 |
| Alfred the Great |
Many of the changes introduced during England’s
Dark Age military development are said to be directly attributable to the Anglo
Saxon warriors who first sailed to Britain in the early 5th and 6th
centuries, intent on conquering and settling the lands that lay across the
English Channel. According to a number of sources, the Germanic Anglo Saxons of
Western Europe were a highly disciplined martial society, whose fighting forces
were typically divided into individual war bands, often comprising some thirty
to forty men, who could fight and raid on their own, or as part of a much
larger combined army. Each of these bands was thought to have been led by a war
chief, who in turn was supported by a small cadre of full time warriors, who
would serve, protect and die for that particular leader, much the same as the
later Anglo Saxon Earls or Lords who maintained their own staff of knights or
men at arms who served that individual nobleman alone.
It was said to be these professional soldiers who
were thought to have made up the vanguard of any Anglo Saxon army, with the
younger, part time and older warriors making up the remainder of the fighting
force that followed close behind. As the shock troops of the Anglo Saxon war
band, the full time professional soldiers were reported to have been the most
heavily armed, generally carrying a spear, shield, long sword, dagger and any
other weapon that they could comfortably wield in battle, whilst at the same
time being protected by a full metal helmet and chain-mail body armour.
Supporting troops were thought to have been less well armed and protected than
those who went into battle first, although most would have carried a shield,
spear and double edged short sword that could be used during close quarter
fighting. It has also been suggested that in common with the Spartan, Greek and
Roman armies of earlier times, Anglo Saxon troops were regularly drilled in
fighting formations, so that both small war bands and much larger military
units could combine together, not only for their mutual defence, but also as
part of a tactical offensive strategy. When a number of these individual war
bands combined together to form a much bigger army unit, it has been suggested
that this larger force was put under the command of the most senior leader, the
Althing, who all of the other war chiefs would defer to in matters relating to
military operations or strategies. Although it has been speculated that many
Anglo Saxon armies may well have been relatively small contingents of men, as
few as a couple of hundred at a time, it seems unlikely that such small numbers
would have been able to play a significant role in conquering, let alone
holding new territories, which suggests that larger numbers of Anglo Saxon
warriors could and would be gathered together as and when the need arose.
As Britain became increasingly settled in the
post-Roman period, with a new Anglo-Saxon society beginning to be created
throughout much of England, so many parts of the country began to be governed
and protected by a new class of feudal Earls, who held individual territories
for and on behalf of the English king. As part of their duties, each of these
English noblemen was reported to have been responsible for the appointment of
the local Sheriffs, Magistrates and Tax Collectors, who not only maintained the
Earldom’s legal and financial systems, but also ensured that their own area of
the country was able to enjoy the King’s Peace. These new Anglo Saxon Earls
were also held to be responsible for ensuring the military security and defence
of their individual regions through the creation of a local field force known
as the “Fyrd”, a local militia that could be called upon to take up arms and
defend the country from any outside threat.
 |
| Anglo Saxon Soldier |
The idea of regional armies had first been proposed
and initiated by the Anglo Saxon king of Wessex, Alfred the Great, during the
late 9th century, when he introduced the concept of the defensive
“Burh” or “Burg”, heavily defended towns and cities, which not only provided a
safe haven for the local population, but also acted as military bases for the
areas own Anglo Saxon defence forces. Typically, each of these burgs and their
surrounding regions would be protected by the Earls own professional troops, as
well as male members of the local population, many of whom were thought to have
been granted lands in exchange for a given number of days of military service.
According to some sources, service within the local militia, or Fyrd, was a
highly regulated affair, which not only ensured that a sizeable local fighting
force was available throughout the year, but that each man had sufficient time
to work on his own lands, growing the crops and supplies that the country
needed to survive. It has also been suggested that when members of the local
Fyrd, were not engaged in military operations, then they would be used to
defend the regions borders, strategic targets, or were undergoing additional
military training, to improve their fighting capabilities with the shield,
sword and spear that they would commonly carry into battle. A significant
feature of the Fyrd was thought to have been its composition, most notably, the
widely accepted view that it was a lightweight field army, one that consisted
almost entirely of lightly armed infantrymen and archers, rather than a
traditional mixture of light cavalry and heavily armed foot soldiers, as had
often been the case with other historic armies, such as the Romans.
