell opposed Leveller demands for manhood suffrage ("one man, one vote") and other social and political reforms. He tried to adopt a conciliatory attitude towards the King, proposing to restore him to power in the interests of achieving a peaceful settlement. This alienated radicals in the Army and in Parliament, who came to regard Cromwell as a hypocrite motivated by his own self-interest. In any case, Cromwell's attempts to secure a peaceful settlement were frustrated by the King's refusal to compromise and by his negotiations to bring a Scottish army into England, thus provoking another civil war.

The Second Civil War

When war broke out In 1648, Cromwell marched to crush a Royalist uprising in South Wales while Fairfax dealt with the Royalists in Kent and Essex. Cromwell then went north to take command of Parliament's forces against the Duke of Hamilton's Engager army and their English Royalist allies. In August 1648, Cromwell led a daring campaign that resulted in the total defeat of the Scots at the battle of Preston. He then marched into Scotland and negotiated with the Marquis of Argyll to remove all Engagers and Royalist sympathisers from office in Scotland.

Cromwell was in the north clearing up the last Royalist military resistance during the dramatic events of November and December 1648, when Ireton and the council of officers resolved to prosecute King Charles, the "Man of Blood". Cromwell delayed his return to London until the day after the Army's enemies in Parliament had been ejected in Pride's Purge. He claimed to have known nothing of the design, but nevertheless expressed his approval of the purge. Having realised at last that Charles could not be trusted, and recognising that the Army was determined to avenge itself upon the King, Cromwell became a relentless supporter of the King's trial and subsequent execution in January 1649. He had come to believe that regicide was an act of justice and the will of God.

Ireland and Scotland


Cromwell in Ireland 1649-50Cromwell in Ireland 1649-50

In 1649, Cromwell suppressed the Leveller mutinies in the New Model Army and prosecuted John Lilburne, whom he held personally responsible for the unrest amongst the soldiery.

After meticulous preparations, Cromwell then took the army to Ireland (1649-50) where Royalist supporters of the Stuart dynasty had formed an alliance with the Irish Confederates. Cromwell's Irish campaign was a military success, and by the time he returned to England in May 1650, the provinces of Ulster, Leinster and Munster were substantially under the control of the English Commonwealth. However, Cromwell's reputation was indelibly stained by notorious massacres that took place during the attacks on Drogheda and Wexford in the autumn of 1649, which have lived on in Irish folk memory, making his name into one of the most hated in Irish history.

When Charles II was proclaimed King of Scots in Edinburgh with the support of the Covenanters, Fairfax declined to lead an army of invasion into Scotland and resigned his commission. Cromwell was appointed Captain-General and commander-in-chief of the Army in his place and marched into Scotland in July 1650. Although initially outmanoeuvred by Alexander Leslie, he succeeded in defeating the Scots at the battle of Dunbar (3 September 1650), which is regarded as the greatest of Cromwell's victories. After spending nearly a year trying unsuccessfully to persuade the Covenanters that Charles II was an unsuitable king for a godly nation, Cromwell lured Charles and the Scots into an attempt to invade England. Cromwell pursued from the north and decisively defeated the Scots and Royalists at the battle of Worcester on 3 September 1651, the anniversary of Dunbar and the last major battle of the civil wars.

The Commonwealth

After the execution of Charles I and the declaration of the republic in 1649, the English Commonwealth was governed by the so-called Rump Parliament and the Council of State. The Rump Parliament was regarded as an interim government and was expected to prepare for a permanent representative but divisions arose between factions in Parliament and in the Army over what form the new government should take.

When the military campaigns in Ireland and Scotland were over, Army leaders became increasingly impatient over Parliament's lethargy in formulating the new representative. Although Cromwell attempted to moderate the Army's more extreme demands, he too finally lost patience. On 20 April 1653, he led a body of musketeers to Westminster and forcibly expelled the Rump Parliament. His exact reasons for doing so are unclear; he may have come to believe that Parliament was planning to perpetuate itself. There were no plans for an alternative government in place and Cromwell made no attempt to take power himself.

