How far was the civil war lost because of the royalists inability to lead there troops affectively? I think leadership was a key part in the failure of the king to amass an effective army, and it made it almost impossible for Charles I to follow through for any kind of decisive victory.

The rascally Royalists did win some battles too......they just didn't manage to pay their troops as regularly. They also had Prince Rupert and his wonderful cavalry to storm the Parliamentarian lines.....and raid the baggage train. Charles didn't make too many sound decisions though and often failed to press home an advantage. Cromwell and Black Tom Fairfax were masterly leaders and the creation of the New Model Army was the clincher.
I think you would do well to ask at the English Civil War Society website and there are huge numbers of books about the Civil Wars.

I know little about the civil war but did not the general will of the people have something to do with the victory?

....that depended on where you lived in a lot of cases.

True. If you lived anywhere near the borders of territory, then you pretty much disliked both sides. I must admit, the Parliamentarians did have a lot of advantages over the royalists. Better leadersip, finances and general geography were definate good points. I know the royalists had some good vicotries, but they never followed them up. How good could there leadership have been? Charles was too narrow minded to listen to advice, and rupert was too worried about his poodle.

Well Parliament had the advantage of London on there side which has been desisive in many battles and wars before.

I am thinking of the Plantangent and Wars of the Roses, even Mary I had London on her side. And William III and Mary II in the glorouis revolution had the London City Mob on their side.

How far do you think Cromwell had a promenant roll in the beginning of the civil war? he was just a lowly farmer for most of it. It is VERY impressive he rose so quickly to become the head of the country. Its a pity his son mucked it all up really.

I think he was always a member of Parliament, and rose like anyone did through his conecctions. Look through the reign of the stuarts and tudors all people rose through there connections. but I beilive his conviction in his faith helped him greatly.

True, he had a devout belief on providence. But he rose so quickly, and from such a discredited family. It was surprising how he was offered the crown but refused it. Many people thought he would take the crown, but didnt cause he didnt want to upset the army.

It is an exaggeration to say that Cromwell was a lowly farmer for most of the ECW.

I didnt mean most of it, just at the beggining.

He was a fairly lowly farmer but was also a Member of Parliament from 1628 until Charles disolved it the next year but when Charles was forced to recall it in 1640 Cromwell had created around him a sizeable group.When war broke out in 1642 Cromwell was at the head of a cavalry regiment that won a series of victories in East Anglia and rose rapidly through the ranks.

He was made general of the New Model Army and after the victory at the battle of Naseby in 1645 his power was secure.....

On the subject of Richard he was just the wrong man for the job - the third son of Cromwell he only succeeded when his two elder brothers died.He lasted 8 months before resigning in face of hostility from both the army and the Rump Parliament - anarachy and new Civil War threatened so Charles II was recalled.

Interestingly he went into exile on the Continent but returned to England in 1680 and lived here until his death in 1712....thus outliving Charles II by 27 years....

The New Model Army was commanded by Sir Thomas Fairfax until he resigned his commission in 1650. Cromwell commanded the horse. Fairfax was not too keen on the execution of Charles I but what really forced his resignation was war against the Scots (who had been his allies earlier in the wars).

Also let's not overstate this idea of Cromwell being a farmer. He wasn't particularly wealthy but do remember he was an MP in 1628/9 and would have been regarded as a gentleman rather than a yeoman farmer. In 1637 he inherited a decent income and property from his uncle.

It is widely known that although Fairfax didnt really want to kill the king, it was his idea. In fact, many things came from fairfax originally, and cromwell instigated them. Unfortunately for fairfax, Cromwell always got the credit for it, shunting him into the background.

Although cromwell was a 'gentleman', many of his peers did see him as a lowly farmer. He worked the land along with his people, and had lost a great deal of money. To top it off, he had sisters, which were practically useless to him except for marrying off. He wasnt in a great position. I think what made him great was his ability to inspire his men. The Ironsides were the best force England had seen, and were the basis for the new model army.

quote:

Originally posted by ZJ:
It is widely known that although Fairfax didnt really want to kill the king, it was his idea. In fact, many things came from fairfax originally, and cromwell instigated them.

Can you substantiate the first point? This is the first time I've ever heard the idea of the regicide was Fairfax's idea. Also can you provide examples to support your second, somewhat contradictory, sentence?

I think this probably refers to his execution of Sir Charles Lucas and Sir George Lisle after the siege of Colchester during the Second Civil War in 1648 for treason on the grounds that they had taken up arms against Parliament. Obviously Cromwell and the other elements of the Army Council who had grown tired of negotiating with Charles and for whom this renewal of conflict was the last straw got the idea from this that if such a charge could be levelled at his subordinates it could be equally levelled at their leader.

Fairfax had not intended for the logic of his action to be extended in this manner. Indeed his behaviour was uncharacteristically unchivalrous and was probably explained by the fact that Fairfax had become bogged down reducing Royalist resistance in Kent and Essex whilst Cromwell gained the plaudits with a series of stunning victories over the Covenanters in Lancashire (it was probably at this time that effective power shifted to Cromwell) combined with an attack of severe gout (which probably also played a part in hastening his retirement).