Although the English king was reported to have had
his own personal military retinue, made up of armed retainers, full-time men at
arms and members of the royal household, in order to put a large English army
into the field against a foreign enemy, he continued to rely on the support of
the new English nobility and their regional militia’s to grant him their
services. However, such support was not always guaranteed and on more than one
occasion an English king was forced to rally his own military forces against
those of an insubordinate nobleman who was either unwilling or unable to comply
with the monarch’s royal wishes. Such was thought to be the case in the middle
of the 11th century, when the reigning English monarch, Edward the
Confessor, either by accident or by design, was said to have caused dissention
throughout the country, by reportedly nominating two entirely different men to
be his legitimate heir, Harold Godwinsson and Duke William of Normandy, whilst
at the same time, a third candidate, King Harald Hardrada of Norway, insisted
on pursuing his own claim to the English throne.
Consequently, when Edward died in 1066, all three
candidates claimed to be the dead Anglo Saxon monarch’s legitimate successor
and although Harold Godwinsson found support amongst the majority of the
English nobility and was subsequently crowned King of England, both Duke
William and Harald Hardrada were reported to have received significant levels
of support from a number of other leading nobles within the country. It was
said to be as a result of such divisions that when the Norwegian army of Harald
Hardrada landed on the east coast of England in 1066 in order to pursue
Hardrada’s claim against the English throne, Harold Godwinsson was forced to
bring a fairly limited Fyrd, or field army with him to confront the foreign
invaders, some of his nobles having previously switched their allegiances to
Hardrada, whilst others simply chose to await the outcome of the Battle at
Stamford Bridge, before deciding which side to support.
 |
| Bayeaux Tapestry |
However, despite the many obstacles that might well
have prevented him from overcoming the Norwegian army, ultimately Harold
Godwinsson and his Anglo Saxon Fyrd were said to have gained a victory over the
invaders, whose leader, Harald Hardrada, was reported to be the most notable
victim of the bitter and bloody engagement. Unfortunately for King Harold of
England and his generally exhausted troops, almost as soon as they had overcome
the Norwegian invaders, reports began to arrive, informing them that the Norman
leader, Duke William had subsequently landed at Pevensey with yet another
invasion army, forcing Harold and his limited field force to march some two
hundred and fifty miles south to confront this new military threat to their
Anglo Saxon kingdom.
For many historians, the two armies that faced one
another at the Battle of Hastings in 1066 were not that different to one
another, save for the mounted Norman cavalry and the previously unseen motte
and bailey castle, which would subsequently become such a regular feature in
the British landscape. However, despite these advantages, ultimately the
victory of William the Conqueror’s Norman army over Harold Godwinsson’s Anglo
Saxon Fyrd was as much the result of extreme good fortune as much as anything
else, with the misfortune of the Anglo Saxon’s helping to hand victory to their
Norman adversaries. Although no independent records from the time of Hastings
are thought to exist, other than those produced by the two protagonists, who
both have largely biased views on the course and outcome of the battle, for
many historians the two sides were very evenly matched and it was only the
ill-timed death of Harold Godwinsson that finally swung the engagement in Duke
William’ favour.
With no clear royal successor, or prominent
military commander to look to for leadership, the till then undefeated ranks of
the Anglo Saxon Fyrd were thought to have dissipated through the actions of its
men, rather than the attacks of William’s cavalry and infantry. However, as
their protective interlocked shields began to fragment, so the individual Anglo
Saxon warriors became increasing susceptible to the lances of the Norman
knights, the spears of the Norman foot soldiers and the arrows of the Norman
archers, who quickly began to shatter the defensive lines, which the Fyrd
relied upon for its protection. Even though William the Conqueror and his troops
eventually managed to overcome this first English army and having fought their
way to London, subsequently taking the Crown of England, within the wider
country there were still thought to be sufficient fighting men to meet and
defeat the Norman Lord, had they had an effective political and military
commander who was popular enough to lead them. Unfortunately, rather than form
a national alliance, which might confront the Norman invaders, many Anglo Saxon
Earls and noblemen were thought to have sworn fealty to the new foreign
monarch, whilst other chose to defend their territories independently, thereby
guaranteeing their own demise and the end of Britain as an entirely Anglo Saxon
kingdom.
