Hastings to Culloden - Battles in Britain 1066-1746

by Glen Lyndon Dodds

  Nevertheless, despite his great victory, Somerset failed to secure possession of Mary, and in 1548 she was spirited away to France where she married the heir of Henry II.

  18

  EDGEHILL 23 October 1642

  In 1642 hostility between Charles I and parliament was such that both began preparing for civil war. (For the background to the war see Chapter 21). Charles raised his standard at Nottingham on 22 August. The force at his disposal was small and thus on 13 September he left Nottingham and made for Shrewsbury believing, and rightly so, that he would receive much support in the west. He arrived at Shrewsbury on 20 September.

  Parliament’s army was at Northampton when its commander, the Earl of Essex, heard that Charles was making for Shrewsbury. He thus also moved west and occupied Worcester just after the king’s nephew, Prince Rupert, had routed an advanced detachment of his army at Powicke Bridge on the 23rd. On 12 October, the king, who had now raised a substantial army, began marching towards London and proceeded to bypass Essex. When aware of this, the earl set off in pursuit.

  On the evening of Saturday 22nd Charles was at Edgecote: Essex at Kineton. On the following day, at the suggestion of Rupert, the king moved to Edgehill and deployed, having decided to engage the Parliamentarian army. When it became clear that Essex would not attack uphill, Charles descended Edgehill and took up a position just below it to the north of Radway. His army numbered about 14,500 men and Lord Forth was placed in command. Prince Rupert led the horse on the right, Sir Jacob Astley the foot in the centre, and Lord Wilmot the horse on the left.

  Essex deployed a short distance to the north of the Royalists. He had about 14,900 men and also had more cannon than the king. Sir James Ramsey led the cavalry on the left of the army. The infantry in the centre was under Philip Skippon and was arrayed in three brigades—in contrast to the five of the Royalist foot—and to the rear of the right brigade were two regiments of horse, one led by Sir William Balfour, the other, by Sir Philip Stapleton. The cavalry on the right of the army was under Lord Feilding.

  The battle began at about 3.00pm with an ineffective artillery duel. The Royalists then advanced. Rupert’s wing quickly routed the opposing cavalry and swept on to Kineton two miles away and proceeded to plunder the enemy baggage train. Wilmot likewise achieved success, and many of his men also went plundering in Kineton.

  In the centre, a fierce struggle occurred between the infantry with the Roundhead foot receiving valuable assistance from Balfour and Stapleton. The Royalists were slowly driven back. Charles’ son, the Duke of York, was to recall that his father rode forward to encourage the hard-pressed infantry and that as he did so ‘one of his footmen was shot in the face by his horse’s side; after which [Charles] continued in the rear of the foot, till the battle was ended by night.’ The victorious Royalist cavalry had returned to the field as darkness was falling, but they were not in a fit state to charge and thus held aloof as the fighting died down.

  It is estimated that about 1,000 Roundheads perished at Edgehill and that Royalist losses were approximately 500 strong. On the following day the Royalists stood firm, but Essex decided not to renew hostilities and withdrew ‘in great disorder to Warwick,’ leaving Charles to all intents and purposes the victor: the road to London was open.

  19

  THE FIRST BATTLE OF NEWBURY 20 September 1643

  After the Battle of Edgehill Charles delayed moving against London until it was too late. When he did so, he was confronted by 24,000 men at Turnham Green on 14 November 1642 and thus withdrew to Reading. Nonetheless, in subsequent months the Royalists generally had the better of things. Then, on 10 August 1643, Charles invested Gloucester, an important Parliamentarian outpost. On the 26th, Essex set out from London to relieve its garrison. His approach led Charles to raise the siege on 5 September and withdraw to Sudeley Castle near Winchcombe.

