Battle of Naseby - The English Civil War, Royalists VS Parliamentarians
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 ก.ย. 2024
- Cromwell, 1970. No Russian dubbing
잉글랜드 내전(영어: English Civil War, 1642년 ~ 1651년)은 잉글랜드 왕국의 왕당파와 의회파 간에 있었던 내전이다. 1642년에서 1646년까지 있었던 첫 번째 내전과 1648년에서 1649년까지 있었던 두 번째 내전은 찰스 1세의 지지자들과 의회파 간의 내전이었고, 1649년에서 1651년까지 있었던 세 번째 내전은 찰스 2세의 왕당파와 의회파 간의 내전이었다. 1651년 9월 3일에 우스터 전투로 내전은 의회파의 승리로 끝났다.
내전의 결과 찰스 1세는 처형되었고 찰스 2세는 추방되었으며, 의회파는 잉글랜드 연방(1649년 ~ 1653년)을 구성하여 1653년에 올리버 크롬웰을 호국경으로 선출하였다. 잉글랜드 내전은 영국 정치에서 의회가 군주에 대항하는 첫 번째 사례가 되었고, 이후 1688년에 일어난 명예 혁명에 영향을 주었다.
-
The English Civil War (1642-1651) was a series of armed conflicts and political machinations between Parliamentarians ("Roundheads") and Royalists ("Cavaliers") over, principally, the manner of England's government. The first (1642-1646) and second (1648-1649) wars pitted the supporters of King Charles I against the supporters of the Long Parliament, while the third (1649-1651) saw fighting between supporters of King Charles II and supporters of the Rump Parliament. The war ended with the Parliamentarian victory at the Battle of Worcester on 3 September 1651.
The overall outcome of the war was threefold: the trial and execution of Charles I (1649); the exile of his son, Charles II (1651); and the replacement of English monarchy with, at first, the Commonwealth of England (1649-1653) and then the Protectorate under the personal rule of Oliver Cromwell (1653-1658) and subsequently his son Richard (1658-1659). The monopoly of the Church of England on Christian worship in England ended with the victors consolidating the established Protestant Ascendancy in Ireland. Constitutionally, the wars established the precedent that an English monarch cannot govern without Parliament's consent, although the idea of Parliament as the ruling power of England was only legally established as part of the Glorious Revolution in 1688.
I don't see a lot of movies that showed Pike and Shot battles. Thank god I found this scene.
Try Spanish movie "Alatriste", it has some very detailed pike&shot warfare scenes.
We should have those in movies more often.
Don't tell em your name!
Shame it is massively inacurate in its depiction.
@@TheArmourersBench is it?
The New Model Army was one of the finest of all time. This film has a lot inaccuracies historically, but even without CGI it did a pretty damn good job of the battle scenes.
It did forget that fact that the red uniforms was a parliamentarian invention rather than the royalist uniforms
Better w/o CGI. CGI is so fake. But now massive labor is too expensive.
@@liamw6562 didn't king's lifeguard wear red? otherwise though yeah red more common in new model army, but varied with regiment as it does to this very day in UK
@@liamw6562 it at least makes it easier for the audience to know which side is which.
@@liamw6562 Not an invention exactly. The New Model Army more red, but before that different regiments on both sides wore different colours.
"My majesty, may I suggest that we withdraw?"
*"no"*
Obi wan should have listened
Your majesty
@@jesseterrell9354 Shut up.
@@Tyrell-d6o must be a slow day if you’re reacting to a comment that’s almost a year old. Bud
@@jesseterrell9354one can talk that skank I saw you with. It must of been like kissing a fireman
This is definitely one of the best battle scenes i have ever seen. I have read so much about Oliver Cromwell and the Round Heads and the Cavaliers. This is the first time that I get to see a very realistic , believable re-enactment.
Our men are running from the battlefield. This is a shameful display.
Correction: Our men are running from the battlefield. This is a *ſhameful diſplay.*
...flee the field of battle,
Total war???
LoL
Sir.....our general is under attack
When I worked near Naseby several years ago I used to have my packup lunch on the battle site, very eerie feeling I got there too, couple of times I had nightmares about the actual battle, weird indeed.
"Ah a beautiful day here on this field of Naseby where I sit to eat my lunch while realizing that this was a blood filled battle...the beauty".
Idk why but I have a feeling that ur nightmares were caused byt something supernatural
Because you knew about the battle. If you didn’t know, watch a movie, or read anything you wouldn’t have had that dream
Another fun fact:
- Young professor Dumbledore, young James Bond plus old Obi-Wan all in one film!
