Inligting

Wallis en die burgeroorlog


In die burgeroorlog was godsdiens 'n belangrike faktor om te besluit watter kant hulle wou ondersteun. Die regering se vervolging van Puriteine ​​het beteken dat die oorgrote meerderheid van hierdie godsdienstige groep die parlement ondersteun, terwyl die meeste Anglikane en Katolieke geneig was om die royaliste te bevoordeel.

Werkers en huurders van groot grondeienaars wat die royalistiese saak ondersteun, was dikwels verplig om die voorbeeld van hul meester te volg. Richard Vaughan, die graaf van Carbery, 'n Anglikaan, wat grond in Cardiganshire en Pembrokeshire besit het, kon daarin slaag om 'n groot aantal van sy huurders te oorreed om by die royalistiese weermag aan te sluit. Terwyl Lord Dacres van Hereford soldate vir die royaliste gewerf het uit sy landgoedere in Radnorshire.

Die markies van Worcester, die Rooms -Katolieke eienaar van die Raglan -kasteel, ondersteun Charles I.

Die koning was nie bereid om die markies van Worcester of sy seun aan te stel nie. Lord Herbert, na senior poste in sy leër, aangesien hy bewus was van die sterk vooroordeel wat die meeste mense in Brittanje teen Rooms -Katolieke gehad het. Die markies, wat groot dele van Monmouthshire besit het, en een van die rykste manne in Brittanje was, het die koning egter 'n aansienlike hoeveelheid geld voorsien om vir sy gewapende magte te betaal.

In sommige gevalle was gesinne verdeeld oor wie hulle moet ondersteun. William Feilding, graaf van Denbigh, en 'n lid van die Raad van Wallis, het by die koning se leër aangesluit kort nadat die oorlog verklaar is. Sy seun, Basil, wou egter nie sy pa se voorbeeld volg nie en besluit uiteindelik om vir die parlement te veg.

Mans en vrouens het nie dieselfde kant nodig gehad nie. Hoewel John Bodvile van Anglesey 'n kolonel in die koning se leër geword het, het sy vrou Anne die parlement ondersteun. Bang dat sy vrou die godsdienstige en politieke siening van sy drie kinders sou beïnvloed, het John Bodvile dit van haar laat wegneem en in die sorg van sy ma geplaas.

Alhoewel die meeste van die groot grondeienaars in Wallis die koning ondersteun het, was 'n paar baie invloedryke figure in die land die parlement ten gunste. Thomas Myddelton, parlementslid van Denbighshire, en eienaar van 'n aansienlike hoeveelheid grond rondom sy kasteel in Chirk, was 'n vroom Puritein.

Robert Devereux, graaf van Essex, wat groot boedels in Carmarthenshire besit het, was 'n sterk teenstander van Charles I. Aan die begin van die burgeroorlog is die graaf van Essex as generaal-generaal van die parlementêre leër aangestel.

Die belangrikste ondersteuner van die parlement in Suid -Wallis was Philip Herbert, die graaf van Pembroke, die grootste grondeienaar in Glamorgan. Herbert's Cardiff Castle was 'n belangrike basis vir parlementêre magte in Suid -Wallis.

Die parlementariërs het duisende pamflette vervaardig in 'n poging om mense te oorreed om hul saak te ondersteun. Alhoewel sommige hiervan in Wallis versprei is, het dit baie min invloed op die Walliese mense gehad. Die grootste probleem was dat hierdie pamflette in Engels was, 'n taal wat 'n groot deel van die bevolking nie verstaan ​​nie.

Mense se sakebelange het ook hul politieke trou beïnvloed. Om geld te bekom, het die koning monopolie regte aan sakelui verkoop. Dit het beteken dat slegs een persoon die reg gehad het om sekere goedere soos bakstene, sout en seep te versprei. Die manne wat voordeel getrek het uit hierdie monopolie -regte, ondersteun die koning, terwyl diegene wat die geleentheid geweier is om met hierdie goedere handel te dryf, dikwels die parlement ondersteun.

Mense wat in die meer ekonomies gevorderde gebiede in Wallis gewoon en gewerk het, was geneig om die parlement te bevoordeel. Dit was veral die geval met dorpe soos Haverfordwest, Pembroke en Tenby, wat baie handel dryf met die Puritaanse oorheersde hawe van Bristol.

Mense wat in die plattelandse gebiede van Wallis woon, het baie min geweet van die politieke meningsverskille tussen die koning en die parlement. Dit was ook onwaarskynlik dat hulle kontak met Puriteinse predikers gehad het. Hierdie mense was sterk onder die invloed van die plaaslike geestelikes en heersers, wat in die meeste gevalle uiters vyandig was teenoor Puritanisme. As gevolg hiervan was mense wat op die platteland woon, geneig om die koning te ondersteun.

Die oorgrote meerderheid mense in Wallis was nie sterk oor die geskil tussen die koning en die parlement nie en het so hard as moontlik probeer om uit die konflik te bly. Dit was eers toe hulle onder groot druk van hul verhuurder of van 'n besoekende weermagregiment gekom het, dat hulle gewoonlik ingestem het om by die een of ander kant aan te sluit.

Op 27 September 1642 verlaat Charles I sy hoofkwartier in Shrewsbury en reis na Wrexham, die hoofstad van Noord -Wallis. Boodskappe is gestuur aan die mense wat in Flintshire en Denbighshire woon om bymekaar te kom in Wrexham, sodat hulle kon hoor hoe hul koning die redes vir die konflik met die parlement verduidelik. Die koning was tevrede met die ontvangs wat hy ontvang het en sy toespraak het daartoe gelei dat 'n groot aantal mans ingestem het om vir die royalistiese leër te veg.

Toe die koning na Shrewsbury terugkeer, het sy neef gou by hom aangesluit. Prins Rupert, wat ook besig was om mans uit Noord -Wallis te werf. In die suide van Wallis het die markies van Hertford ook mans suksesvol oorreed om by die royalistiese saak aan te sluit. Teen 3 Oktober was die royalistiese leër sterk genoeg om die Cardiff -kasteel van die parlementêre ondersteuner van Suid -Wallis, die graaf van Pembroke, in beslag te neem.

Charles I het nou 'n leër van ongeveer 24 000 man gehad. Terwyl die meeste voetsoldate uit Wallis was, was die offisiere lede van die Engelse adel. In die 17de eeu is mans op 'n jong ouderdom opgelei om perd te ry. Dit het Charles die voordeel gegee om 'n goeie kavallerie te hê.

Op 12 Oktober het die koning se leër na Londen opgeruk. Elf dae later is die royalistiese magte deur die graaf van

Essex se troepe by Edgehill. Prins Rupert het besluit om 'n nuwe kavallerietaktiek te probeer, wat hy in Swede leer veg het. Dit behels die laai van volle spoed by die vyand. Die perde is naby mekaar gehou en net voor die impak het die mans hul pistole afgevuur.

Rupert se aanklag was suksesvol en sy kavaliers het die volgende uur lede van die parlementêre kavallerie agtervolg wat

van die slagveld af gehardloop het. Die swak gewapende royalistiese voetsoldate het op steun van die kavallerie staatgemaak. Toe Rupert terugkom, het hy ontdek dat sy voetsoldate baie swaar ly. Een ooggetuie beweer dat bykans 1 000 Walliese royalistiese soldate by Edgehill dood is.

Dit is gevolg deur nog 1 500 Walliese soldate wat op 16 November in Tewkesbury vermoor is en 2 000 by Hereford op 27 November. Royalistiese militêre bevelvoerders beskuldig die Walliesers van die vlug van die slagveld. Sommige historici het die optrede van die soldate geregverdig deur te beweer dat die Walliesers swak gewapen was en altyd aan die voorkant van die royalistiese magte geplaas is waar hulle die swaarkry van die parlementêre weermag teëgekom het.

