Whatever your opinion, Cromwell overturned years of established order in England and oversaw a pivotal period in English history and his legacy has been far-reaching. Here are 10 facts about the England’s first Lord Protector.

1. He was distantly related to Thomas Cromwell, Henry VIII’s chief minister

Oliver Cromwell was born in Huntingdon to a family in the landed gentry. His great-great-grandmother, Katherine, was Thomas Cromwell‘s older sister, and her sons chose to take her name, Cromwell, rather than their father’s.

Oliver was one of 10 children, and the only boy to survive infancy.

Thomas Cromwell by Hans Holbein the Younger

Image Credit: Public Domain

2. Relatively little is known about the first 40 years of his life

For a man who would become so prominent in public life, Cromwell’s early years remain relatively obscure. He studied at Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge, and it’s thought that he studied at Lincoln’s Inn after this, but there is no recorded evidence of this fact.

Aged 21, Cromwell married Elizabeth Bourchier, the daughter of a London leather merchant who had Puritan connections: the pair went on to have 9 children. Whilst the marriage appears to have been loyal and affectionate, it also brought plenty of connections which served the ambitious Cromwell well in his career.

3. He had something of a crisis of faith

Whilst Cromwell was certainly exposed to Puritanism from early on, it seems that in the 1620s he had something of a personal crisis. Despite his successful election as an MP for Huntingdon in 1628, records show he sought treatment for a variety of issues, including depression, in the same year.

In 1629, Charles dismissed Parliament: he would not call it again for 11 years. In the meantime, it seems Cromwell had a spiritual awakening. His letters began to use increasingly Puritanical language, speak of more radical beliefs and include more Biblical references and quotations than ever before. He even tried to emigrate to the Americas in 1634, but was prevented from doing so.

After moving to farm in Cornwall, for several years, Cromwell and his family returned to Ely in the late 1630s as an established member of the gentry, committed Puritan and well-connected politician.

4. When civil war broke out, he had little military experience

When war rolled around in 1642, Cromwell had only ever participated in local militia. However, he quickly gathered troops and blocked a shipment of silver plate from Cambridge colleges to the king, and tried to participate in the Battle of Edgehill, but arrived too late to be of any use.

Fortunately there were plenty of other opportunities for Cromwell to develop his tactical skills, and he impressed his superiors at the Battle of Gainsborough, amongst several other skirmishes in East Anglia.

5. He became key to the Parliamentarians’ success

Cromwell subsequently oversaw notable victories at Marston Moor and Naseby, and was the only MP who was excluded from the Self-Denying ordinance, allowing him to retain his role in Parliament and his military command.

He also helped spearhead the founding of the New Model Army, which was based on skill and ability rather than social status: a new innovation at the time. Close cavalry formations, another innovation, and strict discipline also helped bring success.

Statue of Oliver Cromwell in Parliament Square

Image Credit: Prioryman / CC

6. Cromwell was one of the more enthusiastic regicides

The question of what to do with the deposed Charles I plagued the Parliamentarians. Many of them felt that killing the king was wrong: the doctrine of the Divine Right of Kings rang deep. Others argued that the war would never be over while Charles remained alive.

Cromwell was the third to sign Charles’ death warrant, and co-signed the actual warrant to proceed with the beheading, which took place on 30 January 1649.

7. Cromwell’s Irish campaign remains controversial

Ireland remained predominantly Catholic and had made an alliance with the Royalists which had the potential to pose a serious threat to the newly founded Commonwealth of England. As a result, Parliamentarian forces invaded Ireland in 1649, sacking and capturing a number of strategically important towns and ports in brutal, bloody and protracted sieges.

The conquest of Ireland took 3 years to complete, and Cromwell’s legacy in Ireland remains one tainted by bloodshed and bitterness. Civilians, as well as those bearing arms, were subject to violence and some historians have dubbed his actions in Ireland as being reminiscent of ethnic cleansing in their brutality.