Ascending the English throne in December 1066,
despite having received the submissions of most of the Anglo Saxon nobility
shortly after the Battle of Hastings, the new King, William I of England, was
thought to have remained a relatively unpopular figure with a significant
portion of the population, especially amongst the remaining Anglo Saxon
nobility who had much to lose to a new Norman administration. Northern England
and Wales were both thought to have been major centres of resistance to the
rule of the new Norman king, forcing William to travel north with his huge
armed retinue to begin what became known as the “Harrying of the North”, a
bloody campaign that saw numerous settlements razed, crops destroyed and
thousands of innocent civilians driven from their lands. By 1070, just four
years after his army had first landed in England, most of the country was
thought to have been under the military control of Duke William, with only
isolated pockets of resistance holding out in Wales, Scotland, Cornwall,
Cumbria and East Anglia, although eventually these too were either defeated or
isolated by the Norman king.
 |
| Castle Merlon |
In the aftermath of his successful invasion and
occupation of England, the vast majority of Anglo Saxon noblemen and landowners
were subsequently deprived of their lands and properties, which were then
simply handed to the Norman knights, foreign mercenaries, financiers and
Churches, who had either supported King William’s great venture, or whose
prayers were necessary for his continued good fortune. However, despite wearing
the Crown of England and heading the largest military force in the country at
that time, William’s hold on his new English kingdom was thought to have
remained tenuous at best, not least because of the relatively small numbers of
Norman troops that were expected to guard the far reaches of his new realm.
Even though fresh forces might occasionally be brought over from Normandy to
supplement or replace those troops already stationed in England, King William
did not have an inexhaustible supply of soldiers for his suddenly expanded
territories and was therefore forced to look for alternative methods of
securing his new lands. The system that he ultimately chose to employ, was
virtually the same one that had worked so well in Europe, where the country was
broken down into individual regions, each of which was controlled by a nobleman
of the king’s choice, who would rule that particular Barony, or Earldom, for
and on behalf of the Norman monarch, much the same as the Anglo Saxon king’s
had done before him. In turn, these newly created Norman Barons and Earls would
then be supported by their own cadre of sub-lieutenants, or knights, who would
help control specific areas of the individual Baron or Earl’s territories,
ensuring that they remained safe and secure, at the same time ensuring that
rents were paid and taxes collected.
As an occupying army, especially one that was
comparatively small, the Norman forces of William the Conqueror were forced to
consider their own personal safety as a matter of some priority, leading to the
widespread introduction of the Norman motte and bailey castle to the English
landscape. Initially constructed as a temporary timber redoubt, which was
designed as a short term defensive shelter for the Norman troops, their horses
and their possessions, almost inevitably, these early structures were later
replaced by the much more permanent and far larger stone built castles, which
continue to litter the British countryside to the present day. Although these
early fortresses offered some level of protection to the new Norman elite,
ultimately these relatively small numbers of foreign aristocrats found
themselves isolated amongst a predominantly Anglo Saxon population, who carried
on with their lives, entirely regardless of the foreign nobility who ruled over
them. According to most sources, just like the Anglo Saxons before them, these
new Norman incomers, rather than fundamentally altering the language,
traditions and customs of the native British people, instead found themselves
and their own heritage being gradually absorbed by and added to what would
eventually become the basis of the modern British character, a combination of
Ancient Briton, Celtic, Viking, Anglo Saxon and Norman.
 |
| Crusader Knights |
Similarly, necessity was also thought to have
brought about the creation of a new English fighting force, one that was bought
and paid for by individual Norman nobles, who needed to expand their own
household troops, not only to protect their own extensive possessions, but also
to offer military support to the English King, in regional disputes, foreign
wars, or even on crusades to the Holy Land. According to some records, King
William I even took some English troops with him when he returned to
continental Europe after securing his hold in his new kingdom of England,
suggesting that a number of Anglo Saxon troops had already transferred their
allegiance to the Norman Duke, either before or shortly after the Battle of
Hastings in October 1066. Whatever the case, the fact that William I was
reported to have brought an estimated twenty thousand men with him from
Normandy, many of whom were reported to have died from battle wounds and
disease, would seem to indicate that a large number of English born Anglo Saxon
troops, must have played a part in helping the Norman Duke to secure his new
territories.
The practice of protecting England through local
troops raised by a series of regional Barons, Earls and other noblemen, who
owed their title and position to one or other English monarch, undoubtedly had
its roots in the Anglo Saxon period, although similar arrangements were thought
to have operated elsewhere, following the demise of the Roman Empire. However,
a number of problems presented themselves with regard to such locally raised
forces, not least the fact that most of these individual soldiers were linked
to the local community and were therefore often loathe to operate outside of
their home areas, preventing them from being used on a national, much less an
international basis. Although such attitudes would change over the coming
centuries, ultimately such troops remained tied and generally loyal to the
particular nobleman who employed them, rather than to whichever monarch
happened to be sitting on the English throne at that period of time. As a
result, the military and political power of individual nobles could often
outweigh the authority of a king and it was often the case that royal decisions
were almost entirely dictated to and by the will of a particular Earl or Baron,
who had the support of his own private army and whose wishes could not therefore
be overlooked.