- James Bond-Timothy Dalton, in the role of Prince Rupert(the commander with the little puppy)
- Dumbledore-Richard Harris, in the role of Cromwell(the cavalry commander with helmet)
- Obi-Wan Kenobi-Alec Guinness, in the role of King Charles I. (With the hat and golden-enriched armour plate)
Don't forget actor Charles Gray who played Blofeld.
Rosida Andriyana t
this movie seems to have the who-is-who of British actors of the 60s and 70s; I guess you just *had* to be in that movie. "one scene please, no pay required"
I thought Obi Wan had won the clone wars, I'm sorry to see him lose
Yes, it's almost like they're actors who play many roles in many films over their lifetimes
the time without CGI...where real manpower are use....aweesome!
Wanna see something really impressive? Watch the movie Waterloo 1970. They hired 20.000 Soviet soldiers and taught them 19th century French and British military formations.
That was mostly because they were cheao labour. The Russian communist was a slave-state where all citizens were slaves and had to work. They were desperate for foreign currency because the Soviet Union was bankrupt, but they had an abundance of free labour.
Voila, there was the soviet business case to agree to help film Waterloo.
Gods and Generals used Civil War reenactors for its battles.
Blah b, I never said it was perfect, i said it was impressive. Impressive that each person you see in the movie is actually there instead of the CGI of today where 10 people get multiplied by a 1000 and they call it a day.
not really it looks dated and crap ... slowing the horses down before they meet or one going down before a blow was struck ect .. they used the sealed knot society for the movies and didnt pay them .. the acting is top notch by al..l sadly the battle are shockingly bad these days .. i prefer how game of thrones did it .. watch battle of the bastards with how the cavalry hit each other ect brutal as hell and realistic ... what ppl dont know is the horses were all cgi in the scenes of battle ... here ....th-cam.com/video/m8rURwkvOx0/w-d-xo.html
That camera work at 03:12 is bloody dynamic. I'm surprised that's not been used more often in battle scenes since.
There was only one occasion when the New Model Army fought in mainland Europe, the Battle of the Dune, their foes, the French and Spanish were amazed by their discipline and ferocity.
The french were allied with the english at this battle.
@Rosida Andriyana
Yeah really ^^. One of the few times in our history before ww1 where we were on the same side.
@@kimok4716 and even when allied to them in WWII we still sank their navy
@@kimok4716 how about the Crimean War 1853 -1856
@@daniellastuart3145 There was also the third Anglo-Dutch war. But the French admiral was sneaky - allowing himself to be drawn away by the Dutch van so that English and Dutch main bodies fight and deplete themselves.
The CGI in this movie is amazing! So realistic!
Filming was on the Channel Isle of Jersey in may 1968, most extras were from the English Civil War Society and the Sealed Knot civil war re enactment groups, who actually had their own real campfires for cooking etc.
I am in there somewhere as a pikeman
Harris came to many of the camps to socialise and brought plenty of booze which was appreciated by all.
Hi@@stevebagnall1553 . I'm just now properly learning about the English Civil War. Was the battlefield really as dynamic as depicted in this clip? It was always my belief that Pikemen pushed at each other for a while until one overpowered the other and then the cavalry swept in to mop up.
The pikes were there to provide a barrier between the cannon and musketeers I suggest you find a re enactment near you if in the UK.
It's an eye opener.
@@RobMarriage well that was something in the previous century. Warfare had evolved, and what you see here is the transition between pike square to muskeet line.
@@stevebagnall1553 that is a complete lie. The battle scenes were filmed in sierra de urbasa in northern spain. As for the sealed knot, they were formed in 1968 and most of these soldiers are spanish extras
2:52 "Let me just trot my face into this pike"
ouch!
It doesn't make the most sense and might not have happened often but I imagine someone must've done it accidentally.
I take it as the Horse's momentum was too great for it to stop in time for him to miss the pike.
Thank god someone else saw it.
Had me in absolute stitches.
"Do you know the story of how one eyed Will got his name?"
“This kids gonna knock himself out” 2:53
4:00: *Royal Army is overwhelmed*
Officer: "Should we withdraw?"
King: no
4:22: *wagon explodes*
King: aiight imma head out
I swear the first 20 seconds of this scene is one of the most badass moments in any movie.
No CGI. Simply great.
Lord of the rings not great ?
You can't do a realistic battle without CGI extras unless you're somehow expecting to wrangle up more people than any film set could ever accommodate. We don't mind battles this small looking in old movies because we know that's all they had to work with at the time but if you filmed a modern day battle scene with such a tiny army on each side it would look ridiculous. Even a movie as grand a scale as Waterloo pales in comparison to how many troops fought in the actual battle.