8. Lord Protector – for life

In December 1653, Cromwell was made ‘Lord Protector’ for life: a role not entirely dissimilar to that of a monarch. He was called ‘Your Highness’ and had the power to call and dissolve parliament. In 1657, he was ceremonially re-installed as Lord Protector at Westminster Hall in an event which closely mirrored a coronation.

The main aim at this point was ‘healing and settling’ the nation following nearly a decade of civil war, as well as implementing social and moral reforms to firmly establish ‘godliness’ at the heart of England. The office of Lord Protector was not hereditary, but Cromwell could nominate his own successor.

9. Cromwell’s rule was ambitious

Not content to simply heal the nation, Cromwell launched an ambitious foreign policy, including the ‘Western Design’ (which was effectively an armada against the Spanish West Indies) and a treaty with the avowedly Catholic France to supply troops and weapons in their war against Spain. Jews were allowed to re-enter and settle in England following their expulsion in 1290 in the hope that they would aid economic and commercial recovery in England.

The Protectorate, as the period between 1653 and 1658 was known, relied heavily on Cromwell’s ability to keep control of both Parliament and the army. A popular military leader and an experienced politician, he managed to balance these two powerful forces in a way which no one else could.

10. He was posthumously executed

Cromwell died in September 1658, possibly from septicaemia following a urinary infection. He was buried with great pomp and circumstance at Westminster Abbey with a funeral based on that of James I.

Two years later, in 1661, his body was exhumed and subject to posthumous execution. His head was then displayed on a spike outside Westminster Abbey until 1685. It changed hands several times subsequently before being reburied in 1960 at Sidney Sussex College Chapel, Cambridge.

Oliver Cromwell was the most influential General of the English Civil War, famous for creating the New Model Army and decisively defeating King Charles I at Naseby in 1645. However, his fighting career didn’t end with the final defeat of the King.

Resistance in Ireland

Ireland still held Royalists, who had recently allied with the local Confederate rebels, and the these combined forces were preying on Parliamentary shipping. Cromwell was not a man to sit my and let this happen and in August 1649 he landed in Ireland with a highly trained army of Civil War veterans.

Wexford, a seafaring settlement on Ireland’s east coast, had been a thorn in Parliament’s side for eight years since the Irish rebellion of 1641. It could not have done anything more to offend Oliver Cromwell than eject its Protestants, which it did in 1642, leading to 80 of them drowning. Finally, it was the hub of Royalist Privateers and perilously close to the English mainland.

So infamous were the Wexford raiders that if Cromwell’s ships caught them they were thrown overboard with their hands tied. In response, the 170 English prisoners in the town were threatened with summary execution. For all these reasons Wexford was a crucial target for Cromwell’s invading army, and after taking Drogheda in September his troops arrived at the walls of the town on 2 October.

Playing for time

Cromwell’s army consisted of roughly 6000 men, and crucially he had with him eight heavy siege guns designed for destroying the walls of a town. The garrison, meanwhile, was Irish and by the time the city was stormed on 11 October its commander David Sinnot had bolstered its numbers to 4,800.

Knowing that the Duke of Ormonde’s main Royalist army was close at hand, Sinnot knew that he only needed to play for time. After the sacking of Drogheda, however, the civilians were demoralised and demanded that Sinnot surrender. As a result he entered into negotiations with Cromwell, making demands that he knew would not be accepted to play for time.

Cromwell, predictably, dismissed the ideas that he would let the Catholic garrison and their privateer go with all their weapons. While these negotiations were carried out his siege guns opened two breaches in the city walls, opening the way for an attack should he order it.

While negotiations continued on 11 October Cromwell’s troops suddenly stormed the vulnerable town. Cromwell denied giving the order, but chaos ensued as the Parliamentarian troops flooded into Wexford. The town’s castle was inexplicably surrendered without a fight by its English Royalist captain, Stafford, and after this any notion of a fight was over.