Throughout the 12th and early 13th
centuries, there were thought to be numerous instances of the future of the
English Crown being decided by a handful of England’s most powerful noblemen,
who had the military might to insist that a particular candidate was placed on
the throne, or that a king modify his behaviour, as in the case of King John
and the signing of the Magna Carta in 1215. Even two of England’s most able and
militaristic Plantagenet monarch’s Henry III and his son, the later Edward I,
were said to have found themselves held hostage by a number of these powerful
noblemen, whose revolt was only finally brought to an end after Henry and
Edward managed to persuade or bribe some of the rebel Lords to once again
support the royalist cause, thereby restoring authority to the English Crown.
However, in order to gain the support of these former rebels, Henry and Edward
were thought to have granted them even more titles and lands, essentially
turning them into an even greater potential threat to the English monarchy, a
situation that would inevitably lead to more military conflicts in later years.
For the remainder of the Plantagenet period and on through the Lancastrian and
Yorkist eras, England was thought to have suffered a series of royal disputes,
which saw the various private armies of kings and nobles fight one another, not
only for control of the country, but also for the Crown of England itself.
 |
| Medieval Battle |
By the beginning of the 16th century,
most of the large private armies, previously under the personal control of
England’s leading Earls and Barons had not only been outlawed, but had been
largely replaced by a series of militias and local forces who were under the
direct control of the monarch’s representative, the Lord Lieutenant, who was
responsible for the defence and security of his local region. Although the
requirement for young men to defend their homeland was known to have existed
since Anglo Saxon times, it was only finally placed into law in 1285 when the
Statute of Winchester legally obliged any man between the ages of fifteen and
sixty to take up arms as and when required to do so. The Act was reported to
have taken account of the differing social and financial standings of each man,
with the common worker expected to arm himself with a scythe or a knife, while
the rich man was instructed to provide himself with a horse and armour.
In many towns and cities, compulsory weapons
training was reported to have become the norm, with the young men of the city,
town or village obliged to attend archery and drill classes, so that they were
able to defend their local region, as and when the need arose. Often the Lord
Lieutenant deferred the training of such militias to the local Mayor and
Sheriffs, who not only knew the local population, but would have been aware of
the local geography, ensuring that any strategic targets and highways would
have been protected during time of conflict. Each eligible man within a town,
city or parish was thought to have been recorded on a local muster roll, so
that numbers could be calculated and men identified as and when required, with
those called to service being expected to attend a rallying or muster point
along with his comrades. However, just like with the Anglo Saxon Fyrd many
centuries earlier, many of these local volunteers were thought to have been
unwilling to serve outside of the own home areas, once again restricting their
use to that of a regional force, rather than representing any sort of national
army.
A number of England’s largest towns and cities were
said to have been more fortunate than most, in that they could muster very
large numbers of men who were prepared to meet and train regularly, helping to
form the basis for the more established trained bands, or militias that would
defend Britain’s biggest towns and cities right through to the late 19th
century. As has been mentioned elsewhere, the principal defender’s of the
British Isles for many centuries was the English, later the British Navy, who
in nearly all circumstances would have been in the front line of defending the
country from enemy invasion. The fact that the much larger English fleet of
King Harold Godwinsson had been withdrawn to port for re-provisioning, just
prior to the Norman invasion of England by William the Conqueror, perfectly
illustrated the reliance placed on the nations navy and what could happen when
that vitally important naval force was no longer there to protects England’s
extensive coastline.
It was thought to be the inefficiencies and
strategic limitations of local militias and trained bands during the early 17th
century, most notably during the first months of the English Civil War that
caused certain Parliamentary leaders to reconsider the efficacy of such armed
forces. Although most of Parliaments troops were reported to have been raised
through local Associations, as with the earlier Fyrd and Militias, most of
their men were either unwilling or unable to be used far from home, making them
tactically useless to the Parliamentary cause.
 |
| Oliver Cromwell |
By the middle of 1644, the fact that these local
forces were being commanded by a mixture of Parliamentary General’s who all had
their own strategic, religious and political objectives, some favouring peace
with the Crown, whilst others the complete removal of the monarch, Charles I,
it was becoming increasingly clear to a few leaders that little would be
achieved if the military situation remained the same. Eventually, Parliament
was reported to have divided into two distinct factions, with the Earl of
Manchester’s side demanding that Parliament should seek the best possible terms
with the king, whilst hardliners such as Oliver Cromwell were determined to
inflict a complete military defeat on the royalist cause, before dictating
terms to the monarch.