Fairfax was appointed overall commander of the Parliamentary forces in 1645 in place of the incompetent Earl of Essex as he was one of the few commanders not affected by the Self-Denying Ordinance which removed Members of Parliament from army commands (although Cromwell was officially exempted). Although he was appointed one of the commissioners to try Charles I he pointedly refused to attend the trial and when his name was called at the beginning his wife, Anne, made his feelings clear when she called out:

"He hath more wit than to be here"

She was to make an even more famous intervention at the end of the trial on the morning of the 27 January when Bradshaw, the presiding judge, interrupted one of Charles' monologues on the value of monarchy with the words:

"Gentlemen, it is known to all, or most of you here present, that the prisoner at the bar hath been several times convened and brought before the Court to make answer to a charge of high treason and other high crimes exhibited in the name of the people of England."

to which Lady Fairfax shouted out defiantly:

"Not half, not a quarter of the people of England. Oliver Cromwell is a traitor."

Naturally, after this she was rapidly hustled out of the courtroom but Charles' dignity and bearing throughout the trial and the obvious kangaroo nature of the court had created a groundswell of public sympathy in Charles' favour. There was a serious risk of public disorder developing if the trial was allowed to continue any further and so, on Cromwell's orders, the trial was shut down, sentence was pronounced and Charles was executed three days later.

Fairfax' reason for giving up his command was Cromwell's later expeditions to Ireland and Scotland (then in theory still a foreign country) since he argued that Paliament's war had been with Charles not with the outlying parts of his kingdom (although the one lasting effect of the Civil Wars was to subordinate the four nations of the United Kingdom to a centralised government based in London in the same way that, over a century later, the chief lasting effect of the French Revolution was to subordinate the various regions of France to a centralised government based in Paris).

The Duke of Buckingham, whose lands had been confiscated and given to Fairfax, came out of exile and married Fairfax' daughter, Mary. When Buckingham was arrested and put in the Tower by Cromwell for sedition in 1658 Fairfax fiercely remonstrated with his former deputy. Fortunately for Buckingham, Cromwell's death literally saved his neck and he went on to negotiate Charles II's return two years later and play a prominent role in his court.

When Monck moved south to restore order in the post-Cromwellian Commonwealth Fairfax came out of retirement and captured York from Richard Lilburne, John's brother, and handed it over to Monck and advised him to restore Charles to the throne. In recognition of the part he had played in the Restoration and as a symbol of reconciliation of the two factions Charles entered London in May 1660 riding Fairfax' horse.

Fairfax was elected to the Cavalier Parliament in 1661 but played little part in public affairs after that. He died in 1671. He thus became the leading Parliamentarian to escape the retribution dealt out to his colleagues, both living and dead, after the Restoration. During the Civil War he engaged the metaphysical poet, Andrew Marvell, as tutor to his daughter (his poem "The Garden" dates from this period). Marvell subsequently became amanuensis to Milton, enabling him to continue as Latin Secretary to the Council after the onset of his blindness, as well as being elected M.P. for Hull after the Restoration. Marvell was an eye-witness to the execution of Charles I and wrote a poem with the famous lines:

"He nothing common did or mean
Upon that memorable scene"

quote:

Originally posted by Owain Glyndwr:
....that depended on where you lived in a lot of cases.

Geography, as much as, if not more than, social class determined allegiances. The larger the urban area you lived in the more you were likely to support Parliament (the three largest urban centres, London, Bristol & Hull were all Parliamentary strongholds) the more rural the area the more likely the support for the King, the nearer to London you were the greater the support for Parliament the further away the greater the support for the King. There was also a west-east division, East Anglia was strong for Parliament Wales was strong for the King, Derbyshire tended to support the King whilst Nottinghamshire tended towards Parliament, similarly with Lancashire and Yorkshire (although both areas were mixed).

The South-West was almost evenly mixed with loyalties cutting across family ties although Cornwall tended to be more pro-Royalist than Devon which was more pro-Royalist than Somerset. The Highland Scots under Montrose supported the King against the Lowland Covenanters (although the latter switched sides in the Second Civil War of 1647-8). Ireland had its own separate civil going on well before the version on the mainland started- which was of course to continue for another 350 years after the latter had ceased (although it was the Protestant "massacres" of 1641-2 and the fear that Charles would import Catholic levies to impose order and, eventually, Roman Catholicism, on the country that triggered the start of the Civil War here) and Cromwell intervened to bring that war to an alas temporary close with the most brutal effect in 1649.

The royals command of the army was a very predominant factor in why the civil war was lost by the royalists.There were other factors though thast were just as important. The main Factor in my opinion that caused the loss of the civil war was the appiontment of generals and army officails by bassing it on their title and not bassing it on their ability to fight.