  On the 8th Essex entered Gloucester. He soon headed north to Tewkesbury and so the king moved to Evesham to keep in touch, partly expecting Essex to make for Worcester. On the 15th Essex left Tewkesbury. His destination?—London. Charles therefore set off in pursuit and reached Newbury on the 19th before his adversary. The way to the capital was blocked and so Essex determined to fight.

  The battle was fought just to the southwest of the town by forces which both probably numbered about 14,000 men. The Royalists faced west towards their opponents who had managed to secure Round Hill, a feature of tactical importance. The hill was in the centre of Essex’s line, and upon it he placed infantry and cannon.

  The battle commenced at about 7.00am on the 20th. The task of dislodging the Parliamentarians from Round Hill chiefly fell to Sir John Byron and his brother Sir Nicholas Byron, who led a brigade of horse and foot respectively. The latter attacked first, but encountered stiff resistance and so asked for cavalry support. However, the terrain was not suited to horse. The ground before the hill was enclosed and as Sir John’s troopers advanced they found their way barred by a high hedge with a gap just wide enough for one horse to pass through at a time. Before the gap could be widened, Lord Falkland, ‘more gallantly than advisedly,’ spurred his mount through it and was instantly killed. As soon as the hedge had been rendered passable, Byron’s men charged only to be repulsed. The Royalists later repeatedly tried to drive their opponents from the hill, but again failed.

  Meanwhile, on the south flank, where much of the ground was open, Prince Rupert charged and re-charged the enemy, primarily Sir Philip Stapleton’s cavalry wing, which answered in kind. Eventually Stapleton was driven off, but Rupert then failed to achieve similar success against foot stationed among small enclosed fields. On the north flank, fierce fighting evidently also occurred, but neither side gained the ascendancy. As the day progressed a fierce artillery duel commenced between the Roundhead gunners on Round Hill and their counterparts firing from near tumuli on Wash Common to the east. Fighting continued until about 7.00pm. During the course of the night Charles began withdrawing to Oxford. Essex resumed marching toward London the day after the battle, of which he can rightly be viewed the victor.

  Perhaps 3,500 men perished in the fighting. Clarendon wrote the following about the most notable fatality:

  In this unhappy battle was slain the lord viscount Falkland; a person of...inimitable sweetness and delight in conversation, of so flowing and obliging a humanity and goodness...that if there were no other brand upon this...accursed civil war than that single loss it must be most infamous and execrable to all posterity.

  20

  CHERITON 29 March 1644

  Shortly after retiring to Oxford following the First Battle of Newbury (20 September 1643), which checked the progress of the Royalist war effort, Charles and his council of war decided to raise an army to clear Dorset, Wiltshire and Hampshire of the enemy.

  The man chosen to command the new force was Lord Hopton. Though eager to conduct operations in the intended theatre, Hopton was soon lured into Sussex where he proceeded to capture Arundel Castle in early December 1643. However, it did not remain in Royalist hands for long. Sir William Waller, the commander of a Parliamentarian army, retook the castle and Hopton retired to Winchester unwilling to continue campaigning during the winter months against numerically superior forces, especially in view of significant losses sustained in a clash with Waller at Alton on 13 December.

  In March 1644 Charles sent Hopton reinforcements. With them came the elderly and gout-ridden Lord Forth, a higher ranking officer who was to take command, though in reality he allowed Hopton a great say in conducting the ensuing campaign and battle.

  Waller, who had also been reinforced, proceeded to march west towards Winchester. On 28 March he encamped in and around Hinton Ampner, three miles south of Alresford. Meanwhile, the Royalists had marched east to confront their opponents and spent the night a short distance to the north.

  The battle was fought the following day on ground just to the nort
h of Hinton Ampner, and between the village of Cheriton to the west and Cheriton Wood to the east. The armies were marshalled on two ridges with the Parliamentarians facing their adversaries to the north. Moreover, Waller stationed 1,000 musketeers in the wood to threaten the Royalist left flank. His army numbered about 10,000 men of whom 3,500 were cavalry. The Royalists were some 6,000 strong of whom 2,500 were horse. They were also inferior in cannon.

