Nor was it with insubordination alone that Rupert had to deal. Wrote
Louis Dyves: "Our men are in extreme necessity, many of them having
neither clothes to cover their nakedness, nor boots to put on their
feet, and not money enough amongst them to pay for the shoeing of their
horses."[40] And declared Sir Ralph Hopton: "It is inconceivable what
these fellows are always doing with their arms; they appear to be
expended as fast as their ammunition."[41] Another officer required
supplies of biscuits: "For your Highness knows what want of victuals is
among {70} common men."[42] A fourth desired a change of quarters,
"because the country, hereabouts, is so heavily charged with
contributions, as our allowance falls short."[43] A fifth modestly
requested, "to be put into the power of a thousand horse, or foot, and
then I doubt not, by God's assistance, to give a sufficient account of
what is committed to my charge."[44] Every one of them lacked arms and
ammunition, and all their wants were poured out to the luckless young
Prince, who was expected to attend to every detail, and whose own
supplies were wretchedly insufficient.
Added to all this, there were private quarrels to be appeased. Wyndham
declined to serve under Hopton, who had "disobliged" him.[45] Vavasour
complained of "very high language" used towards him by Sir Robert
Byron. At Lichfield disputes between the factions of Lord Loughborough
and Sir William Bagot raged violently. "In all places where I come,
it's my misfortune to meet with extreme trouble," lamented the brave
old Jacob Astley, to whose lot the pacifying of this quarrel fell; "I
have met, in this place with exceeding great trouble, the commanders
and soldiers in the close at Lichfield, having shut out my Lord
Loughborough."[46] And not even the efforts of old Astley could bring
about a peace between the contending officers; "our minds being both
too high to acknowledge a superiority,"[47] confessed Loughborough
candidly. But even more serious than such quarrels as these were the
court factions which divided the Royalist army against itself. From
the very beginning, the attempts of the King's Council to regulate
military affairs were bitterly resented by the soldiery. Courtier
detested soldier, and soldier despised courtier! Nor were the military
and civil factions {71} the only ones existent; there was party within
party, intrigue within intrigue. Wrote the shrewd Arthur Trevor, in
1643: "The contrariety of opinions and ways are equally distant with
those of the elements, and as destructive, if there were not a special
providence that keeps men in one mind against a third party, though
they agree in no one thing among themselves."[48] Equally opposed to
the military party of Rupert, and to the constitutionalists led by Hyde
and Falkland, were the followings of the Queen and of Lord Digby.
Bitter, private jealousies completed the confusion, and the vacillation
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account