@@AnEnemySpy456 I'd rather take a smaller battle than big overpaid CGI battle.
@@AnEnemySpy456 "You can't do a realistic battle without CGI extras"
Sergei Bondarchuk did it with Waterloo which was released the same year as this.
Admittedly Bondarchuk had the advantage of being given an entire division of the Red Army to use as extras.
This battle can be inaccurate, but I like how armor actually is shown to work here and how musket volleys put down entire lines of enemies.
Also actors at 2:52 and 4:06 are hiliarous!
Wow! QUICK footwork from the pikemen at 2:42. They filled the gap with two ranks in seconds just feet away from cavalry.
Thats what we call winning a battle really good
do you witness many attempts of this or something in day to day life ? lol
@@rvalle11
It's the umpteenth movie I've seen with pike formations battling so yes it is.
@@hammerofmariotos any recommendations ?
@@rvalle11
Pikes used properly--"Alatriste"
Pikes used poorly--"The New World"
The scene where that unfortunate Royalist got his crotch piked seriously horrified me as a boy.
No male alive would disagree with you on that!
@@TheGroundedAviator my head just said rdm rdm rdm
@@penginator89 I just squeezed my legs together.
I swear, the English Civil War was the most splendid, elegant, dashing and gallant war of them all! (though no less horrific).
Parlament's cuirassiers vs King's black cavalrymen. Great movie.
As I known Mr. Cromwell won the war because he had the well discipline armored cavalry named " Iron Side"
Phòng Kế toán TST Correct. The invincible and undefeated Ironsides.
Oliver Cromwell’s Regiment of Horse was given the nickname “Ironsides” after Cromwell’s nickname “Old Ironsides”.
@freneticness _
Ironclads had there debut in the Civil War. Old Ironsides was Cromwell’s nickname as well as the nickname of the USS Constitution in the war of 1812 three hundred years later.
@freneticness _ Only one particular ship..USS Constitution surely
Well technically some of the Americans of now descent from the banished Puritans, so it makes sense that they bond with the anti crown side
This is extremely innacurate. The parliamentarians outnumbered the royalists 2:1. Secondly, the parliamentarians had redcoats and the royalists wore blue, yellow or whatever they were given. Thirdly, the tactics were completely different to whats shown here, the artillery didnt explode either
🙄🤫
Yeah great costumes, but holy moly why everything keeps exploding
The production probably know the royalists warring red because of the American civil war. In Napoleon's time the army was wearing green.
I love how the New Model Army went: “Ight guys let’s give our soldiers red uniforms and their battle flags will be a solid color with the cross of St. George in the corner. And like a star or a streak represents the company in the regiment.”
“Wait isn’t that was the Royalists do? Won’t the soldiers get confused?”
“Nah it’s fine.”
I'm a direct descendant of Oliver Cromwell. Lord Protector. So much so our first son or daughter has been called Oliver or Olivia to this day. I can't right or wrong it. We are all over Cambridgeshire in the South and Norfolk in the East of England
Interesting movie, special effects are not worser than any similar movie, time period. For example, Waterloo, War or Peace. I think, clothes and costumes are accurate, and the movie about an interesting and sometimes forgotten time period...
I didn't see any special effects
Clothes aren't accurate at all for the New Model Army, all that ridiculous Brown and Orange. The New Model Army were the first British Units to possess a uniform, and they chose Red. They were the first Redcoats.
So, To Kill a King(2002) have better uniform colors. OK, but at least the men was not dressed as "polished leather/pvc wearing heavy metal biker gang" style. One recent turkish TV drama series everybody wearing leather-viziers, janissaries, even the sultan himself as battle dress. Forget muskets, cavalry actions(ottomans vs persians)chain and scale armour, silk, velvet, canvas, and any possible material...
Or BBC Musketeers...like a XVII. century metal band. Why not chromed horse harness and red flames painted to the poor horses...
Waterloo didnt have any special effects most of the soldiers we see in the movie are millitary reservist for then Soviet Russia
Technically NMA wasnt the first to receive regular uniforms. Many civil war regiments wore regular clothing before them, including many Royalist and Parliamentarian regiments which wore red. But I get your point
4:32 He felt a great disturbance in the force. 😂
I am a bit confused by this, because the Parliamentarian commander at Naseby was not Oliver Cromwell. He just commanded a wing of the New Model Army's cavalry. The real commander was Sir Thomas Fairfax.
I totally agree, Movie makers poetic licence i guess as the film is called 'Cromwell' i do think Faifax was a better battlefield commander and a far more interesting character in reality
They diddled with historical accuracy all through the movie, mostly to give Cromwell a more prominent role in the opening stages of the civil war than he actually had.