Portrait of Oliver Cromwell by Samuel Cooper (c. 1656). Image credit: NPG / CC.

A massacre ensues

Irish troops fled from their stations in panic and were then pursued and often massacred by Cromwell’s men. Many more tried to cross the nearby river Slaney to escape the orgy of violence unfolding in the town, but most, including the governor Sinnot, drowned or were shot as they tried to swim.

Violence in the town grew out of hand, spreading to its civilian population and the buildings as well as the survivors of the garrison. By the end of the day 2000 soldiers and 1500 civilians had been killed, at the cost of just 20 of Cromwell’s men.

Such a massacre of innocents remains a serious stain on Cromwell’s reputation. Though he did not give the order explicitly, he did little to halt the violence. This can be compared to Henry V during the Agincourt campaign, who famously hanged his men for stealing even minor items of loot.

Cromwell in fact justified the actions of his men by arguing that they were merely taking revenge for the treatment of Protestants in the town and the actions of the privateers that it sheltered. Other historians have argued on the other hand that though this was brutal it was simply what happened in warfare at the time. The debate continues.

One thing that is certain is that the sack was somewhat counterproductive for Cromwell’s army, as they damaged the port so much as to make it unusable: it did also prevent Royalists using the port to land in Ireland though. The sack is also said to have had a psychological effect on the Irish and Royalist armies.

Ormonde observed shortly afterwards that terror that Cromwell’s men inspired encouraged other garrisons to surrender without any attempt at resistance, and the Cromwellian conquest of Ireland was well underway by the end of 1649, as Parliamentarian forces controlled the provinces of Munster and Ulster.

However, ten years later they decided to invite Charles I’s 30-year old son – also called Charles – back to England and reinstate the monarchy. So why did they go to all the trouble of deposing a King only to invite him back?

Bringing back the King

England’s problem was that a significant majority never wanted to get rid of the monarchy completely. There were radical voices calling for the introduction of new freedoms and democracy, but these were very much on the fringes.

For most people, the news that England had been turned into a Republic was shocking and a desire to return to the traditional English constitution – a stable country with a king who would behave himself within reason – remained.

The problem lay with King Charles I and his refusal to compromise even when he had little other choice. After his capture at the end of the first Civil War negotiations proceeded to place him back on the throne.

He did have to make a number of concessions if the Parliamentarians were to reinstate him however – promising that he would not target Parliament’s leaders and that he would devolve power. Charles’ belief in the Divine Right of Kings ensured he was particularly averse to the latter demand.

Rather than accepting the concessions, Charles escaped his captors, fled north and tried to forge an alliance with the Scots.

The plan backfired. The Scottish Presbyterian army entered negotiations with Parliament for the handing over of the suppliant king and pretty soon Charles found himself in custody of the Parliamentarians again.

By this time attitudes had hardened. Charles’ intransigence seemed to make peace impossible. As long as he remained on the throne, it seemed, war would continue. The only choice was to kill the King.

Charles I on horseback by Anthony Van Dyck. Image credit: Public Domain.

Life without kings

With Charles gone England was now a commonwealth led by the powerful hand of Oliver Cromwell, but pretty soon he found governing the country was not as easy as he might have liked. First there was a kingdom to secure. Charles I might be gone, but his son was still at large.

The young man who would later be Charles II raised his own army to challenge Parliament. He met with little more success than his father and was defeated by Cromwell at the Battle of Worcester on 3 September 1651. Legend has it that he hid in a tree to evade Parliament’s forces.

Furthermore, Cromwell soon had his own problems with Parliament. In 1648 Parliament had been purged of all those who were not supportive of the New Model Army and the Independents. Even so, the remaining Rump Parliament was in no mood to simply do Cromwell’s bidding and in 1653 Cromwell dismissed it and set up a protectorate instead.