The divisions between the two political factions
was said to have reached crisis point following the Second Battle of Newbury in
October 1644, when the Earls of Essex and Manchester failed to destroy the
kings forces, despite having the opportunity to do so. By the following month,
a Parliamentary committee was formed to oversee the conduct of the war, as a
result of which the Self Denying Ordinance was eventually passed by both Houses
of Parliament, a statute which forbade all members of the Commons and Lords
from holding any sort of military office and essentially removing the Earls of
Manchester, Essex, as well as other royalist sympathisers from their commands.
By January of 1645 the same committee was also reported to have laid out the
basis for a New Model Army and appointed Sir Thomas Fairfax as the Captain
General of this brand new military force, whilst Sir Philip Skippon was
appointed as the Sergeant Major General of Foot. Although Oliver Cromwell was
forbidden by the new Self Denying Ordinance from continuing to hold his
military post, within a short time, Sir Thomas Fairfax was said to have made a
special request for Cromwell to be allowed to hold a military command and
within weeks he had been granted a temporary exception, which permitted him to
take control of a cavalry regiment. Although he was given a three month
allowance to hold his temporary military command, in practice this exemption
was thought to have been continually renewed, allowing Cromwell and three other
Members of Parliament to retain his military command throughout the entire
period of the English Civil War.
Initially, Parliament’s New Model Army was said to
have comprised some twenty-odd thousand troops, made up of nearly seven
thousand cavalrymen, fourteen thousand foot soldiers and an additional one
thousand dragoons, many of which had been taken from the earlier regiments
commanded by the Earls of Manchester and Essex, who were no longer involved in
the military conduct of the war. Unlike the earlier militias and associations,
the New Model Army was run along new and uniform lines, so that each
infantryman, dragoon and cavalryman knew his rights, duties and conditions of
service, with a centralised system being put in place, to ensure that each
soldier was fed, clothed and more importantly, paid for his military service.
Another peculiar feature of this new English national army was thought to have
been its insistence that only the ablest soldiers should be recruited and
retained, regardless of their rank or indeed their financial status, recognising
perhaps that in many cases that the richest men did not always make the best
soldiers, something that later governments often seemed to overlook.
 |
| Civil War Dragoon |
However, regardless of an individual soldier's
social standing or wealth, according to some reports the New Model Army managed
to retain rich and poor alike, as each in his turn was said to have been driven
by the ideals of the Parliamentary cause, irrespective of his own particular
circumstances. The elite troops of the New Model Army was said to be the cavalry
regiments, whose behaviour and battlefield tactics were determined by the rules
laid down by commander’s such as Oliver Cromwell, who insisted that these
mounted troops should be the most highly disciplined and determined of their
age. Unlike their royalist counterparts and earlier cavalry forces, Cromwell’s
cavalry regiments were reported to have been trained to work alongside the New
Model Army’s infantry, musketeers, Dragoons and artillery units, marking the
beginning of what would inevitably become the sort of modern warfare that would
be fought in future years. For their part, the thousand strong Dragoon force
were often regarded and used as mounted infantry or skirmishers, which could be
used to intercept any sort of enemy force, or even to assault enemy positions,
holding them until reinforced by the main infantry body. But perhaps the most
significant military force within the New Model Army was the infantry, which
was reported to have been a mixed body, comprising two thirds musketeers and
one third pike men, comparable to anything that the royalist army of Charles I
had at that particular time. However, unlike earlier English armies, which had
generally been made up of half-trained, poorly equipped and often dissatisfied
militias, the musketeers and pike men of the new Parliamentary army were
reported to have been highly trained, very well equipped and constantly
motivated by their commanders, making them a far superior force to the one
being fielded by the royalist cause.
The New Model Army was said to have first been used
in May 1645 when elements of the new force attempted to break the royalist
siege of Taunton, where the famous General-at-sea, then simply Colonel Robert
Blake, was reported to have been blockaded in the town, along with his relatively
small Parliamentary garrison. Unfortunately, these initial attempts to break
the siege were said to have been largely unsuccessful, ostensibly because most
of the New Model Army was being prepared for the forthcoming Battle of Naseby,
which finally took place on the 14th June 1645.
