John Cook was tried and found guilty of high treason for his part in the trial of King Charles I. He was hanged, drawn and quartered with the radical preacher Hugh Peters and another of the regicides on 16 October 1660. Shortly before his death, aged 52, Cook wrote to his wife Mary:
"We fought for the public good and would have enfranchised the people and secured the welfare of the whole groaning creation, if the nation had not more delighted in servitude than in freedom."
This shows that masses are prisoners to their masters and can't be reasoned to achieve free will @Nilgiri After the death of cromwell and other prominent republicans died charles the second took over the country without an ease because the masses who fought against his father because of tyranny-murders-treason didn't fought against him.
People here attacked me for being against the sultan the monarchy I don't want anyone to violate my privilage.
Masses should be educated against these matters
The British monarchy (post Rome-Saxon-Viking-Norman "dark age" turbulence) never faced the serious challenges that Continental Europe did (and Turkiye even more so given its geography location).
This is largely due to Britain being an Island.
There was one major succession crisis dynasty war (War of the Roses), and that was about it.
In fact the concept of monarchy was more important than it being British per se (as illustrated by William of Orange episode).
Where I'm going with this was it was really the grave territorial losses the Ottoman empire faced (that Britain never did with regards to its home island) that brought about the massive decline in the Sultan role in Turkish perception. Hence the seeds of a republic were sown that the great Ataturk would bring to fruition.
That is also why Cromwell (seen as a radical compared to say Fairfax) and co (like John Cook) were unable to have the fire "catch" w.r.t having a non-monarchy given vast undercurrent for the institution they had facing them at that moment (England and Britain just had not faced what the Ottomans would face later in 19th and 20th century).
Retribution was in the eye for an eye format afterwards with much popular support.
Fairfax in comparison was recognised to not have gone after the King's neck, just wanted an increase of parliamentary power in the system which was granted over time in its particular unique British way....and so Fairfax was held in pretty high repute in the restoration period.
Cromwell head (his body was exhumed and decapitated in a "posthumous execution") would sit on a pike and then a giblet for 100s of years till it was interred in the 20th century sometime iirc.
The movie about him is pretty good..... it has Obi Wan Kenobi and Dumbledore in earlier roles of King (Charles) and Cromwell