The Royalist actually had no guns at Naseby (and cannons in that era fired roundshot which don't explode - only howitzers fired shell). They were also heavily outnumbered (approx 7000 men to Parliament's 14,000), they turned to offer battle out of desperation. i.e. Prince Rupert wouldn't be uttering the line "are they mad?" as seen in the movie. It was 100% certain that they would get attacked.
@@sbam4881 thanks for posting this. The movie is good, not doubt about it, but after reading a bit, I didn't agree with making the Royal army look like a mighty confident force, and the Parliament like the plucky brave underdogs, when it was clearly the other way around.
@@sbam4881 Maarston Moor was bigger and a more even fight. Royalists still got smashed tho by the same FairFax Cromwell combo
3:13 was a hell ova camera shot!!!! for that time in film making. 👍
Great soldiers, amongst the best disciplined and most hard fighting in all of Europe at that time, both sides, proud and fierce English warriors all.
A pack of dirty fuckers
@@taylorahern3755 all having their countries absorbed and abused by others. Your boast is empty at best and pitiful at worst
@@SantomPh They all got soft after WW2, via a Good Degree of indoctrination, societal conditioning & historical revisionism taught in the schools & reinforced by the mainstream media. Sad, tragic yet seemingly inevitable. Though what a glorious & amazing battlefield legacy that all those various warrior tribes left, the Irish, Scottish, English, Serbian & Croatians, along with the near invincible Polish Cavalry of yore, outstanding fighters all👍👍👍
Taylor Ahern
There’s propaganda from that time period showing Croatian soldiers eating babies in Germany. I’m not sure how accurate it is, but people back then tended to exaggerate atrocities.
@@joellaz9836 That is so true, as things tended to be Greatly Embellished/Distorted/Exaggerated back then, so true ((the reputation acquired by the Irish as being as savage & vicious off the battlefield as on it seems to carry a Good Degree of validity, universally seen as extremely fearsome as they were, their exceptional skills as natural warriors notwithstanding)). Thank you for pointing that out👍👍
Does my eye decieve me are they actually fighting in formation, with pikes and historical armor?
I had no idea the Clone Wars were that long ago.
FOR THE REPUBLIC
For the Commonwealth of England 🏴 and the parliament
You inadvertently stumbled upon one of the the reasons I hate Star Wars - with all their technology they still fought using 17th century tactics.
@almightyinferno Charles I is played by Alec Guinness, more famous (to his distaste) for playing Obi-Wan Kenobi in Star Wars
"A LONG time ago, in a galaxy far far away."
Crazy that you actually went back in time to film this. Subscriber earned!
Good filming but nothing like the actual Battle of Naseby. Parliamentary army outnumbered the Royal army 3 to 1 and was commanded by Sir Thomas Fairfax.
So true! Cromwell spent the vast majority of the first English Civil War as a cavalry commander and not an army commander. It was a pretty hopeless cause for the Cavalier, (Royalist), forces by the time this battle was fought due to Scotland entering the war and allying herself with the Parliamentarians. The Parliamentarians outnumbering the Royalists already, right from the get-go long before the Scots joined in, while also having control of the vast majority of the most important geo-strategic territory and was immensely better resourced to boot. Yet, in spite of all those advantages the Royalists were actually winning the war for the most part up until the Scottish entry. Every country has their own historical heroes and villains, and greatly embellish the accomplishments of said heroes to a degree, but England and the US are by far the worst in this regard. And this immensely distorted version of history is further exaggerated when it's translated into film and tv most of the time. There are certainly a few outliers here and there no doubt, one being that of the incomprehensibly underrated classic "Waterloo," where the film does a pretty damn good job depicting a much more accurate version of the battle, one where Wellington didn't defeat Napoleon due to his brilliant and unrivalled strategy/tactics, where instead if Blucher and the Prussians hadn't shown up when they did Wellington was well on his way to being defeated. Or even if Grucci had only marched to the sound of the guns, even with the Prussians showing up, with Gucci's 60 thousand troops similarly joining the battle - the Brits and Prussians still most likely would have ended up losing at Waterloo.
-Sidenote: not that winning Waterloo would have changed much for Napoleon, France had simply lost too many troops over the years and had absolutely zero allies while facing a fully united Europe, making it impossible for him to maintain his rule over France. The Napoleonic Wars were really decided not at Waterloo, but instead by the combination of the battle of Borodino, Napoleon's retreat from Russia, and above all - the battles of Dresden and Leipzig. Waterloo was nothing more than a pointless afterthought by that point.