According to some contemporary reports of this
decisive Civil War engagement, the battle itself proved to be a baptism of fire
for the new professional Parliamentary army, simply because the royalist army
of Charles I was said to have contained some of the monarch’s most experienced
and battle-hardened soldiers, men who would not have been concerned by the
prospect of facing enemy infantry or cavalry. However, unlike Cromwell’s
mounted troops, who were both well trained and highly disciplined, elements of
the royalist cavalry were reported to have been in such a rush to pursue
retreating Parliamentary horsemen, that they left the field, thereby handing a
tactical advantage to Oliver Cromwell’s remaining mounted troops, which helped
secure a Parliamentary victory over the king.
 |
| Civil War Musketeers |
This battle was also thought to have been marked by
a number of murderous incidents, where Fairfax’s and Cromwell’s troops were
reported to have slaughtered several hundred royalist supporters, including a
hundred or so women who were part of the captured royalist baggage train.
According to some sources, the women were killed, ostensibly because they were
believed to be Irish, suggesting that even at this point in time; some English
troops had such a deep inbred hatred of the Irish and their perceived Roman
Catholic faith that they were prepared to commit cold blooded murder to satisfy
their own racial and religious intolerance. Although the Battle of Naseby did
not bring an end to the First English Civil War, most historians are thought to
take the view that this particular engagement did mark the beginning of the end
for the royalist cause, mainly because of the loss of so many of King Charles’
highly experienced troops.
It was said to be in the aftermath of Naseby that
Thomas Fairfax was subsequently able to sent troops to lift the royalist siege
of Taunton and take control of most of the West Country at the same time. The
last great military engagement of the First English Civil War was the Battle of
Langport which took place just outside Bristol on the 10th July 1645
and which resulted in the New Model Army defeating the last remaining royalist
field force in England, an action that not only forced King Charles I to
surrender himself to the Scottish army, but also brought an end to hostilities
between Parliament and the English Crown.
However, having won the First English Civil War,
discontent and disagreements then began to spread throughout Parliament, the
New Model Army’s military commanders and even amongst the rank and file members
of the victorious English army, as to what should happen to the country in the
aftermath of the bitter national conflict. For most of the common soldiers
employed by Parliaments new army, their greatest cause of resentment was said
to be the fact that they had not been paid for some time and with rumours of
them being sent to Ireland to suppress royalist unrest there, many of these
same English troops, were thought to be extremely angry about their treatment by
Parliament.
 |
| Civil War Pike-men |
Within the army itself there was also thought to be
many social and political agitators who not only wanted to see an end to the
English monarchy, but also wanted to see new democratic and religious freedoms
introduced, including universal male suffrage, a redrawing of the existing
electoral boundaries and a reorganisation of the country’s legal systems, much
of which was proposed by a group called the Levellers. Members of a political
movement, which was dedicated to the abolition of corruption in public office,
the introduction of religious tolerance towards all faiths, as well as the
translation of the law into the common tongue, it was reported to be members of
the Levellers who proposed a new constitution for the country, which would have
included many of these core demands. However, at the same time that the
Levellers were trying to force their own demands on the English Parliament,
many representatives, both in the Commons and the Lords, were trying to lobby
for a complete restoration of the king’s constitutional position, without any
sort of reforms taking place, something that was totally unacceptable to most
of the soldiers who had risked their lives in order to bring about change.
In order to try and resolve these issues, in 1647 a
new committee called the Army Council met for the first time, a consultative
body which was reported to have drawn representatives from all of the different
groups within the army, in the hope to find an agreeable solution to the many
and varied demands that were being proposed. Unfortunately, even though this
new council was said to have met several times in order to find a solution,
ultimately it was thought to be as a result of lobbying by senior officers
within individual regiments that brought about a solution, although even this
was thought to have been resisted by some troops, causing Oliver Cromwell to
use armed force to suppress the minor military mutiny.
During the time that Parliament and the army were
busily debating the subject of soldiers pay, future constitutions and the use
of English troops in Ireland, the English king, Charles I was said to have been
busy negotiating with any party that might help restore him to the English
throne. With four major power blocks operating in the country, the royalists,
the New Model Army, the English Parliament and the Scottish Parliament, Charles
hoped to be able to make some form of alliance with one or more of these
parties which might allow him to seize back the political and military
initiative, which would then allow him to dictate terms to the other sides in
the ongoing dispute.