Die royalistiese leër het sy opmars na Londen voortgesit en teen November die buitewyke van die stad bereik. By Turnham Green het Charles sy weg geblokkeer deur 'n parlementêre leër van ongeveer 24 000 man. Baie het Charles besluit om terug te keer na Oxford.

By die uitbreek van die burgeroorlog was Pembroke die enigste stad in Wallis wat steun vir die parlement verklaar het. Toe hy die nuus hoor, het Charles bevel gegee dat die stad aangeval moet word. Richard Vaughan, die graaf van Carbery, luitenant-generaal van die koning se leër in die suidweste van Wallis, het besluit om seker te maak dat ander dorpe in hierdie streek veilig is voordat hy met Pembroke te doen kry.

Die graaf van Carbery het eers in 1644 met sy aanval op Pembroke begin. Maar voordat hy die stad kon verower, het parlementêre versterkings per see vanaf Engeland gekom. Die graaf van Carbery besluit nou dat hy nie sterk genoeg is om Pembroke te vang nie, en trek sy magte terug.

Rowland Laugharne, die parlementêre bevelvoerder van Pembroke, het van hierdie geleentheid gebruik gemaak om die offensief aan te gaan. Sy troepe het gou beheer oor Haverfordwest, Tenby en Carew Castle verkry. Sy magte het toe ooswaarts opgeruk en dit was nie lank nie of Carmarthen en Cardiff is ook deur die parlementêre weermag gevange geneem.

Charles I was woedend toe hy hoor wat gebeur het en die graaf van Carbery as bevelvoerder van sy troepe in die suidweste van Wallis afdank. Carbery is vervang deur kolonel Charles Gerard, 'n ervare militêre bevelvoerder uit Engeland. Gerard se koninklike magte het gou die verlore gebied teruggekry en teen die somer van 1644 moes Laugharne en sy soldate terugkeer na Pembroke.

Die parlementêre magte het ook op die kort termyn sukses in die noorde van die land behaal. Thomas Myddelton, M.P. vir Denbighshire, en wie se Chirk -kasteel in Januarie 1643 deur die royalistiese magte gevange geneem is, was in beheer van die parlementêre militêre veldtog in Noord -Wallis.

Generaal-majoor Myddelton se belangrikste strategie was om die koning se militêre voorrade wat in Noord-Wallis aankom, van die vasteland af te sny. Nadat hy Wrexham in November 1643 ingeneem het, het sy leër na die hawens van die noordelike kus van Wallis gegaan. Conwy, Bangor en Caernarvon was goed verdedig en nadat 2 500 royalistiese troepe uit Ierland aangekom het, moes Myddelton terugtrek.

Myddelton vestig sy aandag nou in die middel van Wallis. In die somer van 1644 verower hy Welshpool en Newtown en op 18 September vind die eerste groot slag van die burgeroorlog in Wallis by Montgomery plaas. Die koninklikes het 'n swaar nederlaag gely en meer as 2 000 van hul mans is óf gedood, gewond of gevang.

Die troepe van Myddelton is noordwaarts en in Oktober kon hulle die Powis -kasteel verower. Ondanks strawwe pogings kon Myddelton egter nie beheer oor sy eie kasteel in Chirk terugkry nie. Nadat hy nie die parlement kon oorreed om nog troepe aan hom te verskaf nie, moes Myddelton weer sy plan laat vaar om die beheer oor die noordelike hawens van Wallis te probeer verkry.

In 1645 beveel die koning kolonel Charles Gerard en 2 700 van sy soldate om die royalistiese veldtog in Engeland te gaan help. Aangesien die royalistiese magte in Suid -Wallis verswak het, het Rowland Laugharne besluit om weer op die aanval te gaan. Nadat Laugharne die royalistiese leër by Colby Moor verslaan het, kon hy Carmarthen verower en teen die lente van 1646 was die hele Wes -Wallis onder die beheer van die parlementêre leër.

Die royalistiese leër het 'n slegte nederlaag op Naseby in Junie 1645 gely. Onder die slagoffers was meer as 100 Walliese vroue wat hul mans in die geveg gevolg het. Later het die parlementêre weermag sy optrede geregverdig deur te beweer dat omdat die vroue 'n taal praat wat hulle nie verstaan ​​nie, hulle aangeneem het dat hulle Ierse Katolieke is.

Na die Slag van Naseby het die koning teruggetrek na die Raglan -kasteel. Charles het gehoop dat hy meer Walliesers sou kon oorreed om by sy leër aan te sluit. Gerard se behandeling van die Walliesers ná sy oorwinnings in 1644 het hulle egter teen die royalistiese saak gekeer.

Om hulself te beskerm teen die royalistiese troepe van Gerard, het mans in Glamorgan 'n 'Peaceable Army' gevorm. Charles I het ingestem om verteenwoordigers van hierdie groep op 29 Julie 1645 in St Fagans te ontmoet om hul griewe te bespreek.

As gevolg van hierdie vergadering het Charles ingestem om kolonel Charles Gerard te verwyder as bevelvoerder van die royalistiese magte in Suid -Wallis. Ten spyte van hierdie optrede, het Charles steeds probleme ondervind om plaaslike mans in sy leër te werf. Op 14 September het die koning die Raglan -kasteel verlaat en na Noord -Wallis gegaan. Kort nadat die koning vertrek het, is die kasteel deur die parlementêre leër ingeneem. Ander koninklike kastele in Ruthin, Chirk, Caernarvon, Beaumaris, Rhuddlan, Flint en Harlech het een vir een aan die parlementêre magte geval. Charles het 'n rukkie in Denbigh Castle gebly, maar nadat Jacob Astley en sy royalistiese leër op 21 Maart 1646 oorgegee het, het Charles na Skotland gevlug.

Na die suksesvolle oorwinning oor die royalistiese magte in 1647, het die parlement planne begin maak om sy leër te ontbind. Dit het baie kommer veroorsaak omdat baie van die soldate etlike maande lank nie betaal is nie. Ander was bekommerd oor die toename in belasting wat deur die parlementêre regering opgelê is.

Op 24 Desember verklaar die parlement dat alle soldate wat na 6 Augustus 1647 aangekom het, sonder betaling ontslaan moet word. Diegene wat in 'n vroeëre stadium van die oorlog aangesluit het, sou slegs twee maande loon ontvang.

John Poyer, die militêre goewerneur van Pembroke, was woedend toe hy die nuus hoor en toesprake begin hou oor sy soldate wat die parlement se besluit om die leër te ontbind, aanval. Toe die parlement agterkom dat Poyer vyandige toesprake hou, stuur hulle kolonel Fleming om hom te vervang as goewerneur van Pembroke Castle.

Poyer het geweier om die kasteel prys te gee en het in plaas daarvan 'n brief aan die parlement gestuur om die betaling van £ 1,000 aan agterstallige loon vir sy mans te eis. Kolonel Fleming het £ 200 aangebied, maar dit is verwerp. Ander soldate in Suid -Wallis, wat van Poyer se optrede gehoor het, het na Pembroke gegaan om hul hulp te verleen. Ondersteuners van John Poyer was die twee mees senior weermagoffisiere in Suid-Wallis, generaal-majoor Rowland Laugharne en kolonel Rice Powell.

Die parlement het nou besef dat hulle 'n groot opstand onder hande gehad het. Die situasie het nog erger geword toe die nuus kom dat Charles I 'n ooreenkoms met die Skotte aangegaan het. In ruil vir die ondersteuning van 'n Skotse leër, het Charles ingestem om die vestiging van die Presbiteriaanse godsdiens in Engeland te aanvaar.