Although Cromwell refused the Crown, he was King in all but name and soon started to show royal tendencies. He governed in much the same way Charles had, only recalling parliament when he had to raise money.

Strict religious order

Cromwell’s regime soon became unpopular. Strict observance of Protestantism was enforced, theatres were shut down and ale houses across the country closed. Military failures in a war against Spain damaged his reputation abroad, and England was largely isolated from her European neighbours, who were fearful revolution and discontent would spread to the continent.

However, Oliver Cromwell was a strong leader: he provided a powerful figurehead, commanded widespread support (particularly from the New Model Army) and had an iron grip on power.

When he died in 1658 rule passed to his son Richard. Richard soon proved to be not as proficient as his father had been: Oliver had run the country into debt, and left a power vacuum as head of the army.

Parliament and the New Model Army became increasingly suspicious of each others’ intentions and the atmosphere became increasingly hostile. Eventually, under the command of George Monck, the army forced Cromwell from power – he resigned his position as Lord Protector peacefully to resign with a pension.

This paved the way for the return of Charles I’s exiled, namesake son; an opening for the return of a monarch had appeared.

Parliament began negotiations with the young Charles to bring him back to the throne on condition that he agree to certain concessions. Charles – who was a little more flexible than his father – agreed and was crowned in 1660. Charles had his coronation a year later and England had a King once more.

Portrait of Oliver Cromwell by Samuel Cooper (c. 1656). Image credit: NPG / CC.

1. Parliament needed stronger military presence

If you were a Parliamentarian supporter in 1643 things were looking bleak: Royalist forces, led by Prince Rupert, were sweeping all before them. This veteran of the 30 Years War in Europe was recognised as a military genius and it seemed no force on Parliament’s side could match him. However, in 1644 one MP from Huntington changed all that.

2. Cromwell had proved he was a worthy Parliamentarian soldier

Oliver Cromwell had been a member of the Long and Short Parliaments, which had stood up to Charles and eventually taken the country to war. Once war began, he had also established a reputation as a brilliant military leader, quickly rising through the ranks until he had command of his own cavalry, which was beginning to develop a formidable reputation of its own.

In 1644, they encountered Rupert’s army at Marston Moor and shattered their aura of invincibility. Leading a charge behind the lines, Cromwell’s men snatched victory and helped to dramatically alter the balance of power in the war.

Portrait of Oliver Cromwell by Samuel Cooper (c. 1656). Image credit: NPG / CC.

3. Creating a whole new army seemed necessary

Despite success at Marston Moor, there was still discontent within Parliamentarian ranks at how the war was being fought. Although they had a clear advantage in manpower and resources they found it difficult to raise men from local militias which could move around the country.

Cromwell’s answer was to establish a full-time and professional fighting force, which would become known as the New Model Army. This initially consisted of around 20,000 men split into 11 regiments. Unlike the militias of old these would be trained fighting men able to go anywhere in the country.

4. The New Model Army was a watershed moment in British military history

The creation of the New Model Army was a watershed for many reasons. Firstly, it worked on a meritocratic system, where the best soldiers were the officers. Many of the gentlemen who had previously been officers in the army found it difficult to find a post in this new era. They were either quietly discharged or persuaded to continue serving as regular officers.

It was also an army in which religion played a key role. Cromwell would only accept men into his army who were firmly committed to his own Protestant ideologies. It quickly gained a reputation for being a well drilled and highly disciplined force, earning the nickname of God’s Army.

However, fears grew that it was also becoming a hotbed of independents. Many of the early generals were known to be radicals and after the first civil war disagreements about pay led to agitation within the ranks.

The troops became increasingly radicalised and opposed the restoration of Charles without democratic concessions. Their goals went much further and are outlined in their Agreement of the People, which called for the vote for all men, religious freedom, an end to imprisonment for debt and a parliament elected every two years.