The Rump Parliament was replaced by the Nominated Assembly, popularly known as "Barebone's Parliament", which first met in July 1653. Cromwell regarded the Assembly as a "Parliament of Saints" and expected it to bring righteous, godly government to the Commonwealth. The Nominated Assembly was the most radical constitutional experiment of the 1650s, but the legal and ecclesiastical reforms it tried to introduce were regarded as too extreme by moderates. In December 1653—less than six months after its inauguration—moderates manoeuvred to dissolve the Assembly and to hand power over to Cromwell, whom they regarded as having granted it to them in the first place.

Lord Protector


Cromwell-coat-of-armsProtectorate coat-of-arms

Headed by Major-General Lambert, the council of officers proposed a new constitution. In discussions with the officers, Cromwell made it clear that he did not want to be made king. Seeking to maintain links with the ancient constitution yet distance himself from the disgraced monarchy, Cromwell proposed a revival of the title "Lord Protector", which had precedents going back to the 15th century. Under the terms of the Instrument of Government, executive power now passed to an elected Lord Protector advised by a Council of State. Cromwell was declared Lord Protector for life and formally installed at Westminster Hall on 16 December 1653. His decision to accept the office of Protector alienated many republicans and religious radicals, who regarded it as a betrayal of the principles for which the civil wars had been fought. In April 1654, Cromwell moved into Whitehall Palace, the former residence of King Charles.

“No man rises so high as he who knows not whither he goes.”
Cromwell, as recorded in the memoirs of Cardinal de Retz
Domestic Policy

Despite opposition from many quarters, Cromwell held on to power throughout the 1650s by retaining the loyalty of the Army. He also tended to grant important positions in civil and military government to those with personal attachments to himself or who had reason to be grateful to him for their advancement. Senior army commands were granted to officers who had served with him during the civil wars, particularly those connected to his own family such as his son-in-law Charles Fleetwood and brother-in-law John Disbrowe. The dependence of the Protectorate régime upon a standing army in England, armies of occupation in Scotland and Ireland as well as a powerful navy led to unprecedented levels of taxation. Despite an aggressive foreign policy, Cromwell gradually reduced army numbers and levels of taxation, but this was never enough to satisfy his critics or to deal with arrears of pay in the army and navy.

Cromwell's overriding concern in domestic policy was the creation of a broadly-based national church with toleration of radical Protestant groups who remained outside it but were prepared to keep the peace. During the first year of the Protectorate, a central commission of clergy and laymen was established to examine candidates for the ministry ("Triers") and local commissions were appointed to eject ministers who proved unsuitable ("Ejectors"). Although Cromwell's religious policy made steady progress towards reconciliation among the Protestant sects, the emergence of the Quakers, who opposed all organised churches, was disruptive and alarming.

Foreign Policy

Within months of his inauguration as Protector, Cromwell negotiated a treaty to bring the first Anglo-Dutch war to an end, having never been in favour of war against a Protestant nation. However, his hopes of forming a grand alliance of the Protestant states of Europe came to nothing, and during 1654, Cromwell became involved in secret negotiations with the two great Catholic powers France and Spain.

The two nations were at war with one another and each sought an alliance with the Protectorate against the other. Cromwell finally opted for an alliance with France and secretly promoted the Western Design to attack Spanish colonies in the West Indies. The Anglo-Spanish War resulted in the seizure of Jamaica in 1655 and Dunkirk in 1658, but Cromwell's anti-Spanish foreign policy was criticised as damaging to English trade and commerce.

Miltary Rule

In September 1654, Cromwell summoned the First Protectorate Parliament, which was elected on a wider franchise than any previous parliament and which included MPs representing Scotland and Ireland at Westminster for the first time. Distrust between the Army leaders and civilian politicians became strikingly clear, however. Heated constitutional debates, amendments to the Instrument of Government aimed at strengthening Parliament's powers at the expense of the Protector's, and criticism of Cromwell's leadership by republican MPs prompted him to dissolve this Parliament at the earliest possible opportunity, in January 1655.

