Third English Civil War

In 1639, and again in 1640, Charles I, who was king of both Scotland and England in a personal union, went to war with his Scottish subjects in the Bishops' Wars. These had arisen from the Scots' refusal to accept Charles's attempts to reform the Scottish Kirk to bring it into line with English religious practices.[1] Charles was not successful in these endeavours, and the ensuing settlement established the Covenanters' hold on Scottish government, requiring all civil office-holders, parliamentarians and clerics to sign the National Covenant, and giving the Scottish Parliament the authority to approve all of the king's councillors in Scotland.[2] After years of rising tensions, in part caused by Charles's defeat in the Bishops' Wars and his need to fund them, the relationship between Charles and his English Parliament also broke down in armed conflict, starting the First English Civil War in 1642.[3][4]

In England Charles's supporters, the Royalists, were opposed by the combined forces of the Parliamentarians and the Scots, who in 1643 had formed an alliance bound by the Solemn League and Covenant, in which the English Parliament agreed to reform the English church along similar lines to the Scottish Kirk in return for the Scots' military assistance.[5] After four years of war the Royalists were defeated. With his capital at Oxford under siege, Charles escaped, surrendered to the Scots at Southwell on 5 May and was taken to Newcastle, which was in Scottish hands.[6] The Scots agreed with the English Parliament on a peace settlement that would be put before the King. Known as the Newcastle Propositions, it would have required all of the King's subjects in Scotland, England and Ireland to sign the Solemn League and Covenant, brought the church in each kingdom into accordance with the Covenant and with Presbyterianism, and ceded much of Charles's secular authority as king of England to the English Parliament. The Scots spent some months trying to persuade Charles to agree to these terms, but he refused to do so. Eventually, under pressure from the English to withdraw their forces now the war was over, the Scots handed Charles over to the English parliamentary forces in exchange for a financial settlement, and left England on 3 February 1647.[7]

Charles now engaged in separate negotiations with different factions. Presbyterian English Parliamentarians and the Scots wanted him to accept a modified version of the Newcastle Propositions, but in June 1647, Cornet George Joyce of the New Model Army seized Charles,[8] and the army council pressed him to accept the Heads of Proposals, a less demanding set of terms which, crucially, did not require a Presbyterian reformation of the church.[9] He rejected these as well however, and instead signed an offer known as the Engagement, which had been thrashed out with the Scottish delegation, on 26 December 1647. Charles agreed to confirm the Solemn League and Covenant by Act of Parliament in both kingdoms, and to accept Presbyterianism in England, but only for a trial period of three years, in return for the Scots' assistance in regaining his throne in England.[10]

When the delegation returned to Edinburgh with the Engagement, the Scots were bitterly divided on whether or not to accept its terms. Its supporters, who became known as the Engagers, argued that it offered the best chance the Scots would get of acceptance of the Covenant across the three kingdoms, and that rejecting it risked pushing Charles to accept the Heads of Proposals. It was opposed by those who believed that to send an army into England on behalf of the King would be to break the Solemn League and Covenant, and that it offered no guarantee of a lasting Presbyterian church in England; the Kirk went so far as to issue a declaration on 5 May 1648 that condemned the Engagement as a breach of God's law.[11] After a protracted political struggle, the Engagers gained a majority in the Scottish Parliament, by which time war had again broken out in England between Royalists and Parliamentarians. The Scots sent an army under the command of the Duke of Hamilton into England to fight on behalf of the King in July, but it was heavily defeated at Preston by a force led by Oliver Cromwell.[12] The rout of the Engager army led to further political upheaval in Scotland, and the faction opposed to the Engagement was able to regain control of the government, with the assistance of a group of English parliamentary cavalry led by Cromwell.[12][13]

A contemporary English view of the Scots imposing conditions on Charles II in return for their support

Exasperated by the prolonged bloodshed, the New Model Army purged parliament and established the Rump Parliament, which had Charles tried for treason against the English people; he was executed on 30 January 1649,[14] and the republican Commonwealth was created.[15] The Scottish Parliament, which had not been consulted prior to the King's execution, declared his son, also Charles, king of Britain.[16][17] Before they would permit him to return from exile in the Dutch Republic to take up his crown, they demanded that he first sign both Covenants: recognising the authority of the Kirk in religious matters, and that of parliament in civil affairs.[18][19][20] Charles II was initially reluctant to accept these conditions, but after Cromwell's campaign in Ireland crushed his Royalist supporters there,[21] he felt compelled to accept the Scottish terms, and signed the Treaty of Breda on 1 May 1650. The Scottish Parliament set about rapidly recruiting an army to support the new king, and Charles set sail to Scotland, landing on 23 June.[22]

