Thread by @MrGoldstein7

Oliver Cromwell, like his ancestors, was a tool of the Stanleys. #Cromwell's mother is scrubbed everywhere, and we are supposed to believe she didn't know who her parents were.

We are supposed to believe she was a Steward. But thepeerage com admits her grandfather was a Stuart from Scotland, not a Steward, so they don't hide this very well. These are the Stuarts, baronets, related to the Ingoldsbys, Palmers, Worsleys, and Sanders.

Through the Worsleys, they are related to the Nevilles. The Nevilles link us to the Windsors, Bacons (yes, those Bacons), and . . . Stanleys.

In the Cromwell line, Oliver comes from the Cromwells who also produced Thomas Cromwell, Henry VIII's Chancellor of the Exchequer and Earl of Essex. Oliver was a cousin of the Earls of Ardglass, and is related to the Seymours, Willoughbys, Flemings, and Russells.

Cromwell is sold as “middle gentry” and as a Puritan, but both are lies. They admit his grandfather was the richest landowner in Huntingdonshire, but assure us that his father was of “modest means”. The usual sob story.

They also admit he was not brought up a Puritan and that he went to Cambridge, but try to tell us his college, Sidney Sussex, was a recently founded college “with a strong Puritan ethos”. No it wasn't.

Its founder the Countess of Sussex was Protestant, but the college was not Puritan at all. Dissenters weren't even allowed to matriculate at either Oxford or Cambridge, at any of the colleges.

Besides, Puritanism wasn't an “ethos”. It wasn't even a real movement. Like Marxism later, it was nothing more than an Intelligence project.

For now it is enough to say that Cromwell was a Puritan in one sense: all top Puritans were Intel assets, and Cromwell was an Intel asset. Puritanism was both his project and his cover.

Puritanism was simply an extension of Calvinism, taken several steps further to cause more dissension and to allow more splintering of Christianity.

Mainly it was used as a further tool against Rome, since job one was blocking the southern Phoenicians like the Medicis, Bourbons, etc, from regaining any foothold in Britain.

To divert you away from discovering any of that, we are told nothing is known of the first 40 years of his life. Right. But they do admit Cromwell went to Lincoln's Inn, though they say his records are lost. That's convenient.

This connects him again to the Nevilles, since Lincoln's Inn was originally on their estates.

We also know Cromwell married a Bourchier, daughter of Sir James Bourchier, a wealthy London leather merchant with extensive lands in Essex. Wiki and thepeerage scrubs all links out from the Bourchiers, but they were actually Earls of Essex and Earls of Bath.

Funny that the history books don't bother to tell you that when talking about Cromwell.

Henry Bourchier, the 1st Earl of Essex had married Isabella #Plantagenet in 1467. She later married Sir Thomas Grey, whose cousin was the Earl of Kent. Isabella was the daughter of a York, which is a bit confusing, but her husband Thomas was also a Neville.

The Plantagenets didn't die out. The Bourchiers were Plantagenets, through Isabella.
The 1st Earl of Essex, Henry Bourchier, had a son Humphrey, who became the 1st Lord Bourchier of Cromwell in 1461. So the Cromwells and Bourchiers were connected long before Oliver married one.

This Humphrey married Joan Stanhope, daughter of Maud de Cromwell. Maud's brother was the Baron Ralph de Cromwell, Lord High Treasurer under Henry VI. He is now sold as a Yorkist, but he was more likely a Lancastrian. As a banker, he was probably another mole of the Komnenes.

Also interesting is that the 1st Baron de Cromwell married Maud de Bernake, the daughter of a Berkeley, Baron Marmion. [also related to the Earls of Derby.] This should remind you of banker Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve under Obama. Some things never change.

We are supposed to believe that Oliver Cromwell finally discovered Puritanism at age 39. More likely he was finally assigned his first major project (that we know of).

Two years later, in 1640, he was an MP in the Long Parliament, standing for Cambridge, though we aren't told why Cambridge.

They do however admit that he was mysteriously linked to a set of aristocrats in the House of Lords, including the Earls of Essex, Warwick, and Bedford, the St. Johns, and the Viscount of Saye and Sele.

They forget to tell you why he was connected to the Earl of Essex, but I just did: he was linked to him through his wife, since the Earl of Essex was a Bourchier. Warwick was Robert Rich, which again probably links us to the bankers and the Komnenes.

The Riches are scrubbed, but they were likely bankers from Germany, previously Reichs, and my guess is they lead us to Jagiellons, Vasas, or the like. Bedford was a Russell, who links us back to John of Gaunt.

The Viscount Saye and Sele was a Fiennes, who links us to the Beauchamps, earlier Earls of Warwick; and through Fiennes' wife we link to the Spencers.

Fiennes was also a descendant of the sister of William of Wykeham (Longe), who came out of nowhere in the time of Edward III to become Bishop of Winchester, Lord Chancellor, founder of New College, Oxford, and one of the richest men in England.

So, finding Oliver Cromwell linked to these people is informative, to say the least. As “middle gentry of modest means”, Cromwell had no standing to be hanging out with dukes and earls. So this is just another sign of the project, and another indication Cromwell was an agent.

There is no chance these Lords were serious Puritans, and we can be sure they promoted it only as a wedge against Rome.

Suddenly in 1642, Cromwell joined the Parliamentary Army and his bio came alive. But again, it is not clear what his qualifications were. Now 43, he had no military experience prior to that, other than local county militia. He arrived too late for the Battle of Edgehill.

But by later 1643 he was somehow already a colonel. I guess he was promoted for missing battles. By the next year he was already a general.

On the page for the First English Civil War, Cromwell isn't mentioned as a participant until 1645, when we are told he defeated Royalist positions at Basing House and Winchester. We then have to go to the Second English Civil War for more reports of him.

We have to scan down to 1648, for Cromwell's victory at Preston. After that we get a mention of him (previously) reducing fortresses in South Wales. In July he won at Pembroke in West Wales in another lightning victory, which of course looks suspicious.

And that's it. Not really a convincing report of an important and extended Civil War, even for an encyclopedia entry. Going in, one would expect Cromwell's heroics to be extended and detailed, but we get almost nothing.

@threadreaderapp unroll