Following the Royalist insurrections in March 1655 (Penruddock's Uprising), Cromwell felt obliged to impose direct military rule rather than attempt to govern through another civilian assembly. He had already come to regard the failure of the Western Design in its principal objectives as a sign of God's displeasure at the nation's progress. Consequently, England and Wales were divided into twelve districts, each governed by a Major-General answerable directly to the Protector. The Major-Generals were charged not only with maintaining security but also with enforcing moral reform in the localities. The Rule of the Major-Generals proved deeply unpopular. Growing civilian disquiet and the need to finance military operations against Spain forced Cromwell to call the Second Protectorate Parliament in September 1656. Bowing to pressure from MPs who insisted that the Major-Generals were unconstitutional and against law and custom, Cromwell agreed to abolish the system in January 1657.

“King in all but Name”


Engraving of Oliver Cromwell19th century engraving of Matthew Noble's statue of Cromwell

The Protectorate gradually adopted the trappings of a monarchy. Cromwell was usually addressed as "your Highness" and by 1656 he was rewarding his loyal followers with knighthoods. In February 1657, a group of MPs headed by Lord Broghill presented a new constitution known as The Humble Petition and Advice under which Cromwell was formally offered the crown. This was primarily an attempt to stabilise the constitution under a civilian-led style of government. Cromwell's powers would be limited as king because they would then be defined by precedent. Furthermore, since the offer came from an elected Parliament, there could be no further doubts regarding the legality of the Cromwellian régime. However, after much agonising and in the face of strong opposition from republicans and army leaders, Cromwell finally decided to reject the offer, saying "I will not build Jericho again".

sexta-feira, 28 de março de 2014

Holocausto dos esquecidos


Durante a Segunda Guerra Mundial perderam-se 50 milhões de vidas humanas. Destas somente ouvimos falar dos 6 milhões de judeus. Quem eram os 44 milhões de esquecidos, entre combatentes, civis e aqueles considerados etnicamente inferiores?

“As políticas genocidas dos nazistas resultaram na morte de quase o mesmo número de gentios poloneses que o de judeus poloneses, tornando-os assim co-vítimas dum ‘Holocausto Esquecido’.”“The Forgotten Holocaust” (O Holocausto Esquecido), de Richard C. Lukas.

HOLOCAUSTO — o que significa? De acordo com alguns dicionários, foi o genocídio de Judeus europeus, efetuado pelos nazistas, durante a II Guerra Mundial. Isto poderia facilmente dar a impressão de que apenas os judeus sofreram e morreram às mãos dos nazistas. Todavia, satisfazem-se à justiça e à verdade quando se aplica o termo “Holocausto” apenas às vítimas judias da era nazista?

Declara o escritor Richard Lukas:

“A palavra Holocausto sugere, para a maioria das pessoas, a tragédia que os judeus enfrentaram sob os alemães, durante a II Guerra Mundial. Dum ponto de vista psicológico, é compreensível que os judeus prefiram, hoje em dia, que este termo se refira exclusivamente à experiência sofrida pelos judeus. . . . Todavia, por excluir-se outros do Holocausto, os horrores que os poloneses, outros eslavos, e os ciganos suportaram às mãos dos nazistas, são muitas vezes ignorados, se não forem esquecidos.”

Lukas também declara: “Para eles [os historiadores], o Holocausto limitava-se aos judeus, e eles, por conseguinte tinham muito pouco ou nada a dizer sobre os nove milhões de gentios, inclusive três milhões de [gentios] poloneses, que também pereceram na maior tragédia que o mundo já conheceu.”

A Gula de Hitler Pelo Espaço Vital

Quando os exércitos de Hitler invadiram a Polônia, em setembro de 1939, eles tinham ordens de executar a política de Hitler de conseguir o Lebensraum, espaço vital, para o povo alemão. Como declara Richard Lukas: “Para os nazistas, os poloneses eram Untermenschen (subumanos) que ocupavam uma terra que era parte do Lebensraum (espaço vital) cobiçado pela superior raça alemã.” Assim, Hitler autorizou suas tropas a matar “sem compaixão ou misericórdia, todos os homens, mulheres e crianças de descendência ou de língua polonesa. Apenas desta forma podemos obter o espaço vital de que necessitamos”.