The Dunbar victory medal

Believing that the English army was in a hopeless situation and under pressure to finish it off rapidly,[40][41] Leslie moved his army off the hill and into a position to attack Dunbar.[33][37] On the night of 2/3 September Cromwell manoeuvred his army so as to be able to launch a concentrated pre-dawn attack against the Scots right wing.[42][43] Whether this was part of a masterplan to decisively defeat them, or part of an attempt to break through and escape back to England is debated by historians.[33][44][45] The Scots were caught by surprise, but put up a stout resistance.[42][43] Their cavalry were pushed back by the English,[46] while Leslie was unable to deploy most of his infantry into the battle because of the nature of the terrain.[47][48] The battle was undecided when Cromwell personally led his cavalry reserve in a flank attack on the two Scottish infantry brigades that had managed to come to grips with the English and rolled up the Scottish line.[49][50] Leslie executed a fighting withdrawal, but some 6,000 Scots, from his army of 12,000, were taken prisoner, and approximately 1,500 killed or wounded.[51][52] The prisoners were taken to England; many died on the march south, or in captivity. At least some of those who survived were deported to become indentured workers on English possessions overseas.[53]

When the news of the defeat reached Edinburgh, many people fled the city in panic, but Leslie sought to rally what remained of his army, and build a new defensive line at Stirling, where he was joined by the bulk of the government, clergy, and Edinburgh's mercantile elite.[54] Cromwell dispatched Lambert to capture Edinburgh, while he marched on the port of Leith, which offered much better facilities for landing supplies and reinforcements than Dunbar. Without Leslie's army to defend them, both were captured with little difficulty.[54] Cromwell took pains to persuade the citizens of Edinburgh that his war was not with them; he promised that their property would be respected, and allowed them to come and go freely, hold markets, and observe their usual religious services, although the latter were restricted as most of the clergy had removed to Stirling. He also took steps to secure food for the city, which by this point was short on supplies.[55] Edinburgh Castle held out until December,[56] but since it was cut off from reinforcement and supplies and offered no threat, Cromwell did not assault it, and treated its commander with courtesy.[54] The historian Austin Woolrych described the behaviour of the occupying troops as "exemplary", and observed that after a short time many fugitives returned to the city, and its economic life returned to something akin to normality.[57]

The defeat at Dunbar caused great damage to Leslie's reputation and authority. He attempted to resign as head of the army, but the Scottish government would not permit it, largely because of a lack of any plausible replacement.[57] Several of his officers, however, refused to take orders from him, and left Leslie's forces to join a new army that was being raised by the Western Association.[57] Divisions already present in the Scottish government were widened by the new situation. The more practical blamed the purges for Leslie's defeat, and looked to bring the Engagers back into the fold; the more dogmatic thought that God had deserted them because the purges had not gone far enough, and argued that too much faith had been put in a worldly prince who was not sufficiently committed to the cause of the Covenant.[58] These more radical elements issued the divisive Western Remonstrance, which castigated the government for its failure to properly purge the army, and further widened the rifts amongst the Scots.[59] The Remonstrants, as this group became known, took command of the Western Association army, and attempted to negotiate with Cromwell, urging him to depart Scotland and leave them in control; Cromwell rejected their advances, and comprehensively destroyed their army at the Battle of Hieton (near the centre of modern Hamilton) on 1 December.[56][60]

A historical civil war re-enactment

During December 1650 Charles and the Scottish government reconciled with the Engagers who had been purged from it and Highland chiefs who had been excluded by their refusal to sign the Covenant.[56] These competing factions were poorly coordinated[61] and it was not until the late spring of 1651 that they were fully integrated into the Scottish army.[56] In January 1651 the English attempted to outflank the Scottish-held choke point of Stirling by shipping a force across the Forth of Firth, but this was unsuccessful.[62] In early February the English army advanced against Stirling, then retreated in dreadful weather; Cromwell himself fell ill.[63]

In late June the Scottish army advanced south. The English moved north from Edinburgh to meet them, but Leslie positioned his army north of Falkirk, behind the River Carron. This position was too strong for Cromwell to assault; Leslie resisted every provocation to fight another open battle and eventually withdrew. Cromwell followed and attempted to bypass Stirling, but was unable to.[62] He then marched to Glasgow and sent raiding parties into Scottish held territory. The Scottish army shadowed the English, moving south west to Kilsyth on 13 July.[64]

Early on 17 July, an English force of 1,600 men under Colonel Robert Overton crossed the Forth of Firth at its narrowest point in 50 specially constructed flat bottomed boats, landing at North Queensferry on the Fleet Peninsula. The Scottish garrison at Burntisland moved towards the English landing place and sent for reinforcements from Stirling and Dunfermline. The Scots dug in and awaited their reinforcements, while for four days the English shipped the balance of their own force across the Forth and Major-general John Lambert took command.[65][66][67]

On 20 July the Scots, more than 4,000 strong and commanded by Major-general James Holborne advanced against the English force of approximately 4,000 men.[64] After a ninety-minute hiatus the cavalry of both forces engaged on each flank. In both cases the Scots initially had the better of it, but failed to exploit their advantage, were counter-charged by the English reserves, and routed. The previously unengaged Scottish infantry attempted to retreat, but in a running battle lost heavily in dead and captured.[68]