Op 10 April 1648 verklaar kolonel Poyer dat hy die koning nou ondersteun. Aangemoedig deur Poyer se verklaring vir die koning, het oud-royalistiese soldate by Poyer in Pembroke begin aansluit.

Toe die parlement hoor van Poyer se optrede in Pembroke, stuur hulle kolonel Thomas Horton met 3 000 troepe om die opstand te hanteer. Rowland Laugharne en byna 8 000 rebelle het Pembroke verlaat en Horton se parlementêre leër by St. Fagans in Glamorgan aangegaan. Hoewel dit in getal was, kon Horton se ervare en goed gedissiplineerde leër Laugharne se swak gewapende soldate verslaan. Meer as 200 van Laugharne se mans is dood en nog 3 000 is gevange geneem. Laugharne en wat van sy leër oor was, het daarin geslaag om na Pembroke terug te vlug.

Die opstand het nou na ander dele van Wallis versprei. Richard Bulkeley en die mense van Anglesey het hul steun vir die koning verklaar en sir John Owen het probeer om Denbigh Castle uit die parlementêre leër te neem. In die suide van die land het Rice Powell beheer oor Tenby geneem en Sir Nicholas Kemeys en ander plaaslike koninklikes het die Chepstow -kasteel ingeneem.

Toe die parlement besef dat die opstand vinnig onderbreek moes word, het hy besluit om Oliver Cromwell en vyf regimente na Wallis te stuur. Cromwell se troepe het Chepstow -kasteel op 25 Mei terug gewen en ses dae later moes Rice Powell Tenby oorgee.

Cromwell stap nou na Pembroke om John Poyer en Rowland Laugharne te hanteer. Die kasteel, gebou op 'n groot massa kalksteen en amper heeltemal omring deur die Pembroke -rivier, word beskou as een van die sterkste vestings in Brittanje.

Oliver Cromwell het nie kanonne wat groot genoeg was om deur mure te kom wat op sommige plekke 20 voet dik was nie. Hy het ook nie leërs van belegers gehad wat die 80 m hoë mure kon hanteer nie. Pogings om die kasteel te bestorm het misluk, en Cromwell moes dus wag om die rebelle onderdanig te maak.

Cromwell het aan die parlement teruggeskryf en voorspel dat Poyer en sy manne oor twee weke gedwing sou word om oor te gee. Hy was egter aanvanklik nie bewus daarvan dat die kasteel sy eie uitstekende watertoevoer het nie. Uiteindelik het 'n plaaslike man die geheim aan Cromwell verraai en die beleërende leër kon die blootgestelde waterpyp aan die buitewyke van die stad sny.

Na 'n beleg van agt weke en heeltemal sonder kos en water, is die rebelse soldate in die kasteel gedwing om oor te gee. Cromwell het saggeaard omgegaan met die oud-royalistiese soldate. Sy grootste woede was gerig op diegene wat voorheen lede van die parlementêre weermag was.

John Poyer, Rowland Laugharne en Rice Powell is deur die krygsraad in Londen verhoor en nadat hulle skuldig bevind is, is hulle almal ter dood veroordeel. Thomas Fairfax, die leier van die gewapende magte, het besluit dat slegs een moet sterf. Die drie mans het geweier om aan die lotery deel te neem om te besluit wie tereggestel sal word. Die militêre owerhede het 'n jong kind gekies om die lot te trek. Die vraestelle wat vir Laugharne en Powell geteken is, lui: "Life given by God". Poyer se papier was leeg en hy is op 21 April 1649 voor 'n groot skare in Covent Garden geskiet.

Ek ly meer pyn oor die maniere wat jy volg ... as ooit om jou in die wêreld te bring ... ek hoop dat jy nooit die koning sal opneem nie, want dit sal 'n te swaar las vir my wees om te dra.

Is dit nie 'n treurige geval dat daar in Wallis ... nie meer as dertien pligsgetroue ministers moet wees wat in hierdie tye hulself uitgespreek het ... getrou aan die parlement.

Wallis ... is 'n huilende wildernis ... daar is amper nie 'n preek onder hulle gehou nie ... sedert die hervorming ... Kerke sal u sterkste kastele wees as u dit goed bedien met predikante.

Die gewone mense wat verslaaf was aan die diens van die koning, het uit blinde Wallis en ander donker uithoeke van die land gekom ... Hierdie ellendige Walliesers ... het gedeeltelik die wapens opgeneem met die hoop om te plunder.

Ons hoor dat ... 6 000 Ierse rebelle in Wallis geland het ... hulle oefen aaklige en wrede wreedhede ... Tensy daar vinnig hulp ... na sir Thomas Myddelton gestuur word ... sal die hele land hierdeur vernietig word bloedige Iere.

Die groot plundering van die land laat die meeste mense die naam van 'n soldaat haat. 'N Groot aantal mense in Radnorshire en Montgomeryshire, wat hulleself neutraal noem, het hulself gewapen om plundering te weerstaan ​​... Die gewone mense sou ons kant toe trek as daar 'n ernstige verklaring van die parlement teen plundering was, en teen alle bevelvoerders wat nalaat om die verantwoordelikes te straf.

U soldate het die huis van Sir John Trevor, Plas Teg, geplunder ... sonder lasbrief of magtiging ... Ons vereis dus dat u al die persone onder u bevel voor my bring as wat die goedere geplunder of weggeneem is.

Richard Jones het ongeveer 'n kilometer uit die kamp gegaan en twee lakens geneem van 'n arm vrou wat hy gewond het ... Daar is opgelos dat Richard Jones volgens die wette en bevele van oorlog moet sterf. Hy is op 12 April tereggestel.

Wallis is in so 'n verarmde toestand dat daar geen bestaan ​​vir die vyand of ons is nie. Baie van hul mans is dood deur ongesonde kos te eet ... Baie van ons mans is dood, ander het weggehardloop en die wat oorbly het min kos.

Thomas Myddelton se manne is 'n net so minagtende vyand as wat ons ooit in Ierland gehad het ... By die Hawarden parochiekerk het sy manne gebedsboeke geskeur, die nagmaalrails verwyder en die altaar na die middel van die skip gesleep.

Al die voetsoldate het gevangenes geword. Die perdesoldate het geweet hoe om hulself te red, al was dit nie hul eer nie, deur 'n haastige en skandelike vlug na Leicester ... Die koning het opgeruk na ... Raglan Castle om vir hom 'n nuwe voetleër in Suid -Wallis te werf.

In die graafskap Glamorgan is 'n paar voorstelle aan sy majesteit gebring, wat as hy sou toestaan, sy majesteit en hul land sou verdedig ... Die vergadering was in Kevenoh, vier kilometer van Cardiff. Die koning stem in tot hul voorstelle ... Hulle noem hulself die Peaceable Army.

Die koning het 600 mans in Glamorgan ontmoet ... Hulle het geëis dat die Papiste uit die land verwyder word ... King het die aand Cardiff verlaat ... Gerard is buite bevel in Wallis gestel, omdat dit die land se eis was.

Op 25 September 1645 kom die koning na Denbigh Castle in Noord -Wallis ... hy bly drie dae om homself en sy gebroke troepe te verfris ... Hy het vierhonderd perdesoldate gehad; maar waarheen om saam met hulle te gaan, was die moeilike vraag. Sommige het die eiland Anglesey voorgestel as 'n plek van veiligheid, en 'n eiland wat vrugbaar genoeg is om sy magte te ondersteun ... en waarvandaan hy maklik na Ierland of Skotland vervoer kan word.

'N Paar mans ... het al te veel mag in hul hande gekry en wil ons ontbind ... Sodat hulle die mense kan verslaaf ... en belasting kan vasstel. Ons belowe om die mense teen beserings te beskerm en die Protestantse godsdiens te handhaaf ... soos bepaal deur die wet in hierdie land. Daarom verlang ons na die hulp van die hele koninkryk.