5. It marked the start of a new way of fighting

Perhaps the most tangible influence of the New Model Army, however, was its impact on the way England fought. Members could not be part of the House of Lords or the House of Commons in order to avoid political factions, and unlike previous militias, the New Model Army was not tied to any one area or garrison: it was a national force.

Furthermore, it was highly organised: with around 22,000 soldiers and centralised administration, this was the first even vaguely modern army in the sense that it was much more efficient and structured than previous forces had been.

6. The New Model Army allowed for direct military rule

The New Model Army helped Cromwell, and Parliament, maintain a sense of authority throughout the Interregnum. It helped police minor insurrections and was involved with the attempted invasion of Hispaniola as part of the war on Spain.

However, it became clear that it was primarily Cromwell who was holding the army together. Following his death in 1658, the New Model Army lacked a clear leader, and factions began to develop and it was eventually disbanded.

7. Its legacy is still felt today

At the end of the Interregnum, with the return of the monarchy, the New Model Army was disbanded. Some soldiers were sent to support the Portuguese Restoration War as part of Charles II’s alliance with the Duchy of Braganza.

However, the idea of a professional standing army in peacetime proved tempting. Charles II passed various militia acts which prevented local lords summoning militias, and eventually the modern British Army as we know it found its origins in the early 18th century following the Act of Union.

1. Battle of Edgehill: 23 October 1642

This was the first battle of the Civil War: it had become clear the constitutional compromise between Parliamentarians and Royalists simply was not going to work. However, had the Royalists had been a little more disciplined it could have also been the last.

After Charles fled London he made his way north to raise an army. The country quickly began to divide between the conservative north which largely proclaimed for the King and the south which veered towards Parliament.

The two sides met at Edgehill, not far from London. The Parliamentarians were commanded by the Earl of Essex who had been ordered to halt Charles’ march on London. The Royalists on the other hand, were led by Prince Rupert, nephew to the King and veteran of the 30 Years War.

An initial charge by Rupert and his cavalry seemed to turn the battle decisively in Charles’ favour. Much of the Parliamentarian cavalry fled, but instead of returning to the battlefield and securing the victory, Rupert and his horsemen went off in search of the baggage train and plunder. This mistake – not rallying to attack enemy infantry – cropped up time and time again in battles, and continually proved to be a problem in Royalist tactics.

In their absence the remaining Parliamentarian cavalry regiments attacked the Royalists. The two sides fought one another to a standstill and eventually agreed to call it a draw. Charles retreated to Oxford which he set up as a winter base.

2. Battle of Newbury: 20 September 1643

After Edgehill the Royalists began asserting their control, taking much of Yorkshire and winning a string of victories in the West. By now the Earl of Essex was leading the only Parliamentarian army in the field, but he was in trouble.

After marching to relieve a siege at Gloucester he found it difficult to maintain his supply lines. He began making preparations for a retreat back to London. Charles moved to stop him and blocked his path at Newbury.

The first day saw heavy fighting between the two sides with no clear winner. That night, as both sides rested, Charles made the decision to withdraw against the advice of his commanders. The Royalists were low on ammunition and it was becomingly increasingly clear that their soldiers were far from professional.

The next morning Essex, to his surprise and relief, discovered that the Royalists had left the field and his route to London was clear. He arrived back to jubilant crowds. Charles had missed his chance to destroy the Parliamentarians and from then on his cause began to suffer.

Many historians consider this to be one of the most important battles of the Civil War: this was as far as the royalists ever managed to advance, and their loss marked a turning point in their fortunes.

3. Battle of Marston Moor: 2 July 1644

Oliver Cromwell at the battle of Marston Moor by Abraham Cooper (1821). Image credit: Public Domain.

Marston Moor was the largest battle of the Civil War (over 40,000 men were involved) and marked a major turning point. In 1644 York was being besieged by parliamentarian and Scottish troops. Charles ordered Rupert to relieve the siege and he headed North with the full force of his much feared cavalry.