Em setembro de 1939 tiveram início os implacáveis horrores cometidos contra o povo polonês. Hitler havia dito: “A guerra deverá ser uma guerra de extermínio.” Heinrich Himmler, sequaz de Hitler, declarou: “Todos os poloneses desaparecerão do mundo. . . . É essencial que o grande povo alemão considere que uma de suas principais tarefas é destruir todos os poloneses.” Assim, o Holocausto não visava apenas os judeus poloneses; visava “todos os poloneses”.

“Em todos os países ocupados, aplicava-se o terror. . . . Mas, na Polônia, todo o mundo foi submetido a tal brutalidade, e eram muito mais frequentes as execuções em massa, baseadas no princípio da culpa coletiva, porque todo polonês, sem levar em conta a idade, o sexo, ou a saúde, era membro duma nação condenada — condenada pelos arquitetos políticos do partido e do governo nazistas”, diz Catherine Leach, tradutora do livro polonês Values and Violence in Auschwitz. Ela declara que Himmler considerava os poloneses como uma raça inferior, a ser mantida em servidão.

“Mesmo depois da rendição da Polônia [em 28 de setembro de 1939], a Wehrmacht [exército alemão] continuou a levar a sério a admoestação de Hitler, feita em 22 de agosto de 1939, quando ele autorizou matar ‘sem compaixão ou misericórdia, todos os homens, mulheres e crianças de descendência ou de língua polonesa’.” Como podia o exército alemão e as SS ser motivados a tal assassínio sem compaixão? Por lhes ter sido profundamente inculcado o ensino da supremacia da raça ariana, e da inferioridade de todas as outras. Assim, como Lukas declara em The Forgotten Holocaust: “A teoria nazista do império colonial na Polônia baseava-se na negação de humanidade para os poloneses, que, depois dos judeus, eram os que Hitler mais odiava.”

“Política Demográfica Negativa”

No prefácio do livro Commandant of Auschwitz (Comandante de Auschwitz), disse o Lorde Russell, de Liverpool:

“Durante a guerra, é provável que nada menos de doze milhões de homens, mulheres e crianças dos territórios invadidos e ocupados tenham sido mortos pelos alemães. Numa estimativa conservadora, oito milhões deles pereceram nos campos de concentração. Dentre estes, nada menos de cinco milhões eram judeus. . . . O total real, contudo, jamais será conhecido.” Apenas à base de tais números, pelo menos sete milhões de vítimas não eram judias.

Outro testemunho é o de Catherine Leach, que escreve:

“A Polônia foi o primeiro país a ser submetido à ‘política demográfica negativa’ de Hitler, cujo intuito era preparar os amplos territórios do ‘Leste’ para uma recolonização alemã, e a Polônia sofreu as maiores perdas de vidas dentre todos os países ocupados — 220 por 1.000 habitantes. Fontes polonesas declaram que nada menos de 6.028.000 cidadãos poloneses. . . perderam a vida.”

Dentre estes, 3.200.000 eram judeus. Isso significa que quase 50% dos poloneses mortos não eram judeus.

Indisputavelmente, houve um “Holocausto Esquecido” de milhões de vítimas não-judias, notadamente de origem eslava. Estas incluem os milhões de russos assassinados pelos nazistas. Tais russos não tiveram escolha. Em razão da doutrina racial nazista, eles estavam inexoravelmente condenados à morte.

Todavia, tais estatísticas não levam em conta os milhares de alemães de origem não-judia que também sofreram quais vítimas do Holocausto por ousarem opor-se a Hitler e sua filosofia racista quanto à supremacia. Entre estes achavam-se milhares de católicos e pessoas de outras religiões, que se recusaram a colaborar com as pretensões militaristas de Hitler. Sim, dispersa por toda a Alemanha e pelos países ocupados pelos nazistas, havia milhares de pessoas que fizeram uma decisão deliberada que as levou aos campos de concentração, e, no caso de muitas, à morte de mártir.