As bevelvoerder van hierdie graafskappe ... kan ek nie die beledigings ignoreer wat op my manne gepleeg is nie ... In plaas daarvan om hul salaris deur die parlement toegelaat te word ... is hulle ontbind ... Dit het gebeur in my afwesigheid, en na my wete, nog steeds onregverdig ... ek glo dat my vorige diens vir u land ... baie beter behandeling verdien het.

Maandagoggend ... het die vyand na ons toe gevorder ... ons het die beste grond gevat ... Ongeveer sestig mans op perde het een keer aangekla, maar ons het hulle teruggeslaan, en daarna verskyn nie een van die perdepersone weer nie ... Die vyand vertel ons dat hulle 8 000 was. Ons het ongeveer twee uur lank 'n skerp geskil met hulle gehad. Ons manne op perde het die vyand aangekla, wat heeltemal verwoes is ... Baie van die vyande is doodgemaak ... Ons het 3000 gevangenes geneem ... ons het nie baie soldate verloor nie en nie een van ons offisiere nie.

Ek verlang dat ons u bystaan ​​om 'n paar benodigdhede in die ysteroond in u graafskap Carmarthen te gooi, wat ons in staat sal stel om die kasteel van Pembroke te verminder. Die belangrikste dinge wat ons nodig het, is mortierdoppe, waarvan die diepte veertien en drie-kwart duim is ... Ons wil ook 'n kanonskoot hê ... Hierdie diens word gedoen, hierdie arm vermorsde lande kan bevry word van die las van die weermag.

Ons het nog nie ons gewere en ammunisie nie. Ons het net twee vuurwapens ... ons het probeer om die kasteel te bestorm, maar die lere was te kort ... sodat die manne nie kon oorkom nie. Ons het 'n paar mans verloor, maar ek is vol vertroue dat die vyand meer verloor het ... ons hoop om binne twee dae sy watertoevoer weg te neem.

Pembroke Castle was die sterkste plek wat ons ooit gesien het ... Ons het baie probleme in Wallis gehad ... Ons het 'n desperate vyand en min vriende, maar 'n magtige God.

Ek moet jou vertel dat as hierdie aanbod geweier word ... ellende en ondergang die mense by jou sal tref, weet ek waar ek die bloed wat jy mors, moet laai. Ek verwag die antwoord binne twee uur. As hierdie aanbod geweier word, stuur nie meer briewe aan my oor hierdie onderwerp nie.


Die kastele van Wallis en die burgeroorlog

Avove: Die vernietiging van Raglan -kasteel deur parlementêre magte.

Ondanks die vreedsame vordering van die Tudor -era, sou die kasteel as 'n militêre sterkpunt nog 'n laaste lewensooreenkoms hê. Toe die burgeroorlog tussen die koning en die parlement in 1642 uitbreek, was Wallis byna geheel en al royalisties, en 'n aantal kastele was in die saak van Charles I bewaak. Conwy is gedurende 1642-43 deur John Williams, aartsbiskop van York, opgeknap en gefortifiseer en gedurende die eerste burgeroorlog vir die koning gehou. Caernarfon en Ruthin het beide beleërings en aanvalle van die parlementariërs tydens die eerste oorlog deurstaan ​​en eers uiteindelik in 1646 oorgegee. 1645 tot en met Oktober 1646. In die suidooste het die standvastige royalistiese markies van Worcester in die lente en somer van 1646 in Raglan gehou in een van die mees omstrede beleërings van die oorlog. Die markies het uiteindelik oorgegee aan Sir Thomas Fairfax op 19 Augustus, lank na die voorlegging van die koning en die ineenstorting van sy saak.

Volg hierdie skakel om meer te wete te kom oor die val van die Raglan -kasteel

Pembroke Castle was 'n vaste parlementêre basis gedurende hierdie eerste oorlog. In teenstelling hiermee, het dit tydens die tweede oorlog van 1648 'n belangrike royalistiese sterkpunt geword. Cromwell self het op 24 Mei aangekom om die beleg te onderneem, maar eers nadat 'n swaar kanon per skip van Gloucester af gebring is, kon hy sukses behaal. Verskeie oortredings is in die mure van die stad en kasteel oopgemaak, wat die manne van die koning middel Julie onderdanig gemaak het.

Verskeie ander kastele funksioneer in meer of mindere mate in hierdie oorloë. Maar verbasend soos dit mag lyk, was kanonbombardement destyds nie die belangrikste oorsaak van hul vernietiging nie. Die middeleeuse klipverdediging was so kragtig gebou dat kruit slegs 'n deel van die verhaal was. Dit was die daaropvolgende 'versagting' wat die parlement gelas het, wat die werklike skade aangerig het.

Wallis - Kastele en historiese plekke, Cadw: Welsh Historic Monuments, Wales Tourist Board, uitgewer, Cardiff, 1990. Sien die bevele vir die sloping van Montgomery Castle

Tuis | Hoofkieslys | Kasteelindeks | Historiese opstelle | Verwante opstelle | Wat is nuut | Skakels

Kopiereg 2009 deur Jeffrey L. Thomas


Die 'lojale onbekende soldaat': Wallis en die Engelse burgeroorlog

Robin Evans beoordeel die bydrae van die Walliesers tot die probleme van 1642-49.

Toe die burgeroorlog in 1642 uitbreek, was die konflik nie net tot Engeland beperk nie, aangesien al die nasies van die Britse Eilande deel van die stryd was. Hoewel historici behoorlik aandag gegee het aan die oorlog in die Engelse streke en aan die rolle van Skotland en Ierland, is Wallis grootliks geïgnoreer. Maar in die burgeroorlog, soos Gwyn Alf Williams sê: 'Arme Taffy was beslis die lojaalste onbekende soldaat van Karel die Martelaar'.

Hierdie artikel bespreek die Walliese houding teenoor die konflik, die aard en omvang van die Walliese steun vir die twee partye by die uitbreek van vyandelikhede en die rol wat Wallis in die oorlog gespeel het.

Walliese houdings op die vooraand van die oorlog

Wallis is amptelik opgeneem in die Engelse nasiestaat deur die Acts of Union (1536-1543). Deur hierdie handelinge het Welshmen gelyke regte gekry met hul Engelse eweknieë en vir die daaropvolgende eeu het die Walliese heerskappy hul nuwe status ten volle benut. Die Tudors word as 'n Walliese dinastie beskou en lojaliteit aan die kroon is as vanselfsprekend aanvaar en aan die Stuarts oorgedra.

Om voort te gaan met die lees van hierdie artikel, moet u toegang tot die aanlyn -argief verkry.

As u reeds toegang gekoop het, of as u 'n druk- en argief -intekenaar is, moet u dit verseker aangemeld.


Die noodsaaklikhede: ses boeke oor die burgeroorlog

Die literatuur oor die oorlog is so groot dat u 'n leeftyd lank goeie boeke daaroor kan lees. Hier is ses uitstekende:

Battle Cry of Freedom (1988), deur James McPherson: Word algemeen beskou as die mees gesaghebbende geskiedenis in een volume van die oorlog.

Die vurige verhoor (2010), deur Eric Foner: 'n Nuwe Pulitzer-pryswenner en gesaghebbende weergawe van president Abraham Lincoln se navigasie deur die politiek van afskaffing, dit het die Pulitzer-prys vir geskiedenis gewen.

Hierdie lydensrepubliek: dood en die Amerikaanse burgeroorlog (2008), deur Drew Gilpin Faust: 'n aangrypende ondersoek na die maniere waarop die slagting die Amerikaners se idees oor sterftes verander het en 'n invloed gehad het op die manier waarop hulle gekies het om die oorlog te onthou.