But there was a new opponent on the scene. Oliver Cromwell, an MP, had risen quickly through the ranks and his Ironside cavalrymen were developing a reputation to rival Rupert’s.

Early on it seemed as if the royalists held the upper hand as Rupert’s cavalry charges inflicted heavy losses. However, Cromwell led his cavalry behind royalist lines and attacked from the rear. Although the Royalists put up a brave fight they were unable to defeat the numerically superior force of Scots and Parliamentarians.

The victory handed York and the north to the Parliamentarians. It popped the myth of Rupert’s invincibility and almost destroyed the Royalist army in the north. The Royalists also lost access to ports in the North through which they had been getting aid from Europe.

4. Battle of Naseby: 14 June 1645

After Marston Moor, Cromwell established the New Model Army – a highly disciplined professional fighting force. Commanded by himself and Thomas Fairfax, it began to turn the tide of the war and would prove crucial in achieving a landmark battle at Naseby.

Parliamentarian forces had been besieging the Royalist stronghold of Oxford, but were surprised by Royalists launching an attack on the city of Leicester. Fairfax chased Royalist forces, who eventually decided to turn and fight.

Again an initial charge from Rupert’s cavalry was successful but once again they headed off in search of the Parliamentarian baggage train rather than finishing off the fight. The Parliamentarians were able to regroup and defeat the Royalist infantry. When Rupert returned to the battlefield his cavalry refused to fight: over 5,000 Royalist soldiers were captured, and a further 1,000 killed: it was a disaster for Royalist forces.

The battle was lost and with it the war. This was the beginning of the end for Charles. He had lost his main army and his baggage train was captured in the aftermath of the battle, revealing correspondences showed he had been seeking Catholic help from Ireland and Europe. Support flooded towards Parliament, and Charles lost face amongst many of his supporters.

In April 1646 he fled the besieged Oxford and surrendered to the Scots who then handed him over to Parliament. The first Civil War was ended. Charles would later escape and restart the war, but he was swiftly recaptured and royalist rebellions put down.

I beseech you in the bowels of Christ think it possible you may be mistaken.

So Oliver Cromwell, not quite yet Lord Protector, implored the Scottish Parliament to abandon their shaky alliance with Charles II. He failed to persuade.

The campaign which followed, desultory at the outset, ended with Cromwell’s decisive victory at Dunbar on 3 September 1650.

An English trail of tears

Cromwell at Dunbar by Andrew Carrick Gow, 1886 (Credit: Tate Britain).

Approximately 5,000 men began a forced march from the battlefield of Dunbar to Durham, destined for the Southern ports.

It took them 7 days, without food or medical care and with little water. They were now property; the chattels of a ruthless regime determined to eradicate any possibility of further threat.

Hundreds died or were summarily executed on this English trail of tears. Those who survived long enough to reach Durham found no respite – only disease and despair.

Exhausted, starving and dreadfully weakened, perhaps another 1,700 died there – most probably from fever and dysentery.

For those who survived, hard labour awaited them. They faced forced exile as virtual slaves in a harsh new world across the Atlantic. And what were the prospects for their families left behind to fend for themselves?

Official tally of captives

Accounts suggest the full tally of Scottish prisoners after the battle was in the region of 10,000.

Almost half of these were non-combatants, camp-followers, tradesmen and the like; non-combatants who were released without sanction.

The uniformed captives – around 5,000 (an exact number cannot be given) – were deemed too great a threat and had to be neutralised.

The men of Dunbar embarked on a series of forced stages. The long convoy, easily 5 to 6 miles in length, was initially shepherded the 20 miles (32 km) to Berwick upon Tweed, guarded by a single troop of 25 cavalry/dragoons. Or so the record maintains.

Battle of Dunbar (Credit: Ashmolean Museum).

This assertion could stand a challenge: it seems impossible that a single troop, even mounted could control so large a contingent.

We know most of the captives were quite young – in the 18-25 catchment – with some even younger.  Cromwell saw a commercial opportunity here.

