Address at the first commemorative service of the Battle of Worcester on its 360th anniversary held on 3 September 2011 in Worcester Cathedral
In 1786 – 135 years after the Battle of Worcester – two distinguished visitors, who were both to help draft the US Constitution a couple of years later, and go on to be presidents of the United States, came to Worcester because as young revolutionaries who believed passionately in democracy they had been taught that what had happened here in 1651 was of crucial importance in ending the concept of absolute monarchy, in putting paid to the principle of the divine right of kings, and in sowing the seeds for the modern parliamentary system of government, based on the power of the people.
Their names were John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. I would like to be able to say to you that there was already in place the equivalent of today’s Battle of Worcester Society – a bunch of people dedicated to keeping alive the memory of the battle, reminding our citizens of its significance and able to impress Adams and Jefferson with their knowledge and erudition.
But alas not. In his definitive biography of John Adams, the author David McCullough says that Adams was “deeply moved” but disappointed at the locals’ lack of knowledge of the battle. Adams wrote these words in his own diary, written in April 1786:
"...Worcester were curious and interesting to us, as Scaenes where Freemen had fought for their Rights. The People in the Neighbourhood, appeared so ignorant and careless at Worcester that I was provoked and asked, "And do Englishmen so soon forget the Ground where Liberty was fought for? Tell your Neighbours and your Children that this is holy Ground, much holier than that on which your Churches stand. All England should come in Pilgrimage to this Hill, once a Year."
The hill he refers to was Fort Royal, which fell to the parliamentary forces during the course of the battle. I like to think that his impromptu lecture was delivered on the steps of the Guildhall.
When I was a child one of my favourite history books was “1066 and All That”, the purpose of which was to make English history fun, using a succession of one-liners to describe events. The protagonists in the English Civil War were either “Wrong but Romantic” – that was the Cavaliers – or “Right but Repulsive”, that’s the Roundheads.
Certainly there were romantic aspects about the Royalists. They were dressed more exotically for a start, and who can resist the story of the about-to-be- defeated Charles Stuart climbing up the tower of this cathedral and following the course of the battle from there? And then, after the battle, spending six weeks in hiding, some of the time up an oak tree at Boscobel House?
This experience taught Charles two lessons – both of them positive. First, it made him appreciate for the first time that if he was to change the political system – in his case restore the monarchy – he couldn’t expect to achieve this by defying the will of the English Parliament, and overturning its decisions by raising an army of mercenaries from Scotland and France.
The second positive outcome was that the experience of living in hiding for six weeks amongst ordinary people made him a better person - less arrogant and haughty than previous Stuarts had been. That set him in good stead for when the monarchy was to be restored nine years later.
The battle of Worcester of 1651 was quite different from those in the real Civil War of 1642 to 1649. That had genuinely divided the English people, and as with all civil wars set brother against brother, sons against fathers, neighbour against neighbour. That period of turmoil came to a close with the final victory of the parliamentary forces against the royalists of Charles I in 1649.
The 1651 battle by contrast was the last throw in an insurrection against the legitimate government of England, by a largely foreign army.
Contrary to some of the myths and propaganda put about later, the people of this city were not overwhelmingly on the side of Charles Stuart, despite Worcester being called “The Faithful City”. By 1651, people had had enough of the disruption and hardships of war and couldn’t see the point in fighting old battles over again. That’s why the townspeople were so reluctant to open the city gates and let the battle rage inside the walls.
What mattered about the Battle of Worcester was that it marked the end of the English Civil Wars, and the planting of the first seeds of our democracy.
Oliver Cromwell wrote to the Speaker of the House of Commons, William Lenthall saying that the victory in the Battle of Worcester had been the greatest of all the favours given to him by God. “The dimensions of this mercy are above my thoughts. It is, for aught I know, a crowning mercy.”
After the battle the New England preacher Hugh Peters gave the Parliamentarian militia a rousing farewell sermon "when their wives and children should ask them where they had been and what news, they should say they had been at Worcester, where England's sorrows began, and where they were happily ended".
It is right that we commemorate this event which took place 360 years ago today, and I congratulate the Battle of Worcester Society and the Sealed Knot for keeping alive the memory. What we need is a proper permanent memorial at the Sidbury Gate, some interpretative signs and a trail through the city, and for all of us to make sure that the people of Worcester do not now “forget the ground where liberty was fought for”.
Lord Faulkner of Worcester - 3 September 2011
Patron – Battle of Worcester Society