Persoonlike herinneringe van U.S. Grant (1885): dit "oortref enige ander militêre herinnering aan die burgeroorlog en staan ​​alleen as die beste presidensiële outobiografie wat elke gepubliseer word", sê Joan Waugh, skrywer van U.S. Grant: Amerikaanse held, Amerikaanse mite (2009), self 'n goeie biografie.

Robert E. Lee: 'n Biografie (1934-35), deur Douglas Southall Freeman: 'n Portret van die man in volle vier volumes oor die leier van die Army of Northern Virginia.

Mary Chesnut se burgeroorlog (1981), onder redaksie van C. Vann Woodward: 'n versameling geskrifte in dagboekvorm van die doyenne wie se skerp oog en skerp tong 'n onuitwisbare indruk van die burgerlike lewe in die Suide tydens die oorlogsjare gelaat het.

Oor T.A. Broos

Tom Frail is 'n senior redakteur vir Smithsonian tydskrif. Hy het voorheen as senior redakteur vir die Washington Post en vir Philadelphia Newspapers Inc.


Die onbekende bydraes van Britte in die Amerikaanse burgeroorlog

Alhoewel dit dikwels oor die hoof gesien word, het meer as 50 000 Britse burgers in die Amerikaanse burgeroorlog in verskillende hoedanighede gedien. Die historikus Amanda Foreman kyk na hul persoonlike geskrifte en vertel die verhaal van die oorlog en die betrokkenheid van Brittanje daarin, in haar nuutste boek, 'N Wêreld aan die brand, het onlangs een van die New York Times’ 100 Opmerklike boeke van 2011.

Verwante inhoud

Ek het met die skrywer in Londen gepraat, grootgeword in Los Angeles en by Sarah Lawrence College, Columbia University en Oxford University gestudeer oor die rol wat Brittanje gespeel het, en 'n spesifieke Brit, Henry Morton Stanley, in die konflik.

Waarom weet meer mense nie van internasionale betrokkenheid by die Amerikaanse burgeroorlog nie?

As die onderrigtyd beperk is, hou u net by die belangrikste aspekte. Wie het die oorlog geveg. Wat was die belangrikste gevegte. Wanneer het dit geëindig. Waaroor het die oorlog gegaan. U gaan nie na ander aspekte op hoërskool kyk nie. Dit is die eerste ding.

Die tweede ding is wanneer u op universiteit kom en u op 'n meer genuanseerde manier na die burgeroorlog begin kyk, wat gewoonlik ras, klas en geslag beteken. Die internasionale dimensies van die oorlog strek oor al drie en val dus tussen die krake in omdat hulle nie uitsluitlik in een van die spesifieke gebiede sit nie.

Daar is baie wettige redes waarom mense baie lank nie oor internasionale aspekte van die oorlog gedink het nie. Maar die rede waarom u moet, is omdat dit blyk dat hierdie aspekte 'n baie belangrike rol in die oorlog gespeel het. Ek glo dat dit onmoontlik is om die oorlog te verstaan ​​sonder om hierdie aspekte ook te verstaan.

Wat was die mees verrassende onthullings wat u gemaak het oor die oorlog deur dit vanuit 'n wêreldperspektief te bekyk?

Die eerste ding wat ek regtig verstaan ​​het, was die beperkings van buitelandse diplomasie in die vroeë Amerikaanse politiek. Dit was in die 19de eeu en veral in die middel van die eeu die gebruik dat staatsekretarisse hul rol as 'n stapsteen na die Withuis beskou. Dit was geensins 'n instrument vir werklike buitelandse diplomasie nie. Toe William Henry Seward, wat destyds die minister van buitelandse sake was, sy amp beklee, weier hy net vasberade om te aanvaar dat die uitsprake wat hy in die VSA gemaak het vir 'n binnelandse gehoor so 'n ontsettend rampspoedige uitwerking op die reputasie van Amerika in die buiteland gehad het. Sy eie woorde het Europa, en veral Brittanje, gedryf om gewillige bondgenote aan die begin van die oorlog in die rigting van die Noorde in vyandige neutrale dinge te wees.

Deur Brittanje in 'n vyandige neutraal te verander, het dit beteken dat die Suide skielik 'n enorme been in die oorlog gehad het. Al die aksies wat Brittanje kon onderneem het om die lewe in die Suide moeilik te maak, byvoorbeeld, om enige suidelike skip te belemmer om in Britse hawens te land, en het nooit gebeur nie. En in werklikheid het die Suide werklik begin glo dat dit 'n kans het om erkenning van Brittanje te verkry van die suidelike onafhanklikheid, wat ek glo gehelp het om die oorlog met minstens twee jaar te verleng.

Op watter maniere is Brittanje belê of werklik vasgemaak in die oorlog?

Aan die begin van die oorlog het katoen op een of ander manier die lewensbestaan ​​van een uit elke vyf Engelse beïnvloed. Almal was bekommerd dat die katoenembargo die finansiële mag van Brittanje sou vernietig. Maar dit het geblyk dat daar 'n groot hoeveelheid katoen in 1860 was. Daar was te veel katoen in Engeland in pakhuise, en dit het die prys van voltooide goedere verlaag. Wat die oorlog gedoen het, was om Brittanje te red van 'n ernstige industriële insinking wat op die punt was om te plaasvind. In die eerste 18 maande van die oorlog het Britse handelaars net die katoen opgebruik wat hulle geberg het. Then, finally, when the cotton became scarce, truly, truly scarce midway through the war, there were other sources of cotton coming from India and Egypt. By then, Britain had become completely invested in the war because of the war economy. Guns, cannons, rifles, bullets, uniforms, steel plating of all kind, engines, everything that a war needs, Britain was able to export to the North and to the South. In fact, Britain’s economy grew during the Civil War. So just from a financial point of view, Britain was heavily invested industrially.

Second of all, Britain was heavily invested because of the bonds. Both the South and the North needed to sell bonds on the international market to raise money to fight the war. The British were the largest holder of these bonds.

Of course, what is interesting to us is not so much that, but what the British people were thinking and feeling. We know they felt a great deal because over 50,000 sailed from Britain to the U.S. to take part, to fight, to volunteer.

In her latest book titled, A World on Fire, historian Amanda Foreman looks at the personal writings of more than 50,000 British citizens who served in the American Civil War. (Bibi Basch) Secretary of State William Seward, far right, with British Minister Lord Lyons, sitting third from right, and other international diplomats at Trenton Falls in New York. (National Archives)

Can you talk about some of the capacities in which they served?

They served in all capacities. We have the famous actor-manager Charles Wyndham. If you go to London, Wyndham’s Theatre is one of the famous theaters on Drury Lane. But before he became the famous Charles Wyndham, he actually had trained to be a doctor. He wasn’t a very successful doctor. He was having difficulty keeping his patients in England as a young man. So when the war started he went out and he joined the federal army as a surgeon and accompanied Gen. [Nathaniel P.] Banks on his Red River campaign in Louisiana. He spent the first three years of the war as a surgeon until finally he went back in 1864.

The head of the Oxford Infirmary [in England] was a man called Charles Mayo. He also volunteers as a surgeon and became second in command of the medical corps in Vicksburg and was there for the fall of Vicksburg.

These are British soldiers who really played a prominent part in the military life of the war, who just resigned their positions and came over to fight. There is even an English Medal of Honor winner, Philip Baybutt. Sir John Fitzroy De Courcy, who later became Lord Kingsale, was the colonel of the 16th Ohio Volunteers. He was the colonel who captured the Cumberland Gap from the Confederacy. They all have their part to play. Then, of course, you have those on the Southern side, who are in some ways more characterful because it was harder to get to the South. They had to run the blockade. There was no bounty to lure them. They literally went there out of sheer idealism.

Henry Morton Stanley, a Welsh journalist and explorer of Africa best known for his search for Dr. Livingstone, served in the Civil War. How did he get involved?

