A History of the British Army, Vol. 1: First Part—to the Close of the Seven Years' WarFortescue, J. W. (John William), Sir
History
A History of the British Army, Vol. 1: First Part—to the Close of the Seven Years' War
Fortescue, J. W. (John William), Sir
Great Britain -- History, Military; Great Britain. Army -- History
Under such conditions it is hardly surprising that the enterprise
was a disastrous failure. A few butts of liquor left by the
Spaniards outside Cadiz sufficed to set the whole force fighting
with its own officers, and after weary weeks at sea, aggravated by
heavy weather and by pestilence, the result of bad stores, Cecil
and the remains of his ten regiments returned home in misery and
shame.[155]
[Sidenote: 1626.]
A similar enterprise under Lord Willoughby in the following
year failed in the same way for precisely the same reasons; but
Buckingham, still unshaken in his confidence, led a third and
a fourth expedition to Rochelle with equal disaster and equal
disgrace. The captains had no more control over their men than over
a herd of deer.[156] At last, at the outset of a fifth expedition,
which promised similar failure, the dagger of Lieutenant Felton, a
melancholy man embittered by deprivation of his pay, put an end to
Buckingham and to all his follies. On the whole he had not treated
the soldiers worse than Elizabeth, but a man of Elizabeth's stamp
was more than could be borne with.
Nevertheless, amid all these failures there were still plenty of
men in England who had the welfare of the military profession at
heart. Foremost among them was the veteran Edward Cecil, now Lord
Wimbledon, who strove hard to do something for the defence of the
principal ports, for the training of the nation at large, and in
particular for the encouragement of cavalry. The mounted service
had become strangely unpopular with the English at this time,
whether because the eternal sieges of the Dutch war afforded it
less opportunity of distinction, or because missile tactics had
lowered it from its former proud station, it is difficult to say.
Certain it is that officers of infantry, and notably Monro, never
lost an opportunity of girding at horsemen as fitted only to run
away, and as preferring to be mounted only that they might run away
the faster. But Cecil, though in this respect unique, was by no
means the only man who made his voice heard. Veteran after veteran
took pen in hand and wrote of the discipline of Maurice of Nassau
and, as time went on, of the system of Gustavus Adolphus; while
on the other hand one ingenious gentleman, still jealous of the
old national weapon, invented what he called a "double-arm," which
combined the pike and the bow, the bow-staff being attached to the
shaft of the pike by a vice which could be traversed on a hinge.
Strange to say this belated weapon was not ill-received in military
circles and found commendation even among Scotsmen.[157] On one
important point, however, there was a general consensus of opinion,
namely that the condition of the English militia was disgraceful,
its system hopelessly inefficient and the corruption of its
administration a scandal. The trained bands were hardly called out
once in five years for exercise; few men knew how even to load
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account