The English Civil War

by Peter Young, Richard Holmes

Between August 1642, when the Royal Standard of King Charles I was raised above Castle Hill at Nottingham, and September 1651, when the second Charles barely managedto escape to France from the bloody chaos of Worcester, three separate civil Wars between the Crown and Parliament were contested. This text is a military history dealing with the operational aspects of these wars, and is based on a combination of original sources and extensive studies of the actual battle fields - battles such as Edgehill, Cropredy, Lostwithiel, Marston Moor and Naseby.

Genres: Military History, English Civil War, History, Nonfiction, 17th Century

377 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1976

About the author

Brigadier Peter Young, DSO, MC & 2 bars was a British soldier & WWII veteran. He served with the Commandos during that war, ultimately commanding a Brigade. After the war, he commanded a regiment on secondment to the Jordanian Arab Legion. After his retirement from the army, he became a lecturer at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, and eventually also a well-respected author of books on Military History, particularly with reference to the Second World War, the English Civil War & the Napoleonic Wars.

Reviews

[Heinz Reinhardt · Rating 4 out of 5]

Being half English and roughly a quarter Scot myself, I know honestly rather little of the history of my predominantly native isle. The English Civil War (technically, three Civil Wars rather back to back to back) has always been a source of interest of mine, and a huge gap in my knowledge.
I remember watching the movie made on Cromwell for the first time in college several years back, and read quite a few articles on individual battles of the wars in military history magazines. But never read a full on book of the conflict(s) till now.
Personally, I thought this was an excellent introductory work on the English Civil Wars, and despite the density of the detail, it was easy to follow. The book started with a good overview of how Charles I aggravated parliament to the point of civil conflict and then all out war. There was a detailed chapter on the art of war in the 1600's, followed by the meat of the book which was a long section on the First Civil War.
Despite some early defeats, Parliament held the crucial city of London throughout the war, acting as a strategic fulcrum and the central position, while Royalist forces had to operate on exterior lines and the periphery towards the strategic center of the nation.
Parliaments control of the southern ports was likewise decisive, as was the fact that the Royalist forces, despite several gifted commanders, and a King who did quite well with the art of war despite his amateur status, were generally ill disciplined.
Often, after even minor defeats, both sides would see their forces melt away by desertion and looting-foraging. This problem, while endemic to both sides, was seemingly worse amongst the Royalists.
The Royalists negative strategic position never really improved despite Charles marching on London more than once. The peripheries continued to be gobbled up by Parliamentary forces, and when the Scottish Covenanters intervened on behalf of London, Charles cause was strategically doomed.
Parliament, however, especially the dictatorial Protector Oliver Cromwell, ensured that they would push the Scots away and towards support for the Crown. Both of the other two Civil Wars were largely English-Scottish wars, and Scotland was effectively conquered at the end of the final war.
Despite the decisive military victory of Cromwell and the Parliamentary cause, politically the results of the wars were more ephemeral.
Cromwell was indeed a harsh dictator and one who seemingly didn't exactly run a smooth ship of state. By the time of his death, there were signs of civil conflict once again.
Ironically, despite Charles I being beheaded at Cromwell's demand at the end of the Second Civil War (an act this American colonial found extremely deplorable), Charles II would be declared King not long after Cromwell's passing, and the Monarchy and the Lords would be restored. To great acclaim from the commons.
How the wheel had turned.
I genuinely consider this an excellent book, and the perfect introduction to the English Civil Wars.
It definitely needs to have another print run.
Highly recommended.

[Stephen Tuck · Rating 2 out of 5]

I abandoned this one on page 90. It was written in 1974, but in a “war is glorious” style that has been grotesque since 1914. There are many, many better histories than f the English Civil War than this.

[Peter · Rating 4 out of 5]

Enjoyable review of the Civil Wars. Perhaps a little outdated in places but still a sound and readable account.

[Richard Gorton · Rating 4 out of 5]

The bulk of my prior knowledge about the English Civil War[s] is from the Movie "Cromwell".
Pro: lots of interesting content, including such items as: Dragoons were named as such after their "Dragon" (gun); Fusiliers were the infrantry which guarded the artillery with their Fusils (musket). The content is (so far as I can ascertain) generally unbiased towards the Roundheads or the Cavaliers.

Con: my knowledge of the geography of the English countryside is quite limited - unless one knows where places like Naseby, Newbury, etc. are located, it can be hard to understand the various campaigns/sequences of battles.

Interesting: there are a huge number of towns in New England (I live in Massachusetts) with counterparts of the same name in England. Not very original on the part of the founders of the New England locations.

The military leaders of both sides, were (pun intended) in general, amateurs at the beginning of the conflict, with a very few officers with prior field experience. Mostly under arms for Sweden if I understand the descriptions correctly.

Overall, I would recommend this - and highly recommend periodic reading of wikipedia as you are going through this and discover unusual phrases and terms.