The Civil Wars of England and Charles I

If one carefully examines Charles I and his ideas and philosophies on governing and the ways he implemented those philosophies it is easy to see why and how people justified their resistance to his reign. He was a moron. His inability to reason and see past his own pride and admit that his plan and ideologies were incorrect he successfully accomplished a feat rarely seen in history -he got not only is enemies mad at him, but also his supporters, (I know it's hard to imagine this being a rare occurrence in light of the last few years under the Bush administration...but it is).

The Scottish were angered about his insistence on changing their religion, the English for his insistence on changing their government, and the Irish for his insistence on killing them. (Which, really, when you think about it, and you don't have to think too hard, are ALL REALLY REALLY good reasons for becoming angered.) And while the Scottish, English, and Irish all traditionally hate each other, they were able to all agree on one thing-Charles was a moron, and something had to be done.

In 1643 the Scots, after seeing the failure of the Root and Branch Petition and seeing the ineffectiveness of a sermon preached to the House of Commons which addressed the sins and alienation of the king and his followers from God [7], started the Solemn League and Covenant, which stated that it's purpose was for the "settling and preserving of the true Protestant religion with perfect peace in his majesty's dominions..." [2]. In reality, however, this really was a Charles Is A Moron and We Hate Him League. So naturally the English, angered at Charles's political incompetence, the dismal effects of the Wars of the Covenant, not to mention the advent of the First Civil War, joined in. They, however, with the help of the Long Parliament voiced a few extra complaints beyond the Scottish appeals relating to religion-in fact, to be exact, they came up with 240 extra things. Which they presented to Charles I in what became known as the Grand Remonstrance.

By this time, as aforementioned, the First Civil War was well under way as the Earl of Essex and Oliver Cromwell lead the army of Roundheads or Parliamentarians against Prince Rupert and the Cavaliers or the Royalists. Essentially a struggle between the two groups, the First Civil War was claimed by both to be a war that was "defending traditional values and the core of the English constitution in Church and Sate" [3]. Both sides were convinced of their cause, and with this statement made by Cromwell about one of his soldiers, "he was a precious young man, fir for God" [4] it was evident that they thought they fought for the will of god as well. With the battle between Keyton and Edgehill it appeared earlier on that the Royalist would emerge as the victors of the war, as a document attest that the royalists, "killed five for one" [5]. However, in 1646 at the Battle of Naseby Charles's army was destroyed and he was forced to seek shelter with a Scottish army in Southwall.

With Charles in Scotland, Cromwell sought to reform the English Constitution and so consequently the Putney Debates began as the New Model Army and the Levellers tried to reach a consensus on the new constitution. Charles I, however, if he was anything, was not one to give up easily-even when it was obvious that he was wrong. By gathering support in Scotland by making false promises and pledges he didn't intend to keep. Charles I was able to raise yet another army and so began the Second Civil War, which accumulated in the battle of Preston in 1648, the eventual execution of Charles I, and the advent of the Commonwealth.

This, however, was not the end of the Civil wars as Charles II gathered his forces and in an attempt to wrest control from Cromwell began the Third Civil War. Fought mainly in Scotland and Ireland this was probably the most bloodied and brutal of the wars. Nearly 30% of Ireland's population either died or were exiled by the end of the war. The end of the war is traditionally marked with the Battle of Worcester in 1651, but an examination of various historical documents seems to show some confusion on who won the battle. "True and happy Newes From Worchester" indicating that the King's army won [6] and "Battle of Worcester" which indicates the victory of Cromwell [7]. Nevertheless, there is no confusion about who held power and ruled in England from 1653-59 as Cromwell controlled The Protectorate as the Lord Protector.

While all the groups involved justified the English Civil Wars for many different reasons the outcome was singular in nature-widespread confusion, death, and disappointment. All of which resulted in a form of government very akin to that which was in place before the wars. Switching a King for a Lord Protector, a position that would eventually prove to be so unbearable that the people would eventually request Charles II to return to England as a King.

[1] Nicolas Proffet, England's Impenitence Under Smiling, Causing Anger to continue, and the destroying hand of God to be stretched forth still. Set out in a sermon preached before the Honourable House of Commons, at a Publicke Fast, Sept. 25, 1644(London:1645). [Wing P3647].

[2] Solemn League of Covenant for Reformation and Defence of Religion, the Honour and Happiness of the King, and the Peace of the Three Kingdoms of Scotland, England, and Ireland" at http://www.scotswars.com/17thcent/covenanters/the_solemn_league_and_covenant.htm, 1.

[3] Robert Bucholz and Newton Key, Early Modern England 1485-1714.

[4] Thomas Cromwell on a soldier's death at Marston Moor in Thomas Carlyle, ed Oliver Cromwell's Letters and Speeches 2 Vols. (London: Chapman and Hall, 1907), I, 151.

[5] A Relation of the Battel fought between Keynton and Edgehill, by hi Majesty's Army and that of the Rebels. Printed by his Majesty's command at Oxford by Leonard Lichfield, Printer to the University, 1642. At http://www.hillsdale.edu/dept/History/War/17e/ECW/1642-Edgehill-Royalist.htm.

[6] True and Happy News from WORCESTER Read in the Honourable House of Commons, Sept. 24, 1642. At http://www.lukehistory.com/resources/worcester1642.html

[7] "Battle of Worcester" at http://www.lukehistory.com/ballads/btlwor.html