 |
| Sir Thomas Fairfax |
Having first surrendered himself to the Scots,
Charles was subsequently handed over to the English Parliament, many of whose
members were keen to see the monarch restored to the throne, but on their own
terms, rather than those of the king or indeed the army. However, before long,
the monarch was said to have been snatched away from Parliamentary custody by a
young army officer who served under the army’s military commander, Sir Thomas
Fairfax, causing both English and Scottish Parliaments to begin making
preparation for a fresh civil war, this time against the English legislatures
own creation, the New Model Army. In the first instance though, the English
Parliament was said to have tried other methods to undermine the army’s
position, firstly by attempting to disband it, then trying to send it abroad on
foreign service, before finally threatening to withhold its pay, all of which
simply hardened the army’s attitude and made them even more determined to bring
about some sort of political change. As relations between Parliament and the
army leadership became increasingly fraught, so Charles I was thought to have
played his own part in ensuring that the divisions grew deeper and deeper, to
the point that the Parliament made the fateful decision to ally itself with the
remaining royalist factions in the country, along with supporters of the
Scottish Parliament, resulting in the outbreak of the Second English Civil War
in February 1648.
Fortunately for Cromwell and the other leading New
Model Army officers, the constitution that had been imposed by Fairfax, which
dealt with many of the English soldiers political, social and religious
grievances, had ensured that the New Model Army remained a viable fighting
force, even up to and beyond the outbreak of the second civil conflict.
However, the uncertainty that had arisen after the First English Civil War, as
to the future of the king himself and the possible introduction of new social, political
and religious freedoms was thought to have caused some Parliamentary commanders
to reconsider their positions, causing some of them to switch sides on the
outbreak of the Second English Civil War, much to the alarm and annoyance of
Thomas Fairfax and Oliver Cromwell.
Although not all royalists supported the king’s
second military campaign against Parliament, ultimately the Second English
Civil War proved to a much more one-sided affair, simply because the English
Parliament very quickly withdrew from the conflict, as their tacit support for
the king’s cause made such representatives highly unpopular with the general
public, a fact that commanders such as Cromwell exploited to great effect. With
limited resources of their own and with no outside military aid available to
their cause, the royalist forces that participated in this Second English Civil
War very quickly came under increasing pressure from the better armed, equipped
and much more professional New Model Army, which during the first half of 1648
effectively crushed King Charles’ remaining military support in England. By
June of the same year, it was a Scottish Engager Army, a force fielded by the
Scottish Parliament and led by the Duke of Hamilton which was said to have
crossed the border to pursue Charles’ royal ambitions in England, although the
fact that it was comprised mostly of raw recruits and largely inexperienced
officers meant that it posed little threat to the New Model Army and its battle
hardened troops.
 |
| King Charles I |
The defining military engagement in the north of
England was said to have taken place at Preston, between the 17th
and 19th August 1648, when a twenty thousand strong Scottish army
was met and defeated by Oliver Cromwell’s force of around eight thousand
seasoned soldiers, during which, some two thousand Engagers were reported to
have been killed, as against the hundred or so members of the New Model Army
who were said to have perished. Although there were thought to have been
several more attempts to revive the royalist cause in England and Wales,
ultimately all of them came to nothing and by the end of August 1648 the
fighting had come to an end once again. However, for King Charles himself, his
failure to overturn the outcome of the First English Civil War and his later
decision to initiate yet another conflict in his kingdom, ensured that the
calls for him to be removed permanently would become increasingly loud, leading
to him later being charged, tried, sentenced and executed as a tyrant and
traitor on the 30th January 1649.
In August 1649, elements of the New Model Army were
reported to have been landed in Ireland to help suppress a combined
Royalist-Roman Catholic insurrection that was taking place in the country,
beginning a campaign which would not only heighten the divisions between the
various faith communities there, but also create a legacy of hatred towards the
English commander of those forces, Oliver Cromwell. The various military
campaigns of Cromwell’s forces in Ireland have been dealt with in an entirely
separate chapter of this book, but suffice to say the New Model Army’s
campaigns in Ireland ultimately proved to be extremely costly affairs, both in
terms of national unity and for the tens of thousands of people, military and
civilian who were reported to have perished as a result of them.
At the same time that English troops were involved
in bitter fighting with the Royalists and Roman Catholic rebels in Ireland,
other units of the New Model Army were reported to have been involved in what
has been called the Third English Civil War, fighting Scottish Covenanters, who
had allied themselves to the royalist cause of the late English king’s son and
heir, King Charles II. Agreeing to support Charles II claim to the English,
Scottish and Irish thrones, which had been usurped by the Parliamentary cause,
the Covenanters were thought to have been an alliance of Presbyterian’s who
were happy to lend their military support to Charles Stuart’s campaign, in
return for guaranteeing future religious reforms, both in Scotland and England.