I recommend u check it out. It came out a year or two after this movie was made, and had even better visuals than this one and easily two of the best performances of Christopher Plummer's, (as Wellington), and of Rod Steiger's, (as Napoleon), entire careers.
@@8301TheJMan I just watched waterloo last night, and really did portray both sides pretty well. Showed that Wellington had that piece of ground picked out, but needed the Prussians and Blucher to show up to win.
Damn fine movie and worth a watch. Its free on TH-cam with ads.
@@Suodemon It's such a good movie. They used 15000 soviet solders as extras, which back then was enough to ruffle the feathers of Hollywood, (after all it had been rocked during the whole red scare of the 50's and 60's), so the film was sorta black-balled and didn't get the coverage it deserved.
@@8301TheJMan The use of extras with people and horses for scope and scale works perfectly. The fact it was 15000 red army soldiers makes me wonder what deal exactly Delaurentiis made.
As for the Red Scare in the 50s, Hollywood did have a massive Communist contingent back then, sadly the scope and breadth of everything involved there is lost to memes and generalizations about McCarthy and his failings. Not really a good reason for an amazing movie to get snubbed, but understandable in the climate.
@@Suodemon Oh no doubt, but that's exactly why Hollywood wanted nothing to do with it. That said, it's not like this was ever acknowledged officially, it just was theorized by the lack of promotion it received and it getting completely snubbed by awards and so forth. Hollywood did what every major institution does when having a bad rep, it overcompensated, that'd be my guess.
Bless the cameraman for time travelling, explain to both sides that he's a messenger from Gawd, and took all footage from a Panasonic camera. Truly one for the ages 😂
2:53 is so funny to me. He screams like he didn't see the spear there and was surprised by it 🤣
Cromwell is a pime example of you either die a hero or live long enough to become the villain
Exactly, I wonder what would've happened if he died during the war, but the parliamentarians still won. Would England still be a republic/commonwealth? Would there be a union or an empire?
@Love United Hate Glazer
No, he was actually hated by the populace and was kept in power because he had the loyalty of the army,
Oliver Cromwell never lost a battle!
Cromwell managed to do both.
I mean he was no George Washington, but the victory of the parliamentarians helped lead to the establishment of the parliamentary system, which was definitely a great improvement over monarchy’s.
Of course this was but a single step forward, but we shouldn’t act like the parliamentarians winning wasn’t a good thing for England and the world.
The New Model Army was the origin of the British army.
The British army isn't a bunch of traitors like the New Model Army were...
@@huberticusrex lol what?
@@huberticusrex Yet the military structure and many of its traditions hailed from this period.
The Grenadiers can say they're first but everyone knows the Coldstream Guard (who fought FOR the NMA) are Nulli secundus
I feel like this a awesome, fluid representation of this kind of warfare. The Calvary doing hit and runs had me geeking
though not what they did in reality at all..the madcap charge is simply nonsense. Close order, boot to boot even amongst the Cavaliers..not a mad dash that looks like the Grand National
Waterloo, the movie, has been shot in the very same year... 1970 was a great date for historical movies with full cavalry charges...
God... those old Game Workshop's miniatures game like *Pike and Shote* were so great... ;)
4:06 "Have some of that, son".
So brutal punch!(o_o)
Greatest mistake of the entire movie: Boy (Prince Ruperts poodle) had fallen in combat the year before Naseby. When taken back to the camp for safety, she escaped and started looking for Rupert in the middle of a cavalry charge.
Another is the uniforms, by Nasby the Parliamentarian army had become the New Model Army which was uniformed in red but the only soldiers we see wearing red are the Royalists. The Royalists never adopted a standard uniform, instead the soldiers were equipped by their own colonels who uniformed them in the colours of their own choosing, such as Newcastles's Whitecoats who were virtually wiped out at Marston Moor
leo Mutombo.???????????????????????????????
“He girdeth me with strength for war, and teaches my hands to fight!”
Powerful words.
3:51 oh my drum too heavy you guy go ahead
He got shot
The song is wrong as well. Nobody cares. This is the ONLY decent film about the English Civil Wars that there is.
mate this film is so inaccurate a depiction of the civil war that it is a joke. it is full of superb acting and has a masterful script. but it got as much to do with what happened as bravehart has with Scottish history. the sad thing is the civil war is well documented and it would have be quite possible to make a film that was factually correct. instead they decided to make a travesty of lies and half truths instead. it is crying out for a good remake.
Oh yes, but there's no money in big films about English history.
