55 Days

I saw the play 55 Days recently at Hampstead Theatre. I would certainly recommend this excellent piece by Howard Brenton if it comes round your way. It concerns the events and debates leading up to the trial ane execution of Charles 1 in 1648-9. Two issues occurred to me after seeing it. The first was the extent to which the key elements of British government were being shaped at that time, even though it was over 350 years ago. In particular there were the disputes over sovereignty between Parliament (at that time a purged and garrulous institution, rendered impotent by sectarian divisions), and the executive (then the King, of course). All the same issues of where authority sovereignty and power lie that we see today, especially under coalition, were laid bare. Of course, at the time, the protagonists were unable to fathom out how to grant authority to executive government when it was no longer either an hereditary monarchy or a directly elected body. It was only when it was realised, towards the end of the century, that executive government could derive its authority from Parliament that the problem was solved. But is does demonstrate how far ahead of the rest of the democratic world England was. The characters even discussed the possibility of a constitution coming into being and certainly, Cromwell and fairfax favoured a constitutional monarchy - a very modern concept. The second feature was the attitude of Charles towards his own position and ultimate demise. Brenton, I understand, has followed closely contemporary acounts so one assumes the words of his characters are accurate. Charles refused to recognise the authority of the court that condemned him and did not acknowledge the possibility that he, the sovereign, could commit treason. There was also a general sense that he saw himself as the 'embodiment' of the people so he could not betray them. In his words could we not hear the same pleas as those of Milosovic, Saddam Hussain, Mubarak and the like. It seems that the refuge of dictators behind the principle that they represent the state and so cannot be tried by that same state, has a very long history. In the end, of course, the military took over in England, with Cromwell declaring himself Lord Protector. How often do we see reforming revolutionaries become, themselves, dictators, every bit as undemocratic as those they have replaced. Are we seeing this in Egypt today ? Incidentally, before we leave the subject, a footnote on democracy. Sitting on either side of me were Simon Callow and Benedict Cumberbatch with their respective partners. It occured to me that the fact that I, a commoner, could be literally rubbing shoulders with members of the theatrical aristocracy, was indeed a demonstration of modern democracy.