Transportation as an indentured servant had long been a means of capitalising on the American colonies’ need for semi-skilled and skilled labour.

Their initial ordeal ended on 11 September when they were marched over Framwellgate Bridge into Durham and the bare sanctuary of the great Norman cathedral.

They had already spent a night in a church – that of St. Nicholas in Newcastle – where their disordered bellies had resulted in such fouling that the burgesses had been obliged to pay for a major cleaning up operation.

Around 1,700 prisoners died at Durham Cathedral (Credit: Steve F-E-Cameron / CC).

By now many were so weakened that disease spread easily. Of the 3,500 counted through the cathedral’s doors, nearly half died within a short space of time.

Their remains were buried in pits dug on the city’s Palace Green, then open ground as the name would suggest.

Holding such a large number of prisoners would be costly. However, letting them go could prove very dangerous.

Indentured servants

One week after the battle, the Council of State, England’s governing junta, decided to turn the problem over to the powerful Committee of Safety. It informed veteran parliamentarian Sir Arthur Hesilrige, Governor of Newcastle, that he could dispose of as many of the Scots as he deemed fit to the coal mines and other industries.

Armed with that authority Hesilrige consigned 40 men to work as “indentured servants” (effectively forced labour) in the salt works at Shields.

Sir Arthur Hesilrige, 1640 (Credit: National Portrait Gallery).

He then sold another 40 off as general labourers and set up a trade in linen, with 12 of his prisoners becoming weavers.

He may have been making use of existing skills. Dental analysis carried out on one of the recently rediscovered bodies showed damage to the teeth consistent with regularly using them to saw thread ends.

Heselrige was clearly a strong believer in private enterprise and was not above using his position to build up his personal wealth and then flaunting it!

To the New World

Alongside these developments, the Council of State received several applications from entrepreneurs in the American colonies hungry for cheap labour.

On 16 September, negotiations began. The petitioners, John Becx and Joshua Foote, conferred with their partners, the ominously named ‘Undertakers of the Iron Works’. Three days later, Hesilrige was directed to transport 150 prisoners of war to New England.

The brokers insisted they should only receive strong, healthy specimens – the best quality.

Discovery of remains

In November 2013, during construction of a new café for Durham University’s Palace Green Library on the City’s UNESCO World Heritage Site, human remains were uncovered by university archaeologists.

The jumbled skeletons of what would prove to be 28 individuals were subsequently excavated from two burial pits. It was the start of 5 years of meticulous investigation.

A team of experts from Archaeological Services, Durham University – the University’s commercial archaeology consultancy unit – and academics from Durham’s Archaeology and Earth Sciences departments worked together to excavate and analyse the bones.

From the outset, the Durham team acknowledged the possibility that these might be some of the Scots soldiers of 1650.

Dunbar victory medal showing Cromwell’s bust and the Army’s battle cry on the day, “The Lord Of Hosts” (Credit: Public domain).

There has long been folklore about these men and what they did in the Cathedral where they were held.

In May 2018, the 28 men were reburied in Elvet Hill Road Cemetery in Durham, less than a mile from the spot where they were discovered.

There was huge interest in the event, particularly in Scotland where newspapers had covered the Durham discovery in some detail from day one.

Handfuls of Scottish earth were thrown onto the coffins and great care was taken to reflect the traditions of worship of these 17th century Presbyterians.

The service was put together by Durham Cathedral, representatives from the Church of Scotland and the Scottish Episcopal Church.

Metrical Psalms from the 1650 Scottish Psalter and a Bible reading from the 1611 King James Version of the Bible were included in the service – an expression of the wish of all involved to honour the traditions of the dead.

John Sadler is an expert on the history of warfare and a prolific writer on the subject. Rosie Serdiville is a historian who specializes in bringing history alive through drama and education. Their book, Cromwell’s Convicts, is published by Pen & Sword Books.