CROMWELL, KING CHARLES I, AND THE ANUNNAKI SHADOW

By Sasha Alex Lessin, Ph.D. (Anthropology, UCLA)

1600–1640: ENGLAND BEFORE THE STORM 

England in the early 1600s seemed stable, but the land itself whispered discontent.

Wealthy landlords enclosed common fields; peasant families were pushed into hunger. Docks roared with commerce while the poor saw none of its promise. Women in markets murmured that God’s order felt broken, and the streets of London echoed with fear, hunger, and prophecy.

Inside the royal chapel, King Charles I knelt at elaborate altars, convinced he carried Heaven’s mandate.

I rule because God placed me here, he told himself. Disobedience is treason against Heaven.

But Parliamentarians whispered against him in taverns and counting houses.

One merchant muttered to another:
“He taxes us like sheep to be shorn. Yet calls it God’s will.”

THE RELIGION OF CONTROL—PURITANISM AND THE ENLIL-ITE DOMINATION-CONSCIOUSNESS  CLASHED

Puritan preaching grew among middling farmers, merchants, and dislocated workers. They demanded discipline, purity, obedience, and claimed England must purge corruption. Their sermons vibrated with Enlil/Yahweh consciousness—a cosmic hierarchy, stern judgment, boundaries, wrath.

A preacher thundered: “The Lord commands us to cast out corruption! He chastens England through the King’s sins.”

Yet those same sermons carried a paradox: They empowered ordinary people to judge rulers—a seed of partnership hidden within the dominator message Harman identifies.

CHARLES I’s “SACRED KINGSHIP” = F (YAHWEH/ENLIL or MARDUK/SATAN RULE)

Charles believed the monarchy flowed from God directly to him. He raised taxes without Parliament, imprisoned dissenters, and decorated churches with ritualistic ceremonies that Puritans despised. He told himself, The kingdom mirrors Heaven. I am its appointed star. Without hierarchy, chaos rules. This posture fits the archetype of the Enlil-ite “Divine Right” dominator model. Yet in your broader narrative, Charles’s inflexibility also suited Marduk’s typical governance-by-rivalry, the old Babylonian strategy: uphold hierarchy while turning rivals against one another.

1640–1642: ENGLAND UNRAVELED

Scotland rebelled against Charles’s religious impositions; he demanded that Parliament fund an army. Parliament refused and pressed for reforms.

Crowds surged in London, shouting for bishops to be removed. Women petitioned for an end to royal oppression. Dockworkers argued openly that God’s truth lived in the conscience, not the Crown.

A fisherman said to his friend: “The King prays fine prayers, but he doesn’t hear the cries of men like us.” Harman notes this moment as THE AWAKENING OF TRHE COMMON PEOPLE—no longer were they mere spectators; now they were actors.

1642: CIVIL WAR OPENED—AND CROMWELL STIRRED 

Oliver Cromwell entered the conflict as a minor gentleman from East Anglia. Few expected him to change the world.

On the field at Edgehill, as he watched his men falter under aristocratic cavalry, he thought, A new army is needed—disciplined, godly, equal under Heaven.

Cromwell forged the IRONSIDES–soldiers bound not by birth but conviction. They rose from villages, farms, workshops—Harman calls them a revolutionary social force.

1646–1647 CROMWELL’S COMMONER IRONSIDESE DEFEATED CHARLES’ ARMY 

With Charles captured, England faced its most significant question: What comes after monarchy?

Radical voices erupted:

Levellers demanded voting rights and equality before law.

Diggers proposed communal farming on common land.

Women prophets in sects such as the Ranters and Seekers claimed that God spoke through them.

Poor laborers argued for relief from crushing rent and wage exploitation.

A Digger woman addressed her village: “God made the earth for all. Why should one man fence what all must live from?” This was the Ninmah-Enki partnership current—cooperation, shared land, gender dignity—struggling to be born.

CROMWELL FEARED THE REVOLUTION BELOW HIM

When soldiers demanded universal male suffrage, Cromwell recoiled.

If all these demands flood forth, he worried, the kingdom will drown.

He believed the poor should be heard, but not govern.
Harman emphasizes that Cromwell feared the collapse of all hierarchy.

Yet his own army had awakened the people’s confidence—a contradiction he never resolved.

1649:  CROMWELL HEADED CHARLES OFF 

Charles faced trial. He refused to recognize the court.

“I am the King,” he insisted. “No earthly tribunal judges me.”

But ordinary men judged him now.

The axe fell on a cold January day.