  Fighting commenced when Hopton ordered Colonel Appleyard to clear the wood with 1,000 musketeers. A fierce fire-fight ensued and Hopton committed more musketeers to the struggle, thereby securing the position.

  Hopton wished to follow up this success by attacking Waller’s right wing. However, Forth preferred to hold back and let the enemy commit themselves to an assault. But this decision was soon overturned by Sir Henry Bard on the right of the Royalist line. At about 11.00am he charged towards the opposing horse under Sir Arthur Hazlerigg, acting ‘with more youthfull courage then souldierlike discretion.’ His regiment was soon overwhelmed and heavy casualties were inflicted on regiments which rode to its assistance.

  Fighting now became general and very confused. When it became clear that the day was lost, certain Royalist regiments courageously fought a delaying action while their comrades withdrew towards Tichborne Down. From there the defeated army pressed on to Basing House where it arrived that night. It then retreated to Oxford. On the other hand the victors made for Winchester, which surrendered to Waller on 30 March, and he was soon in control of the whole of Hampshire.

  According to a Parliamentarian, Captain Robert Harley, the Roundheads lost about 60 men and the Royalists 300 at Cheriton, but these figures are almost certainly too low. What is undoubted is that the battle was an important triumph for the king’s enemies. It was their first clear-cut victory and as the Royalist, Sir Edward Walker noted, ‘marked a watershed in the war.’

  21

  MARSTON MOOR 2 July 1644

  ‘I see, all my birds have flown’

  Charles I

  The king uttered these memorable words on 4 January 1642 in the House of Commons where he had gone at the head of armed men to arrest five of his opponents. The MPs, however, had received news of his intent and had resorted to flight. Charles’ action had dire political consequences and within months the realm was torn apart by civil war. But, before coming to the melancholy tale of armed conflict, and in particular the Marston Moor campaign, it will be profitable to briefly discuss the events which led to the commencement of hostilities.

  Charles, whom the 19th century historian Lord Macaulay aptly described as having ‘an incurable propensity to dark and crooked ways,’ ascended the throne in 1625, a shy, reserved young man, and an ardent believer in the divine right of kings. He was, moreover, greatly influenced by his favourite, the Duke of Buckingham. They soon adopted an unrealistic foreign policy by entering the European conflict known as the Thirty Years’ War and Buckingham’s inept performance against Spain resulted in his being censured by parliament in 1626. Indeed, the assembly refused to vote further taxation unless he were removed. In response, Charles dissolved parliament and resorted to levying forced loans from the upper classes with which to finance the war effort.

  Following Buckingham’s subsequent failure against French forces, Charles summoned another parliament. This met in 1628 and in return for subsidies the king reluctantly accepted the Petition of Right which forbade arbitrary imprisonment and the raising of taxes not authorized by parliament. An attempt was also made to impeach Buckingham—who was later assassinated by a Puritan fanatic during an adjournment of the national assembly. His death did not result in a permanent reduction in tension between Charles and parliament. Things came to a head following parliament’s reassembly in early 1629, with the king’s infractions of the Petition of Right and his religious policies being causes of conflict. Once more, therefore, parliament was dissolved.

  Why was Charles’ religious stance a source of discord? The problem was this: shortly after the commencement of his reign he openly aligned himself with the right wing of the Church of England, a reactionary group which wished among other things to introduce more ritual into religious services and beautify churches. Disenchantment with the king’s religious views increased during the 1630s for in 1633 Charles, whose wife was a Catholic, appointed William Laud Archbishop of Canterbury, and under him like-minded clergymen received promotion, Puritans were persecuted, and steps taken to restore the power and authority of the episcopate. Hence an increasing number of people came to believe that the king and archbishop were crypto-Catholics spearheading a campaign to undermine the Reformation.

