The Turning Tide, 1643–44 (AQA A-Level History): Revision Notes
The Turning Tide, 1643–44
John Pym's consolidation of Parliamentary strength
The shift in Parliamentary fortunes during 1643-44 stemmed from deliberate consolidation efforts. John Pym, working through the early part of 1643, focused on establishing effective taxation and administration within Parliamentarian-controlled territory.
In May 1643, Parliament introduced an excise tax – a levy placed on home-produced beer and cider alongside imported goods. This tax proved straightforward to collect and functioned similarly to customs duties in principle, though it represented an unprecedented domestic measure in England and generated widespread unpopularity.
The excise tax, despite being highly unpopular among the English people, provided Parliament with a reliable financial foundation that proved crucial for sustaining their military efforts. Its ease of collection made it far more effective than traditional forms of taxation.
Pym maintained a careful balance between those MPs advocating for peace negotiations and those pressing for continued military action. This delicate political management allowed him to secure a precarious unity. By the end of 1643, he had persuaded Parliament to formalize the Solemn League and Covenant with Scotland, bringing Scottish Covenanters' military support to the Parliamentary cause.
The Price of Scottish Alliance
This alliance came at a significant cost: the Scots demanded the introduction of a Presbyterian church system in England. Many MPs held Puritan sympathies and supported further reform within the Church of England, but few advocated for the full Presbyterian structure used in Scotland. This religious compromise would create lasting complications for Parliament.
Pym's approach was to establish an Assembly of Divines (clergy) to debate and design an appropriate model for England. The Assembly convened in December 1643, the same month Pym died.
Military success in the north, January–April 1644
The agreement with Scotland delivered substantial military benefits. Scottish assistance secured aid at Parliament's moment of greatest need and created a serious threat to Royalist control of northern England.
Parliamentary forces in the north, commanded by Sir Thomas Fairfax, had regrouped after taking refuge in Hull. In January 1644 they destroyed and dispersed Royalist forces sent from Ireland to assist the King at Nantwich in Cheshire. Meanwhile, Newcastle's army advanced into Lincolnshire, prompting reorganization of Parliament's eastern forces under the Earl of Manchester, with Oliver Cromwell commanding the cavalry.
The reorganization of Parliamentary forces under Manchester and Cromwell represented a crucial shift in military strategy. By April these forces had succeeded in containing Newcastle's army in York, demonstrating the effectiveness of coordinated command structures.
The King dispatched a relieving force under Prince Rupert, who managed to draw off Parliament's forces and relieve York, but then made the serious tactical error of accepting battle at Marston Moor in June.
The Battle of Marston Moor and its consequences
The Royalists fielded approximately 18,000 men, while Parliamentary forces numbered closer to 28,000. The acknowledged quality of Rupert's cavalry and Newcastle's Whitecoats faced the experienced Scottish contingent led by David Leslie and the disciplined troopers known as 'Cromwell's Ironsides'.
Marston Moor: A Decisive Turning Point
The outcome was decisive defeat for the Royalists. York surrendered a fortnight later, and Royalist forces effectively withdrew westward. In military terms, Marston Moor represented a turning point. Cromwell himself described it as "an absolute victory obtained by the Lord's blessing upon the godly party."
While the battle did not establish Parliament's military superiority definitively, the confidence it gave to some of Parliament's supporters marked a substantial step forward.
The Scottish alliance brought complications alongside advantages. Following Pym's death, management of Parliament's military and political strategy passed to the Committee of Both Kingdoms, making Scottish pressure for religious uniformity a more serious problem. This pressure exposed conflicting views on religious reform among Parliamentary supporters.
Religious disputes and delayed reform
The Assembly of Divines that gathered at Westminster in 1644 to discuss Church reform was dominated by ministers favouring some form of Presbyterianism. However, some MPs and soldiers in Parliament's armies opposed any national religious establishment.
In early 1644, five Assembly members issued a public appeal for limited religious toleration. When this was rejected, they sought to prolong debates and delay reform. Consequently, the Assembly could not complete its work on the Directory of Worship until 1646.
Religious separatists of various kinds mounted a broader campaign for toleration that transformed the political situation. The Directory was never fully implemented, demonstrating how the Scottish alliance's religious demands created unexpected complications that Parliament struggled to resolve.
Essex's failed campaign in the south
What might have been a decisive victory for Parliamentary forces was largely negated by the Earl of Essex's actions in southern England. Essex, determined to assert his position as Parliament's senior general, set off pursuing a similarly prestigious victory in the west. After lifting a Royalist siege at Lyme Regis, he marched to relieve Plymouth and then continued into the Royalist stronghold of Cornwall.
Hopton simply divided his forces, allowing the Parliamentarian army through before closing behind them.
The Disaster at Lostwithiel
The result was a serious defeat for Essex at Lostwithiel in Cornwall, followed by an even more disastrous surrender of 8,000 men with all their cannon and supplies. Essex took a ship back to London, while the remnants of his army were forced to march back through hostile territory, stripped of weapons. Fewer than 600 men reached London alive.
Compounding matters, Waller, Manchester, and Cromwell permitted the King to return safely to Oxford after an indecisive battle at Newbury.
Growing political tensions over military strategy
This disaster, combined with Royalist successes under Montrose in Scotland, did much to restore military balance. More importantly, it brought into the open a simmering dispute between the Peace and War Parties in Parliament over how the war should be conducted.
Complaints were partly based on military considerations. Sir William Waller, for instance, had been arguing for a mobile, professional army to replace locally-based forces. Deeper concerns existed about the tactics and aims of Parliament's commanders.
The Commander Problem
Men like Essex and Manchester had been appointed to command because of their noble status rather than their military talent. Both their social position and political outlook made them cautious. They were accused of viewing the war only in defensive terms and seeking to avoid defeat while hoping for negotiations, rather than pursuing outright victory.
The matter had already opened conflict between Manchester and his cavalry commander, Oliver Cromwell. This conflict was complicated by political and religious rivalries. By December 1644 it became clear that a resolution had to be found to address these differences and prevent disaster.
Key Points to Remember:
- John Pym's excise tax (May 1643) and Solemn League and Covenant with Scotland provided Parliament with financial stability and military support, though the Scottish alliance brought unwanted Presbyterian pressure
- The Battle of Marston Moor (June 1644) marked a turning point, delivering a decisive Parliamentary victory with approximately 28,000 Parliamentary troops defeating 18,000 Royalists, resulting in the loss of York
- Religious disputes complicated Parliamentary unity, as the Assembly of Divines struggled to complete the Directory of Worship amidst growing demands for religious toleration
- Essex's catastrophic defeat at Lostwithiel in Cornwall demonstrated serious flaws in Parliamentary command, with 8,000 men surrendering and fewer than 600 reaching London alive
- By December 1644, disputes between the Peace and War Parties exposed tensions over military strategy, with criticisms focusing on whether commanders like Essex and Manchester were pursuing victory or merely avoiding defeat