@Jade Kilgallon Many, and Waterloo and The Charge of the Light Brigade remaain about as good as film making gets, but they didn't make any money...
Drogo Muircastle
Yeah WHY ISNT THERE MORE FILMS ABOUT THE ENGLISH CIVIL WARS? I want more films about the English civil wars! People are so obsessed with the tudors, but I find the English civil war period just as interesting.
@@tommyfred6180 Film making is about entertainment, facts are only incidental to give some credibility .
Dumbledore kicked Obi-wan's ass.
Explosive artillery shells were not used during the English civil war. During most civil war battles artillery was used very little, and exploding ordinance was generally used only during sieges.
In film at this point (and all the way up to the modern age) always used explosive shells to portray canon simply because it was easier and safer to portray. And for the average person they were able to better understand canon as using explosive shells given the recent memory of the world wars.
Of course through most of human history canon shot round shot to plow through lines of compact infantry. Very few films portray this accurately.
So Ken Hughes how much artillery do you want in this movie?
Ken: yes
what a times...you could ride, your could shout, you could shoot, you could poke
Well it was sort of ok until the infantry started running pell mell down the hill in a silly charge. They would have been slaughtered piecemeal... perhaps the director was football coach?
There were several regiments who did not flee the field among the Royalists, Fairfax had to order full charges to break them up
i'm very conflicted, on the one hand I like the use of extras more than cgi. however for cavalry in these movies they forced the horses to trip using wire, injuring them or in the worst case breaking legs. Causing many horses to be put down. So, besides the cost of extras, a reason for studios to use cgi is to avoid outrage over injured horses in movies about this era of combat.
The only thing wrong with this film is that it is incredibly historically inaccurate and way over-dramatized.
Why are the soldiers of the New Model Army wearing black and gold?
The New Model Army were the original Redcoats.
They depicted Cromwell as a Col. who led Parliamentary forces at the Battle of Edgehill, the first battle of the war, but in reality he was only a Captain then, and had arrived too late to the battle to fight.
While the Battle of Marston Moor, the largest battle of the war and a decisive Parliamentary victory in which Cromwell's role was significant, and where he legitimately first rose to prominence, is not even shown or mentioned...
Where Parliamentary forces destroyed the Royal forces, and discovered that Charles I was planning to recruit Catholics for another war.
It honestly makes me wonder why they didn't bother to show perhaps the most important battle of the first war.
They show Cromwell being appointed Commander-in-Chief (or Lord General) of the New Model Army, when in reality Fairfax was Lord General and Cromwell was second in command as Lt. General, and Cavalry commander, and he did not lead the main charge at Naseby, but the Cavalry charge on the right flank.
Queen Henrietta is portrayed far too manipulatively, she did not have nearly that much influence on Charles I.
In the film, Charles I was put on trial for planning a second Civil War. In reality there was a Second Civil War and only after this second defeat was he trialed and executed, and then a Third Civil War was fought where Cromwell defeated Charles II, forced him into exile, and afterward established the Commonwealth of England as Lord Protector.
Sir. Edward Hyde, who gave the testimony against Charles I in the film, in reality was not even in the country at the time.
After the war the film depicts Cromwell living humbly on his farm, when in reality he took the New Model Army to invade Ireland after the Irish Catholics formed an alliance with Charles II.
And the list goes on...
Yeah, no kidding! People need to read Lady Antonia Fraser's biography "Cromwell" instead of watching this crap.
@@steveweinstein3222 Theodore Roosevelt also wrote a biography on Cromwell, I was looking into picking that up.
They always are even today. Was actually saying the same thing the other day about Vikings on Amazon.
Hers is excellent.And long.
The cavalry did wear armour and leather buffcoats
I really enjoyed watching this film as a kid and it's still a great film. Alec Guinness is superb.
English Civil War battles are just so much... cooler than American Civil War battles
More colours. And swords are cool
Quite well done given a few hundred extras. Back when you had to make a real scene with reality - and not a programmer.
wait did any one die
Like Gen. Robert E. Lee said, “never let the enemy see you run”.
Proudly Protestant.
cromwell is the most acuratley dressed person in this secne, the cavalry wore a more yellow or even various tan type colours buff than the dark brown that most seem to be wearing and nobody was that uniform in appearance, different regiments for most of the war wore different colours. also most artillery in this period were civilians so would have wore whatever civilian clothing they normally would.
it was only really new model army which standized its uniforms into a sort of red uniform.
Such beautiful depiction. And no computer graphics
Cromwell - God's greatest Englishman.
This made me feel like I was in the middle of a total war game!