After the battle, Lambert marched 6 miles (10 km) east and captured the deep-water port of Burntisland. Cromwell shipped most of the English army there, assembling 13,000 to 14,000 men by 26 July. He then ignored the Scottish army at Stirling and on 31 July marched on the seat of the Scottish government at Perth, which he besieged. Perth surrendered after two days, cutting off the Scottish army from reinforcements, provisions and materiel.[67][69] Cromwell deliberately left the route south open, reckoning that if the Scots abandoned their defensive positions, then once in the open they could be destroyed.[69] Charles and Leslie, seeing no hope of victory if they stayed to face Cromwell, marched south on 31 July in a desperate bid to raise Royalist support in England.[69] By this time they had only around 12,000 men, who were very short of firearms.[70] Cromwell and Lambert followed, shadowing the Scottish army while leaving Monck with 5,000 men in Scotland to mop up what resistance remained.[70]

East Port, Dundee

By the end of August, Monck had captured Stirling, Alyth, and St Andrews. Dundee and Aberdeen were the last significant Scottish strongholds. The strength of Dundee's fortifications meant that many Scots had deposited money and valuables there, to keep them safe from the English. Monck drew up his full army outside the town on 26 August and demanded its surrender. The governor, believing the town walls and the local militia strong enough to withstand the English, refused. Infuriated at having to risk his men's lives with an assault when the war was all but over, Monck gave permission for the town to be sacked once it was captured. After a three-day bombardment the English stormed the west and east ports on 1 September.[71] They broke into the town and thoroughly sacked it; several hundred civilians, including women and children, were killed.[72] Monck admitted to 500, but the total may have been as high as 1,000. Monck allowed the army 24 hours to pillage and a large amount of booty was seized. Subsequently strict military discipline was enforced.[73] On hearing the news from Dundee, Aberdeen promptly surrendered. On 26 May 1652 the last Royalist stronghold anywhere on the eastern side of Scotland, Dunnottar Castle near Stonehaven, surrendered after an eight-month siege.[74]

Cromwell meanwhile, had reached the River Tyne in seven days, and thence, marching 20 miles (32 km) a day in extreme heat with the country people carrying their arms and equipment the regulars entered Ferrybridge on 19 August, at which date Lambert, Harrison and the north-western militia were about Congleton. It seemed probable that a great battle would take place between Lichfield and Coventry on or just after 25 August, and that Cromwell, Harrison, Lambert and Fleetwood would all take part in it. But shortly after leaving Warrington Charles resolved to abandon the direct march on London and to make for the Severn valley, where his father had found numerous adherents, and which had been the centre of gravity of the English Royalist movement of 1648. However, Charles's army was perceived as a Scottish invasion, and popular sentiment was against it. Charles arrived at Worcester on 22 August, and spent five days resting the troops, and gathering and arming the few recruits who came in.

Cromwell had during his march south thrown out successively two flying columns under Colonel Robert Lilburne to deal with the Lancashire Royalists under the Earl of Derby. Lilburne entirely routed the enemy at the Battle of Wigan Lane on 25 August and as affairs turned out Cromwell merely shifted the area of his concentration two marches to the south-west, to Evesham. Early on 28 August, Lambert's brigade made a surprise crossing of the Severn at Upton, 6 miles (10 km) below Worcester.

In the action which followed Massey was severely wounded and he and his men were forced to retreat northwards along the west bank of the Severn towards the river Teme and Worcester. Fleetwood followed Lambert with reinforcements and orders to advance north towards the Teme. This western envelopment severed the Royalists lines of communications to Wales and the western counties of England. The Royalists were now only 16,000 strong with no hope of significant reinforcements and disheartened by the apathy with which they had been received in districts formerly all their own. Cromwell, for the only time in his military career, had a two-to-one numerical superiority.[76][77]

Cromwell and his forces overtook the Scottish army in England at Worcester. He secured the bridges which cut the Royalists' line of retreat and on 3 September, the anniversary of Dunbar, forced the passage of the River Teme. The Parliamentarian bridging train bridged both the Teme and the Severn and Cromwell on the left bank and George Fleetwood on the right swept in a semicircle 4 miles (6 km) long up to Worcester. In the Battle of Worcester the defences were stormed as darkness came on and most of the several thousand Royalists who escaped during the night were easily captured the next day. The battle marked the end of the English Civil War after nine years.[78][79] Leslie, along with most of the Royalist commanders, was captured; he was imprisoned in the Tower of London, and would remain there until 1660. Charles II himself managed to escape the field.[78] The historian Barry Coward wrote "It was a divided enemy that Cromwell fought after Dunbar and decisively defeated at Worcester".[80]

In the aftermath of the battle, Worcester was heavily looted by the Parliamentarian army, with an estimated £80,000 of damage[81] Around 2,000 Scottish troops that were not captured meanwhile were attacked by locals as they fled northwards and many killed. Graves have been recovered, and occasional bodies that can be dated to the period. Around 10,000 prisoners, nearly all Scots, were held captive, and either sent to work on the Fens drainage projects, or transported to the New World to work as forced labour.[81]

• Plant, David (17 January 2010). "1651: Jersey and the Channel Isles". British Civil Wars & Commonwealth.

Attribution:

•  This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Atkinson, Charles Francis (1911). "Great Rebellion". In Chisholm, Hugh (ed.). Encyclopædia Britannica. 12 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 403–421.