He had come [to the United States] before the war. He was living in Arkansas, apprenticed to someone. He hadn’t actually had any intention of joining up, but he was shamed into joining when he was sent a package with women’s clothes inside of it—a southern way of giving him the white feather. So he joined the Dixie Grays. He took part in the Battle of Shiloh. He was captured and sent to Camp Douglas, one of the most notorious prison camps in the North, in Chicago. It had a terrible death rate.

He was dying, and he just decided that he wanted to live. He was a young man, and so he took the oath of loyalty and switched sides. Then he was shipped out to a northern hospital prior to being sent into the field. As he began to get better, he realized that he didn’t want to fight anymore. So he very quietly one day got dressed and walked out of the hospital and didn’t look back. That was in 1862. He went back to Wales, where he discovered his family didn’t want to know him. Then he went back to New York. He clerked for a judge for a while. He decided this wasn’t earning him enough money, so he joined the Northern navy as a ship’s writer and was present at the Battle of Wilmington at Fort Fisher, the last big naval battle in 1865. About three weeks after the Battle of Wilmington, he jumped ship with a friend.

So he didn’t really have moral reasons for allying with either side?

No, not at all. He was a young man. He just got caught up. He kept a diary, which is a little bit unreliable but pretty good. It is very eloquent. When he was captured after the Battle of Shiloh, he got into an argument with his captors. He was saying, “Well, what is the war about?” And they said, “Well, it’s about slavery.” He suddenly realized that maybe they were right. He just never thought of it. He said, “There were no blackies in Wales.”

How does Stanley’s experience of the war compare with those of other Brits who served?

Henry joined out of necessity, not out of ideology. That is different from most British volunteers who joined the Confederate army. So he was very rare in the fact that he was so willing to switch sides. Also, he is one of the very rare prisoners to survive incarceration in a federal prison or a prisoner of war camp. His description of what it was like is very valuable because it is so vivid and horrendous. He saw people drowning in their own feces. They had such bad dysentery they would fall into a puddle of human waste and drown there, too weak to pull themselves out.

In their recent book Willpower, authors Roy Baumeister and John Tierney show how willpower works through different character studies, including one of Henry Morton Stanley. Is there a time during Stanley’s service or imprisonment where you think he displays incredible willpower?

Oh, sure. This is a young man who is able to keep his eye on the prize, which is survival. Also, he wants to make something of himself. He keeps those two things at the forefront of his mind and doesn’t allow the terrible, crushing circumstances around him to destroy him.

Did you come across any techniques of his to actually get through the suffering?


Legends of America

Although the “Red Legs” are commonly associated with the Jayhawkers of the Bleeding Kansas era and the Civil War, they were actually a separate guerilla unit that only fought during the Civil War.

During the early part of the Civil War western Missouri was infested with bands of guerrillas, and it was no uncommon occurrence for some of these lawless gangs to cross the border and commit depredations in Kansas. To guard against these incursions, and to aid the Union cause, a company of border scouts was formed sometime in 1862. As it was an independent organization, never regularly mustered into the United States service, no official record of their actions was preserved. The men composing the company became known as “Red Legs,” from the fact that they wore leggings of red or tan-colored leather.

General Thomas Ewing during the Civil War

It was a secret Union military society, organized in late 1862 by General Thomas Ewing and James Blunt for desperate service along the border, and numbered as many as 100 men.

The qualifications for membership in the company were unquestioned loyalty to the Union cause, undaunted courage and the skillful use of the rifle or revolver. Their headquarters were at the “Six-mile House,” so called because it was six miles from Wyandotte (Kansas City) on the Leavenworth Road. This house was erected in the winter of 1860-61 by Joseph A. Bartels, whose son, Theodore was one of the best pistol shots on the border and a member of the Red Legs.

The company was commanded by Captain George H. Hoyt, the lawyer who defended John Brown at Charleston, Virginia after his attack on Harpers Ferry, West Virginia. Other members were Jack Harvey, a brother of Fred Harvey, of the Santa Fe Railroad Hotel chain Joseph B. Swain, nicknamed “Jeff Davis,” afterward captain of Company K. Fifteenth Kansas “Red” Clark, of Emporia, Kansas whom General Ewing said was the best spy he ever had John M. Dean, who was one of the organizers and W. S. Tough, for many years proprietor of the horse market at the Kansas City stockyards. Still others, of less note, were Harry Lee, Newt Morrison, Jack Hays, James Flood, Jerry Malcolm, and Charles Blunt, often called “One-eyed Blunt.”

Evacuation of Missouri Counties under General Order No. 11, painting by George Caleb Bingham, 1870.

William W. Denison, assistant adjutant-general of Kansas some years after the war, was a private soldier in the Eleventh Kansas and was one of the detail to enforce General Thomas Ewing’s General Order No. 11. On that occasion, he wore the red leggings of the organization, which came to be recognized as “a badge of desperate service in the Union army.” Generals Ewing and Blunt usually had several of the Red Legs on their payrolls, where they received often as much as $7 per day on account of the hazardous service they were required to render.

In course of time, the term “Red Leg” became general along the border. William E. Connelley, in his Quantrill and the Border Wars, said: “Every thief who wanted to steal from the Missouri people counterfeited the uniform of the Red Legs and went forth to pillage. This gave the organization a bad name, and much of the plundering done along the border was attributed to them, when, in fact, they did little in that line themselves. There were some bad characters among them—very bad. But they were generally honest and patriotic men. They finally hunted down the men who falsely represented themselves to be Red Legs, and they killed every man found wearing the uniform without authority.”

Albert R. Greene, a member of the Ninth Kansas Cavalry, was personally acquainted with many of the Red Legs and was also well acquainted with the nature of their service. Concerning them and their work, he said: “There was not one of them but performed valuable service for the Union cause, and, so far, as I know and believe, always within the rules of civilized warfare. That the organization was disbanded before the close of the war was owing more to the fact that the necessity for its existence had ceased than because a few of its members had thrown off the restraints of discipline. . . . It is enough to say for the propriety and wisdom of such an organization as the Red Legs, that it did more to protect the homes of Kansas than any regiment in the service, and was the organization of all others most dreaded by William Quantrill.”

Charles R. Jennison, Kansas Red Leg

Such was the character of the Red Legs — men who knew not the meaning of the word cowardice, and who left their fields and firesides to defend their homes against the irregular and predatory warfare of the guerrilla and the bushwhacker.

After the Civil War, most of the members returned to peaceful occupations and once again became law-abiding citizens.

Source: Blackmar, Frank W. Kansas: 'n Cyclopedia of State History, Standard Publishing Company, Chicago, IL 1912


Politics and Government

George Washington once noted, "Good Welshman Make Good Americans" (Thomas, p. 27). In the founding of the United States of America, cultural history positioned Welsh immigrants as American revolutionaries. The Welsh, who already tended to resent English control, were strongly inclined toward revolution in France, Britain, and America. The United States can trace the derivation of its trial-by-jury system through England to Wales. Though it is unclear exactly where Welsh culture contributed to the founding moments of America, Welsh Americans claim the Welshness of Jeffersonian principles, especially that certain rights are inalienable, that rights not assigned to governments are reserved for the people, and that church and state must remain separate. In February of 1776, one month after the publication of Thomas Paine's Common Sense, a Welshman, Dr. Richard Price, published in London The Nature of Civil Liberty, appealing "to the natural rights of all men, those rights which no government should have the power to take away" five months later, Welsh American Thomas Jefferson published similar ideas in the Declaration of Independence (Williams, p. 45).