This is certainly among the better fight scenes I have watched
This actor played is Ben Kenobi From Star Wars a new hope from 1977
Obi-wan had the high ground...
Damit. This ALWAYS happens on 'bring your dog to work' day.
"Your majesty, shall we withdraw?"
"No my divine right will prevail......oh bugger this."
I notice the Parliamentarians banners have a similar look and message to the ones used in our Revolutionary War nearly 200 years later.
Charles started to spur his horse forwards, but one of his officers grabbed it's reins saying "would you go upon your death in an instant!"
Richard Harris playing Cromwell was an inspired choice.....wonderful actor.
4:08 That's gotta hurt.
I love the 'Rejoice in the Lord' song at the beginning. Stirring stuff!
3:12 the shot between the horses legs .
That would have been a difficult shot
if Ruperts cavalry didnt run off the field after the Parliamentary baggage train, this battle could have gone the other way. This was also a problem in other battles like Edgehill.
Yep, strange seeing people here praising the new model army for Naseby despite the parliament cavalry being routed rather easily by numerically inferior royalists
When the king left the battle you knew the fat lady had sung...
I watched this as a kid. GREAT attention to detail at least in costume, style of battle. Back when England was fought between a Religious Fundementist parliament and a King that believe God gave him the right to rule the small folk didn't stand a chance.
I wonna play this battle in some Total War game!
Me too. CA skipped this period and went straight to the 18th century after Medieval 2. Although there are mods out there, i really feel this era needs proper treatment by the developer.
@@killer3000ad there are some pike units and gunpowder units in medieval 2, although in vanilla pikes might be broken... but Stainless Steel works more or less.
And there are mods, as you had said. Check out Italian Wars for Medieval 2 and 1600 Colonialism for Empire.
"you may have won this battle, but you will never win the fashion war"
and they never did.
Really, the New Model Army adopted red as its colour and red is what British soldiers wore in battle for the next 240 years and still wear today on parade and royal ceremony.
Bro uniforms from the Seven Years War and *especially* the Napoleonic Wars are the height of male fashion. You will never see a suit of any make reach the same level as a Hussar's uniform.
I was fascinated watching this film as a kid. But I did almost piss myself laughing at the funny death-yell of the drummer at 3:50.
Old movie. Pretty good fight scene. I like "numbers", and they did a really good job WAY before cgi.
Oh thanks
3:50 that death was very "monty-pythonesque"
Boy was NOT a fluffy little lapdog.
Nope he was a cavalier, or king Charles cavalier
@@gazmj1400 He was not, he was a LARGE poodle.
2:44 : charging pikes under muskets fire was a terrible idea.
It is historically recorded that uniforms on either side were non existent for foot soldiers. They wore their own clothes.
I can only imagine how confusing that was in a pitched battle.
No coat of arms?
Actually around the time of Nasby the New Model Army wore red. They were the first actual redcoats of the English.
I live in Naseby. Thought I'd give it a watch aha
I'm in Harrington. Me too.
Boy, the royal arms of England had gotten crowded by this point--the three gold lions of House Plantagenet of England, the fleurs-de-lis of France (signifying the never consolidated claim of a previous English king to the throne of France,) the harp of Ireland, and the red lion on gold of Scotland. Strangely, despite the claim to the French throne having been decisively defeated by the French in the Hundred Years' War, some versions of the British royal colors still bear the fleurs-de-lis to this DAY.
What's with the dog? Is it some sort of highly trained combat poodle?
It was Prince Rupert's own dog named Boye. But it shouldnt appear in this scene, it died in 1644, one year before this battle was fought
Thanks!
I was taught he had a standard poodle, not a toy , and it was a hunting dog , and would go onto battle with him , but perhaps that was also fake news
@@mickjenner6697 No, you're right. The Parliamentarian press accused it of being a demon familiar, proof against musket ball. He was killed at Marston Moor.
The Grenadier Guards have bean the last line of defence around the monchy since the English Civil War.
Pikemen fight in large close squares, not loose lines charging wildly at the enemy.
Not all the time they didn't , you think you know it all but you don't .There were many different ways they fought and if it looks like the enemy will break then you charge at them for extra shock value to make your enemy panick in disarray which was actually common .
@@britishpatriot7386 running that fast with that armour? And it would just be stupid to have gaps between your pikes
@ yeah I know because of the weight distribution and such, but I mean they were running really fast and not for a short while and this armour is not better for running than plate armor because of the sloopy upperleg protection it would be really annoying to run in it and maybe even hurt. but I mean I can be wrong I wasn't there and never wore such armour all I know about this stuff is from the internet
@dead squid on keyboard In the mid 17th century typical musket to pike ratio was 1:1. Only new model army and some european armies had 2:1 ratio 2:1 ratio was standard by the second half of 17th century (70's-80's) while in the 1690's nearly every western european nation abandoned pikemen.
