Factors that Affected the Outcome of the First Civil War

Factors that Affected the Outcome of the First Civil War

In the 1630’s and 1640’s Britain was divided by civil war. The British

civil war forced fathers and sons, cousins, brothers and friends to

choose sides and fight against the enemy which would often mean family

members. The two sides (the Royalists, who fought for King Charles the

second, and the Parliamentarians, who fought for parliament) both had

strengths and weaknesses. It is these that decided the course of the

war but it is commonly argued that the reason for the result was the

Royalists inability to capitalise on an early advantage and

parliaments growing strength.

King Charles’ army seized an early advantage in the first civil war.

Large parts of the country such as South Wales and the South West were

on the side of the King. In addition to this he soon gained control of

most of northern England. The King, at this stage of the war had

superior troops to those of Parliament and had greater resources

despite Parliament controlling most trading centres and ports.

Charles’ initial plan to march on London was a sound one; however, in

order for him to have achieved victory in this manner it was crucial

that Charles capitalized quickly and decisively upon his early

advantage. Unfortunately for him by allowing his army to be drawn into

battle at Edgehill he missed the opportunity to do this. However, the

door was not shut entirely in the Kings face and most historians agree

that were it not for the battle fought for Parliament by the voluntary

London Trained Bands at Turnham Green then the king would probably

have had an open road to London. As Angela Anderson puts it, ‘’Had...

... middle of paper ...

...rmation of the New Model army a

Royalist victory began to look less and less likely.

Even at this stage, when Parliamentary victory looked inevitable it

was not certain that it would come quickly. It was only Charles’ error

in being drawn to battle at Naseby and the re-emergence of the

neutralists that brought about the collapse of Royalist forces within

the year.

Ultimately it was not Royalist weaknesses or parliamentary strengths

which caused the first civil war to end as it did but a balance of the

two. Parliament would not have been able to capitalise on their

resources if the king had had similar resources and the same goes for

their strong command structure, being at odds with the poor discipline

of the King’s troops. The Civil war ended as it did because of

Parliamentary strength and Royalist weaknesses.