For decades, nearly 75 percent of Welsh immigrants became citizens, higher than any other group (Williams, p. 87). In accord with their religion, Welsh Americans have helped to lobby for temperance, Prohibition, and Sabbath-enforcing Blue Laws. Welsh American abolitionists included workers on the underground railroad, such as Rebecca Lewis Fussell (1820-1893), and authors such as Harriet Beecher Stowe, who wrote Uncle Tom's Cabin. Author Helen Hamilton Gardiner (1853-1925) joined several other Welsh American leaders in the fight for women's suffrage.

Welsh Americans also have been labor leaders. In 1871, Welsh American coal miners led their union in a historic strike in which they protested a 30 percent wage decrease, ultimately to no avail. They won only disapproval and prejudice from more established classes of Americans (Jones, p. 53).


Fascist Government

On 20th July 1935 Oswald Mosley declared his cabinet to be:

Prime Minister: Oswald Mosley

Party Secretary: William Joyce

Chancellor of Exchequer: John Erskine, Lord Erskine

Minister of War: Major General J.F.C. Voller

On 25th June 1935 Mosley raised the BUF flag over Canterbury and 10,000 Fascists marched into the city as a show of force. The arrested the pro Yorkist Archbishop Lang followed but the people of Canterbury stood up in force against his arrest. Lang was taken to the tower of London.

A group of about 1000 protesters stood up against the arrest of the archbishop and began chanting and demanding his release. The Fascists that had taken over the town centre attacked them with various weapons including knives, clubs and a handful of firearms. 235 protesters were killed, and 28 Fascists were killed when a handful of anti-Fascists obtained a few rifles and shot back. However, the protest was put down within an hour, and the Fascists had dominated the town.

Former Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin, who had escaped London with his family and a few members of his Cabinet including the Chancellor, Minister of War, Foreign Minister and the Home Secretary after the Fascist government took over, was in hiding in a cottage in Buckinghamshire where he and his former government planned to fight back against the Fascist oppressors. After contacting trusted members within the War Office, an infantry brigade left Aldershot with the intention of removing Mosley from power. However, they were spotted and troops loyal to the Fascists were dispatched to stop them.

At 8:06 AM, the first shots of the British Civil War were fired. The "Battle of Southampton" began when troops loyal to democracy(later the would become known as the British Parliamentary Forces) were moving through Southampton on their way to London. Fascist troops arrived in Southampton at the same time and engaged them. Around 800 Free troops, backed by some light artillery and a few tanks faced off against almost 1200 Fascists, with heavy artillery and 30 tanks.

Fascist artillery began hammering the Free Army (and any civilians who were in the way) and left the city centre in ruins. Fascist infantry quickly began to push the Free troops back, although they were made to fight for every inch of ground gained. Almost half the Fascists tanks had been destroyed in the first three hours of the battle, although by then only one Free Army tank remained operational. By the fifth hour of the battle, the news of fighting was being reported over the BBC in London, which was under Fascist control and accused Free troops of attacking civilians for no reason. By the sixth hour, Free soldiers were running low on ammo and many were dead or wounded. Much of Southampton was in ruins and close to 2,000 civilians had died. At 2:35 PM the same day, the Free Army commander, Colonel Robert Peterson, agreed to surrender.

The Free Government, having heard the news of the battle, moved again, this time to a secure estate near Newcastle due to the fact the north of Britain, particularly north England and Scotland were more inclined towards the Left of politics and hence would be more anti-Fascist.

Many Members of Parliament, with the exception of Mosley's Fascists, were arrested. Those who hadn't been arrested fled north upon hearing rumours of a rebel government led by Stanley Baldwin. The government made contact with the remaining MP's and formed the National Coalition Government made up of MPs from the Labour, Conservative and Liberal parties and thus styled themselves "The Parliamentarians" in honour of those who had fought on Parliament's side during the First English Civil War in the 17th century. One of these MPs who had recently arrived, happened to be none other than Conservative MP Winston Churchill.

The National Coalition Government (NCG) made contact with members of the Anti-Fascist Resistance in Newcastle, who had been carrying out hit and run raids on Mosley's Army, and with their help made contact with several high ranking military officers who were loyal to Parliament.

On the 1st of May 1935, General Bernard Montgomery arrived in secret at Redford Army Barracks and met with the officers there. They spoke with the rest of the men and all of them felt strongly that it was their duty to stand against Mosley and Fascism. Contact was made with other military bases in Glasgow, Inverness, Fife, Newcastle and York where soldiers, sailors and airmen decided to fight the Fascists. Civil War was now truly about to begin.

By the 5th of May, the British Parliamentary Forces (BPF) were organised and left their bases to set up defensive positions in the north of the country. Known Fascists in the north were arrested and executed although a great majority of the population welcomed the BPF with open arms as they entered the cities. This was greeted with shock and dismay by Mosley's government in Downing Street, who still had full control over Southern and Central England, as well as Wales. The situation in Northern Ireland, however, began to deteriorate as the IRA attacks increased against Fascists, and even groups loyal to Britain joined with the IRA to fight against Fascism. Mosley ordered the army to be mobilised and began sending troops north to fight the BPF.

It had been a week since the Battle of Southampton, and it now seemed that a major war was about to commence. Both sides were rushing troops to the front and mobilising their reserves. At 5:43 AM on the morning of May 6th 1935, the British Parliamentary Army launched its offensive. Over 75,000 troops, backed by tanks, artillery and aircraft from RAF bases in Scotland and Northern England attempted to drive the Fascists back meeting with only some success. The BPF captured Carlisle after a short but bloody battle and killed over 1000 Fascists, losing only 234 men in the process. It was considered the first BPF victory of the war. RAF bombers targeted Manchester and Liverpool, destroying several factories whilst other aircraft bombed Fascist air bases across Central England and Wales.


The Early Stuarts and the English Civil War

James ek
Elizabeth was followed to the throne by James VI of Scotland, who became James I of England. James believed in the absolute power of the monarchy, and he had a rocky relationship with an increasingly vociferous and demanding Parliament. It would be a mistake to think of Parliament as a democratic institution, or the voice of the common citizen. Parliament was a forum for the interests of the nobility and the merchant classes (not unlike today, some would say).

The Gunpowder Plot
James was a firm protestant, and in 1604 he expelled all Catholic priests from the island. This was one of the factors which led to the Gunpowder Plot of 1605. A group of Catholic plotters planned to blow up Parliament when it opened on November 5. However, an anonymous letter betrayed the plot and one of the plotters, Guy Fawkes, was captured in the cellars of the Houses of Parliament with enough gunpowder to blow the place sky high. Most of the plotters were captured and executed. (See our in-depth examination of the Gunpowder Plot here).

The Rise of the Puritans
During James' reign radical Protestant groups called Puritans began to gain a sizeable following. Puritans wanted to "purify" the church by paring down church ritual, educating the clergy, and limiting the powers of bishops. King James resisted this last. The powers of the church and king were too closely linked. "No bishop, no king," he said. The Puritans also favoured thrift, education, and individual initiative, therefore they found great support among the new middle class of merchants, the powers in the Commons.

James' attitude toward Parliament was clear. He commented in 1614 that he was surprised his ancestors "should have permitted such an institution to come into existence . It is sedition in subjects to dispute what a king may do in the height of his power".

The King James Bible
In 1611 the King James Version of the Holy Bible was issued, the result of seven years of labour by the best translators and theological minds of the day. It remained the authoritative, though not necessarily the most accurate, version of the Bible for centuries.

Charles I (1625-49) continued his father's acrimonious relationship with Parliament, squabbling over the right to levy taxes. Parliament responded with the Petition of Right in 1628. It was the most dramatic assertion of the traditional rights of the English people since the Magna Carta. Its basic premise was that no taxes of any kind could be allowed without the permission of Parliament.

Charles finally had enough, and in 1629 he dissolved Parliament and ruled without it for eleven years. Some of the ways he raised money during this period were of dubious legality by the standards of the time.