This scene is one I have always disagreed with Charles did not simply run away he was ready to charge with his last reserve only the intervention of a courtier stopped him however the new model had both the numbers and the tactics also by this stage their gunners were at least a match for royalists as well
Doubtful that a prat like Charles would have charged with his lickspittle troops.
@@johnmorgan4124 Prat? The only prat was Cromwell, the thieving, usurping, murderous bastard he was.
@@michalis7023 Based
@@johnmorgan4124 The wrong side won this war
Historical Inaccuracy: The little dog, Boye, wasn't at Naseby. He was killed at Marston Moor after getting loose and running after Rupert, a year before Naseby
Is that the orange order flag?
Beautifully mowed lawn:-)
Remember looking this movie as a kid
What I don't understand about this movie is why the royalist forces wear red when it was notably the new model army which adopted the red coats
It has Alec Guinness and battles in it, it can’t be that bad, can it?
partly agree, the parliamentarian uniforms are rubbish, but the kings lifeguard of foot wore red uniforms. I believe the film was made in spain and they hired the uniforms and equipment that had just been used in a spanish movie.
sorry this is so wrong. the fighting started with parliamentary dragoons skirmishing on the left. the first charge of cavalry was by the royalists on there right flank and had nothing to do with cromwell. this charge was completely successful and drove parliaments left flank off the field. none of what is shown happened, except parliaments cavalry getting into the royalist baggage train. even the wall shown was not there it was a gully that drained water into a mash on the right of the battle field.
2:51 Don't stay on that phone while walkin Kids! You might run into a pike!
thank you for uploading
Richard Harris nailed it as Cromwell.
4:05 "Evacuate? In our moment of triumph? I think you overestimate their chances."
This is such an amazing movie.
The irony of an Irishman playing a man infamous for butchering the Irish
Tadicuslegion78
I do wish people who make that sort of remark would read Tom Reilly's book and that would give them a more balanced view.
Aren't the uniforms sort of mixed up? Wasn't it the Parliamentarians who wore red?
Yes. I assume in this movie they just wanted to recreate the traditional noble rich look of the King's soldiers since he is supposed to be rich and all, while in reality the King would be very short on money. I presume it was also inspired by the American civil war where the Union was much better equipped than the Confederate 'rebels', as parliamentarians are shown to be, a poor rebel rabble and nothing more, which is completely wrong. They chose red was already taken for the king, so making the other side wearing red aswell could be confusing for the audience, especially for those not very familiar with the civil war. Or, perhaps, they had no idea, didnt even know that were in fact already regimental uniform colours and just applied the same logic as in the Thirty years war. From pictures I have seen of the Sealed knot (a reenactment society focusing on the civil war), back in the 1970s (I think?) they pretty much wore anything and looked more like mercenaries from the continent, really.
I was refering to the Parliamentarian uniforms, especially those shown on the battle of Edgehill, not to the general state of politics. Confederates were widely known to have been in poor state in the early stages of the war, most men serving in civilian clothing or anything they could find, compared to the industrialized richer Union which could afford to properly clothe most of their regiments. Confederates were rebels, such could be said about parliamentarians, both wars are also civil wars, yadadada and the fairy tale of rebels being badly equipped picks up + King is supposed to be the rich powerful one, therefore he should be able to properly uniform his soldiers right? Thats what they thought, but in the early stages of the war, no
It's ironic because as I understand it (based on my admittedly limited knowledge of the English Civil War), it would have been the Royalists who wore basically whatever because the military system at the time was still largely feudal, where you would just raise armies as you needed them out of the peasantry and only spend a little bit to make sure units had the same weapons, ie: pikemen or musketmen. It was the Parliamentarians who innovated by making their army professional and choosing a standard uniform to make them feel more part of a whole.
Yes, though some Royalists regiments would have worn red, (Confusing in the smoke of battle) By Nasby the Parliamentarian army had become the New Model Army which was uniformed in red but the only soldiers we see wearing red are the Royalists. The Royalists never adopted a standard uniform, instead the soldiers were equipped by their own colonels who uniformed them in the colours of their own choosing, such as Newcastles's Whitecoats who were virtually wiped out at Marston Moor
Field signs in the form of a sash, red for the king , amber for parliament. Often clothing and armour was the same, so a simple sash was worn to show what side you were on.
I wonder what would happen if the new model army fought the spanish tercios.
England win easy.
Battle of dunes (1658)