Unfortunately for the new Charles II and his Scottish allies, despite
outnumbering the New Model Army units sent to suppress their activities, the
English forces under the command of Oliver Cromwell ultimately proved to be far
superior to the Covenanter’s forces, defeating them first at the Battle of
Dunbar and later at the Battle of Inverkeithing. Despite these reversals, the
ousted Stuart monarch, Charles II, still managed to lead a Scottish army into
England, before being met and defeated at the Battle of Worcester, on the 3rd
September 1651, which proved to be the final battle of the three English Civil
Wars.
 |
| King Charles II |
In the aftermath of the Scottish royalist
rebellion, the English army was reported to have maintained a significant
presence in the north of the country, not only to guard against any future
royalist revolts, but also to offer some degree of protection against highland
raiders who were thought to have become more troublesome during the same
period. Elsewhere on the British mainland, units of the New Model Army were
also thought to have been used to suppress various outbreaks of violence and
insurrection in the country, although no serious threat to their authority was
thought to have occurred following the royalist uprisings in Scotland, save for
the ongoing disputes that were said to have continued in Ireland.
Internationally, in 1654 the new English
Commonwealth was said to have declared war on the formidable Spanish Empire, as
a result of which units of the English army were despatched to the Caribbean,
to try and take control of Spanish possessions there, including the island of
Hispaniola, now marked by the modern states of Haiti and the Dominican
Republic. Unfortunately for the Parliamentarian forces sent to accomplish this
task, tropical diseases, inclement weather and large numbers of highly
experienced Spanish troops were all thought to have contrived to thwart the
planned invasion of Hispaniola, although these same English forces did
eventually manage to invade and maintain control of the island of Jamaica,
which ultimately became one of Britain’s most prized overseas assets.
The New Model Army was reported to have thrived
during the Protectorate of Oliver Cromwell, who held the unique constitutional
position of Lord Protector from December 1653 until his death in September
1658, after which the army’s very existence began to be questioned by a newly
resurgent Parliament and the many royalist representatives who held power
there. Although Oliver Cromwell had initially been succeeded to the office of
Lord Protector by his son Richard, unlike his father, the younger Cromwell was
seemingly unable to cope with the increasing political and constitutional
pressures that the office brought with it and was reported to have resigned the
post in May 1659. With the army apparently fragmented under the leadership of
various popular military commanders, for the new English Parliament there was a
real fear that the country might well descend into yet another round of civil
wars, as each military grouping sought to place themselves and their own local
commanders in the most advantageous position. However, for other army leaders,
including those who recognised the need to a central figure at the heart of the
British constitution, the most obvious solution was for the English monarchy to
be restored, something that they would not dared to have suggested during the
lifetime of Oliver Cromwell.
 |
| George Monck |
One such military leader though, General George
Monck, who had been put in charge of the New Model Army units in Scotland, was
thought to have recognised the dangers of the country fragmenting under
different military leaders and as a result brought his forces south to London,
to help support the restoration of the Stuart family, in the person of Charles II,
who was officially crowned King of England on the 29th May 1660.
Perhaps mindful of the risks posed by having a large standing army at home that
might well be exploited by the new monarch, Parliament, or by some or other
party, following the succession of Charles II to the English throne, most of
the New Model Army regiments were subsequently disbanded, save for General
Moncks own troops which subsequently evolved into the Coldstream Guards and the
Regiment of Cuirassiers, which eventually became the Royal Horse Guards, both
of which are reported to be two of the oldest serving regiments in the British
Army.
The Coldstream Guards were
said to have been formally founded at Coldstream in Scotland in 1650, by their
then commander General George Monck and now form part of the Household
Division, being only one of two English regiments that can trace its ancestry
all the way back to the New Model Army. The second British military unit that
shares that particular history is the Royal Horse Guards, which has since been
renamed as the Blues and Royals, but which was originally founded as the Royal
Cuirassiers by Sir Arthur Haselrig at Newcastle upon Tyne in August 1650, on
the orders of Oliver Cromwell. After the restoration of Charles II in 1660, the
unit was renamed as the Earl of Oxford’s Regiment and was reported to have been
attired in a blue tunic, giving rise to the nickname the “Oxford Blues”,
leading to their later identification simply as “The Blues”. It was only in
1969 that this earlier corp. was amalgamated with the Royal Dragoons, helping
to create the regiment that is much more familiar today as the “Blues and
Royals”.
No comments:
Post a Comment