The english Civil war

Beresford, William (8L)

Civil War Project William Beresford

Question 1
Scotland
In 1637, a riot erupted in Scotland due to the imposition of Anglican prayer books by King Charles I.
The Scots’ anger with religious policies raised tensions. In 1640, a Scottish army defeated Charles I’s
forces and tried to invade England, forcing Charles to recall Parliament to raise funds for his troops.
However, Parliament swiftly almost entirely stopped the king’s powers, leading to further conflict.
During the final battle of the English Civil War, the Battle of Worcester, most of the Parliamentarians
force was composed of Scottish troops.

Ireland
During the Civil War Ireland also played a large role. The Ulster Rebellion of 1641, led by annoyed
Catholic landowners, created a nationwide uprising. The colonial administration in Dublin responded
with massive brutal attacks on civilians, which also raised tension. The Catholic elite, also helped by
clergymen, created an alternative power base. The outbreak of the civil war forced King Charles I to
change his ideas toward Irish Catholics to be more cruel.

Religion
Many Protestants were angry because when Charles I married Henrietta Maria of France, they
introduced many elements of the Catholic church into Protestant churches (i.e. stained glass
windows and finery). This would have created a split between the few true Catholics and the large
amount of Protestants who hated these changes.

Divine Right
Charles I like James believed that because he was king no one could judge him except for God alone,
especially not parliament. This meant that parliament became irrelevant when he was making laws
so he could raise taxes without asking parliament. I think he truly believed that his dictatorship was
the only form of government that would work.

Taxation
Taxation policy helped cause the civil war as people were angry because Charles primarily raised
taxes to give himself more wealth, not for the benefit of the country. This is shown in the figure that
taxation increased the wealth of Charles from £600,000 to £900,000. Also, he created a ship tax
which meant that coastal boats were given to the army as tax thus strengthening his fleet. Though
he claimed that this was to ward off pirates, this was used to claim more money for his army.

Question 2
Civil War Project William Beresford
Civil War Project William Beresford

Question 3
I believe Charles lost the battle of Naseby for many reasons.
For example, the Parliamentarians had many more men. Sources suggest they outnumbered
the Royalists by 2:1, with around 6000 more troops. This meant it was effectively suicide for
Charles to put himself into a battle with that few troops.
Also, the New Model Army was more skilled, better trained and simply more professional
than Charles’ army. Recruitment was based on skill and not because of status.
The New Model Army also had better leadership than Charles and Rupert. Fairfax and
Cromwell’s military tactics were innovative and a little sneaky - like going round the hedge
to surprise the enemy and luring them into attacking!
So really it was a combination of all these factors which caused the Parliamentarians to win.
Civil War Project William Beresford

Question 4
Cromwell was a good commander as he quickly realized that the key to success was
motivated, well-disciplined and good quality troops. Motivation was based on the religious
belief and provided a zeal for the fight.
This gave Cromwell the template for the The New Model army. This superior force saw men
recruited based on their prowess and dedication rather than their name or wealth.
Cromwell ensured that his troops were properly trained and well disciplined. This was a
decisive difference to the opposing armies. He was also ruthless, permitting the massacre of
his enemies.
Civil War Project William Beresford

Question 5
I stand before you today to present my case against Charles I, a man who has plunged our
nation into darkness. The evidence before us is obvious, and I shall demonstrate that Charles
I is guilty of every crime he is being charged for.

1. Charles I does not recognize the court that is accusing him. Parliament do not agree
with his position as he is a prisoner.
2. Charles I used his power like an autocrat, dismissing Parliament at will and ruling
with supposed divine right. He was effectively a dictator running the country without
a parliament.
3. Because he created a Ship Money tax on coastal towns, despite the lack of any
imminent threat it shows his ideas were not for the benefit of his people. He clearly
wanted to increase his own wealth.
4. The Civil War, created from discontent by Charles I's rules resulted in the deaths of
two hundred thousand people. (This is four and a half percent of the population). His
failure and refusal to compromise with Parliament led to the civil war and the
bloodshed.
5. The Battles of Edgehill and Naseby showed how he was a poor military leader and
also demonstrated his arrogance.
In conclusion, Charles I's reign was marked by tyranny, bloodshed, and the suppression of
free speech. His guilt is undeniable, and justice means he should be accountable. He should
be known as the traitor that ruined England! His death hardly commentates for the massacres
in his name.
Civil War Project William Beresford

Question 6

In this essay I will discuss why Parliament won the English civil war, including factors such
as the strength of the army and the quality of leadership. I will then summarise it all in a
conclusion where I will disclose my own thoughts.
Charles I could be seen as the cause for his own defeat because he made bad choices when in
battle. This was most clearly shown at the battle of Naseby where his forces were massively
outnumbered and even at the end, he thought he could still go and fight again but had to be
pulled back by one of his lords because he would have been killed. This is evident from the
quote “Will you go upon your death, my lord?”. Also, Charles was greedy, out of touch and
largely unpopular. Raising taxes for your own benefit is never going to win much support.
This meant that his forces were unlikely to fight with as much conviction as those under
Cromwell.
Another key reason for the success of the Parliamentarians was a function of the respective
armies. It’s wrong to suggest that the forces were not evenly matched in size as at the battle
of Edgehill both sides had about 14000 troops. However, at the key battle of Naseby there
was a large disparity. There the Royalists had around 9000 men and the parliamentarians had
13,500 men. This can be explained by the casualties from the battle of Edgehill or because
Cromwell was better at recruiting troops. But most significantly it was because the Royalist
High Command were divided on strategy. So the King compromised and split his forces. This
was a critical error.
As for the armies, Cromwell’s forces were superior to the Royalists. The New Model Army
was better than Charles’s because it recruited people based on strength, religious conviction
and how good they were. They had better discipline and better training. The veteran soldiers
for the Royalists were typically recruited based of social status and not ability. This was a
significant factor.
Scotland also gave many troops to help with the Parliamentarians. These additional numbers
would have significantly helped. The Scottish soldiers were motivated with anger at Charles,
after the King attempted to impose a prayer book in Scotland (which had prompted a riot in
1637).
Other factors that probably played a part include the unpopularity of the King and the
monarchy. There was much anger aimed at Charles for his rule, with years of taxes going up
and the adding of the ship tax. Because of this people would be more willing to fight for
Cromwell than to fight with Charles.
Finally, it is worth mentioning that as the Parliamentarians controlled London (East Anglia)
they had access to all its resoursces especially - money and recruitment of soldiers. They
were able to raise money and men without difficulty. Also, the area that Parliament controlled
Civil War Project William Beresford

was rich in iron, for cannons and other weapons), cloth to provide uniforms and leather
(saddles and shoes). This enabled Parliament to have well equipped soldiers.
In conclusion I think it is a combination of all these factors that meant Parliament won the
civil war. However, it was the strength and quality of the Parliamentarian forces, combined
by poor leadership of the Royalists that ultimately caused Charles to lose.

Bibliography
Civil War Project William Beresford

National Army Museum https://www.nam.ac.uk/

Wikipedia (only for dates) https://www.wikipedia.org/

UK parliament https://www.parliament.uk

English Heritage https://www.english-heritage.org.uk

Rest is History (Podcast). https://www.goalhangerpodcasts.com

Civil War Petitions https://www.civilwarpetitions.ac.uk/

School Document