The king’s death shattered the sacred aura of rulership. Harman stresses that for the first time, Europeans executed a king for violating his people’s trust.

But the radical dream did not fully bloom.

1649–1653: COMMONWEALTH AND CRACKDOWN 

England became a republic. Yet the republic feared its own masses.

Cromwell suppressed Irish uprising with brutal, Enlilite severity.

He crushed the Levellers.

He dispersed Parliament by force when it no longer served his vision.

He allowed limited religious tolerance but restricted social liberties.

He banned festivals. He censored dissent.

An officer wrote: “The Lord Protector is Moses and Pharaoh both.”

1649–1653: ORDINARY PEOPLE: THE TRUE REVOLUTIONARIES

Harman insists the deepest democratic impulses came from below, not from Cromwell or Parliament:

The Levellers advocated universal male suffrage, equality, and legal fairness.

The Diggers wanted land to be held in common. Poor urban workers resisted wage cuts and enclosure.

Sectarians insisted that inner illumination outweighed scripture.

Women prophets called for the authority of individual conscience, be they male or female.  A washerwoman complained to her neighbor: “Men argue of freedom. But they never ask how freedom weighs upon a woman’s shoulders.”

The voices of Levelers, Diggers, Women and Sectarians echoed the ancient partnership strain, Ninmah/Great Goddess countercurrent to both Enlilite monarchy and Cromwellian rule.

1653–1658: CROMWELL AS LORD PROTECTOR

When Cromwell ruled as Lord Protector, he balanced contradictory impulses:

Hierarchical (Enlil-ite/Marduk-ian), with military rule, centralized authority, censorship, suppression of popular movements. He enforced Reformist (partnership-leaning), religious tolerance for dissenting Protestants, curbing aristocratic privilege, opening trade, and expanding some parliamentary forms. He governed as a paradox—half liberator, half oppressor.

1660: AFTERMATH AND RETURN OF THE MONARCHY 

After Cromwell’s death, England faltered. Lacking the partnership-based vision the radicals dreamed of, the state drifted back toward monarchy. Charles II returned in 1660. But something irreversible had occurred: The people had tasted agency. Hierarchy would never again be absolute.

Harman’s core insight: The 1640s opened the door to a struggle between domination and cooperation, as we see now in America in the wall between Trump and Maga on the domination and America’s Progressives like AOC, Sanders, and Mamdani.

GENEALOGY / ANUNNAKI ANALYSIS OF THE FACTIONS

1. Charles I (Royalists / Cavaliers)

Archetype: Enlil-Yahweh royal dominator, but with Marduk’s strategy of sacred kingship and “avatarical legitimacy.”
Behavior: Hierarchy, ritual authority, top-down social order.
Goal: Preserve crown and class dominance.
Mode: Divine Right → Enlilite orthodoxy, with Mardukian manipulation through “I alone am God’s chosen.”

2. Cromwell (New Model Army / Parliamentarians)

Archetype: A hybrid—Enlilite moral rigidity + reformist leveling.
Behavior: Discipline, purity, repression; but also merit, mobility, and proto-democracy.
Goal: Godly order, reformed governance.
Mode: “God’s chosen warrior” → Enlilite zeal shaped by Marduk’s chaos-sowing (dismantling old aristocracy but replacing it with military rule).

3. Levellers / Diggers*/ Radical Sects
Archetype: Ninmah–Enki partnership consciousness.
Behavior: egalitarian landholding, women’s voices, religious freedom, conscience over hierarchy.
Goal: social equity, local autonomy, shared earth.
Mode: small, decentralized community-liberation, consistent with ancient partnership currents.
* Cromwell didn’t directly order troops to attack the Diggers, aka “True Levelers.” Still, he played a role in suppressing their activities in the 1640s, when they pushed for communal land ownership and agrarian reform and established a community on common land at St. George’s Hill in Surrey.  Cromwell, as a leader in the New Model Army and a key figure in the English Civil War,  was concerned about the Diggers’ radical ideas and their potential to disrupt social order. In 1649, local authorities and military forces, influenced by Cromwell’s views, sent soldiers against them. Cromwell did not personally lead these military actions against the Diggers, but his government supported the suppression of their movement.

The Poor, Women, and Dispossessed

Archetype: Human partnership movement, often suppressed.
Behavior: petitions, protests, pamphlets, communal farming.
Goal: survival, dignity, freedom.
Mode: bottom-up revelation and conscience, claiming the right to speak and govern.

SOCIAL GROUPS AND THEIR SPIRITUAL / ANUNNAKI ALIGNMENTS