  Laud was appointed Archbishop of Canterbury during the period when Charles ruled without parliament, a period sometimes termed the ‘Eleven Years’ Tyranny’ or the ‘Personal Rule.’ The latter is more appropriate. It is certainly true that he behaved high-handedly during this era, imprisoning for instance, several MPs who had offended him in 1629, but it would be wrong to envisage Charles as a cruel and utterly arbitrary monarch whose actions inflicted abject misery on his subjects: the number of political and religious prisoners was small. On the whole, in fact, life was peaceful and more prosperous than it had been, for inflation, which had marred the early decades of the century, had become less acute.

  Opposition to Charles’ rule only became serious in the late 1630s. The principal cause of the unrest was an attempt to introduce religious reforms in Scotland similar to those implemented in England. The Scots were outraged, and a National Covenant pledging resistance to reform was drawn up and signed in February 1638.

  Charles decided to use force against the Scots in order to impose his will and restore his authority. However, although his financial resources, the customs being one, were adequate for peace time needs, they were insufficient to wage war successfully and so he failed to achieve his objectives in the First Bishops’ War of 1639. Nevertheless, Charles soon set to work planning another war against the Scots (whose cause was widely viewed with sympathy in England), and to gain adequate funds resorted to summoning a parliament. In the event, the ‘Short Parliament’, which assembled in April l640, refused to grant subsidies until its grievances against the king’s rule had been addressed. It was thus soon dissolved.

  One of the grievances was ‘ship money.’ This was an annual charge, first raised in Elizabethan times, for the refitting and enhancement of the navy, which Charles reintroduced in 1634 and extended from coastal counties to inland ones the following year. Initially ship money had an impressive yield but by the close of the decade resistance to it among the king’s subjects was strong and widespread making it harder and harder to collect.

  In the summer of 1640, soon after the dissolution of the ‘Short Parliament,’ Charles became involved in the Second Bishops’ War. Unlike the first, this witnessed some serious fighting and not surprisingly in view of the king’s limited resources, things went badly for him. In fact, the Scots occupied England north of the River Tees. In the ensuing Treaty of Ripon Charles agreed, among other things, to summon a new parliament which would ratify a permanent settlement and pay the Scots to return home.

  Thus, on 3 November, the ‘Long Parliament’ assembled. The vast majority of those who attended were critical of the king and the leaders of the Commons were in no hurry to see the Scots return north, for they were well aware that the Scots’ presence in England strengthened their hand.

  Parliament soon moved against Charles’ ‘evil counsellors,’ the foremost being his right-hand man, the Earl of Strafford, and Archbishop Laud. They were impeached and sent to the Tower. In March 1641 the former was put on trial, accused of treason, and through a bill of attainder, executed in May. (Laud was to suffer the same fate in 1645).

  By the time of Strafford’s death, Charles had conceded to the Triennial Act under which parliaments would be held every three years, and to a bill which stipulated that the existin
g parliament could only be dissolved by its own consent, a major encroachment on the royal prerogative.

  During the course of the summer a series of reforming bills passed into law and resulted, inter alia, in the abolition of ship money and the prerogative courts such as Star Chamber and the ecclesiastical Court of High Commission, which were instruments of arbitrary rule. By late summer enough money had been raised to pay off the Scots. In view of this, and the programme of reform, some people felt sanguine about the future. John Pym, the leader of the Commons, was not one of them. He rightly believed that Charles would seek to reverse his concessions, and passionately believed that Protestantism was threatened by a popish plot to which the king and queen were party.

  Marked tension revived in late 1641. News of a Catholic uprising in Ireland involving the massacre of Protestant British settlers arrived, and the rebels claimed to be acting in the king’s name. As G.E. Aylmer has observed of the rebellion: ‘In Ireland it was overwhelmingly an ethnic and religious conflict: an abortive war of national liberation. In England it was seen as a bloody papalistic rebellion, a horrifying manifestation of the work of AntiChrist.’