Between 1630-43 large numbers of people emigrated from England as Archbishop Laud tried to impose uniformity on the church. Up to 60,000 people left, 1/3 of them to the new American colonies. Several areas lost a large part of their populations, and laws were enacted to curb the outflow.

Ship Money
In 1634 Charles attempted to levy "ship-money", a tax that previously applied only to ports, on the whole country. This raised tremendous animosity throughout the realm. Finally, Charles, desperate for money, summoned the so-called Short Parliament in 1640. Parliament refused to vote Charles more money until its grievances were answered, and the king dismissed it after only three weeks. Then a rebellion broke out in Scotland and Charles was forced to call a new Parliament, dubbed the Long Parliament, which officially sat until 1660.

Burgeroorlog
Parliament made increasing demands, which the king refused to meet. Neither side was willing to budge. Finally in 1642 fighting broke out. The English Civil War (1642-1646) polarized society largely along class lines. Parliament drew most of its support from the middle classes, while the king was supported by the nobility, the clergy, and the peasantry. Parliamentary troops were known as Roundheads because of their severe hairstyle. The king's army were known as Cavaliers, from the French for "knight", or "horseman".

The war began as a series of indecisive skirmishes notable for not much beyond the emergence of a Parliamentary general from East Anglia named Oliver Cromwell. Cromwell whipped his irregular volunteer troops into the disciplined New Model Army.

Meanwhile, Charles established the royalist headquarters in Oxford, called his own Parliament, and issued his own money. He also allied himself with Irish Catholics, which alienated some of his supporters.

To the poor, the turmoil over religion around the Civil War meant little. They were bound by tradition and they supported the king, as they always had. Charles encouraged poor relief, unemployment measures, price controls, and protection for small farmers. For most people, life during the Civil War went on as before. Few were involved or even knew about the fighting. In 1644 a farmer at Marston Moor was told to clear out because the armies of Parliament and the king were preparing to fight. "What?" he exclaimed, "Has them two fallen out, then?"

Marston Moor
The turning point of the war was probably that same Battle of Marston Moor (1644). Charles' troops under his nephew Prince Rupert were soundly beaten by Cromwell, giving Parliament control of the north of England. Above the border, Lord Montrose captured much of Scotland for Charles, but was beaten at Philiphaugh and Scot support was lost for good.

The Parliamentary cause became increasingly entangled with extreme radical Protestantism. In 1645 Archbishop Laud was executed, and in the same year, the Battle of Naseby spelled the end of the royalist hopes. Hostilities dragged on for another year, and the Battle of Stow-on-the-Wold (1646) was the last armed conflict of the war.

The death of a king
Charles rather foolishly stuck to his absolutist beliefs and refused every proposal made by Parliament and the army for reform. He preferred to try to play them against each other through intrigue and deception. He signed a secret treaty which got the Scots to rise in revolt, but that threat was snuffed out at Prestonpans (1648).

Finally, the radical core of Parliament had enough. They believed that only the execution of the king could prevent the kingdom from descending into anarchy. Charles was tried for treason in 1649, before a Parliament whose authority he refused to acknowledge. He was executed outside Inigo Jones' Banqueting Hall at Whitehall on January 30.


The Civil War Was Won by Immigrant Soldiers

I n the summer of 1861, an American diplomat in Turin, Italy, looked out the window of the U.S. legation to see hundreds of young men forming a sprawling line. Some wore red shirts, emblematic of the Garibaldini who, during their campaign in southern Italy, were known for pointing one finger in the air and shouting l&rsquoItalia Unità! (Italy United!). Now they wanted to volunteer to take up arms for l&rsquoAmerica Unità!

Meanwhile, immigrants already in the United States responded to the call to arms in extraordinary numbers. In 1860, about 13% of the U.S. population was born overseas&mdashroughly what it is today. One in every four members of the Union armed forces was an immigrant, some 543,000 of the more than 2 million Union soldiers by recent estimates. Another 18% had at least one foreign-born parent. Together, immigrants and the sons of immigrants made up about 43% of the U.S. armed forces.

America&rsquos foreign legions gave the North an incalculable advantage. It could never have been won without them. And yet the role of immigrant soldiers has been ignored in the narrative of a brothers&rsquo war fought on American soil, by American soldiers, over issues that were uniquely American in origin.

In the 1860s, Confederate diplomats and supporters abroad were eager to inform Europeans that the North was actively recruiting their sons to serve as cannon fodder. In one pamphlet, Confederate envoy Edwin De Leon informed French readers that the Puritan North had built its army &ldquoin large part of foreign mercenaries&rdquo made up of &ldquothe refuse of the old world.&rdquo

Embarrassed Northerners claimed the Confederacy exaggerated how many foreign recruits made up the U.S. armed forces&mdashpointing to immigrant bounty jumpers who enlisted to collect the money given to new recruits, deserted, and then re-enlisted. The underlying premise was that foreigners were not inspired by patriotic principle and, except for money, had no motive to fight and die for a nation not their own.

It was not true. Immigrants tended to be young and male, but they enlisted above their quota. Many immigrants left jobs to fight for the Union, enlisting before the draft&mdashand the bounties&mdashwere even introduced. They volunteered, fought, and sacrificed far beyond what might be expected of strangers in a strange land.

Historians have done an excellent job of retrieving the voices of native-born, English-speaking soldiers. But the voices of the foreign legions remain silent&mdashthanks to the paucity of records in the archives, the language barriers posed to historians, and, perhaps, a lingering bias that keeps foreigners out of &ldquoour&rdquo civil war.

Why did they fight? What were they fighting for? Recruitment posters in the New York Historical Society provide hints at the answers. One poster reads: Patrioti Italiani! Honvedek! Amis de la liberté! Deutsche Freiheits Kaempfer! (Italian patriots! Hungarians! Friends of liberty! German freedom fighters!) Then, in English, it urges &ldquo250 able-bodied men . . . Patriots of all nations&rdquo to fight for their &ldquoadopted country.&rdquo

One immigrant mother gave testimony in 1863 to an antislavery convention as to why her 17-year-old son was fighting for the Union. &ldquoI am from Germany where my brothers all fought against the Government and tried to make us free, but were unsuccessful,&rdquo she said. &ldquoWe foreigners know the preciousness of that great, noble gift a great deal better than you, because you never were in slavery, but we are born in it.&rdquo

Following the failed Revolution of 1848, thousands of young Germans fled to America. They took up arms in what they saw as yet another battle in the revolutionary struggle against the forces of aristocracy and slavery. &ldquoIt isn&rsquot a war where two powers fight to win a piece of land,&rdquo one German enlistee wrote to his family. &ldquoInstead it&rsquos about freedom or slavery, and you can well imagine, dear mother, I support the cause of freedom with all my might.&rdquo

In another letter written to his family in Europe, a German soldier gave a pithy explanation of the war: &ldquoI don&rsquot have the space or the time to explain all about the cause, only this much: the states that are rebelling are slave states, and they want slavery to be expanded, but the northern states are against this, and so it is civil war!&rdquo

So it was civil war, but for many foreign-born soldiers and citizens, this was much more than America&rsquos war. It was an epic contest for the future of free labor against slavery, for equal opportunity against privilege and aristocracy, for freedom of thought and expression against oppressive government, and for democratic self-government against dynastic rule. Foreigners joined the war to wage the same battles that had been lost in the Old World. Theirs was the cause not only of America, but of all nations.

Don H. Doyle is the author of The Cause of All Nations: An International History of the American Civil War. He is McCausland Professor of History at the University of South Carolina. Follow him on Facebook. He wrote this for What It Means to Be American, a national conversation hosted by the Smithsonian and Zócalo Public Square.


Kyk die video: Wallis Loved and Lost (Januarie 2022).