The actual outbreak of hostilities was preceded by minor outbreaks,
which increased the growing antagonism. Ships were lent to France and
used against the Huguenots of Rochelle, and the failure of an attempt
at Cadiz increased the irritation; and when the troops returned from
the Continent, they were not disbanded, as was customary, but billeted
on the population, and martial law was introduced during a time of
peace. Lastly, the efforts of the Star Chamber to raise fresh loans
accorded but little with the English spirit, and the direct tax of
ship-money on inland as well as coastal towns, together with the
attempted arrest of the five members of the House of Commons hostile to
the king’s policy, brought matters to a climax.
Thus the Civil War began, much as in former times, without real
strategy. At first, certainly, there was little or no plan of campaign.
When an army formed, it moved on some point that seemed locally of
value, or to some town or garrison that wanted help. The only broad
principle of a very feeble strategy seems to have been to threaten (or
protect) London, and on the Parliament side to keep free for use the
road from London to the West.
Practically, as in the Wars of the Roses, the political situation
was this. The north part of the Midlands and the west favoured the
Royalists, the east and south the Parliamentarians. But in both cases
there were numerous centres of disaffection in each area, and the
commercial spirit of the great towns and seaports in the south and east
was hostile to the king.
Speaking generally, too, the nobles and gentry favoured the royal
cause, the middle classes that of the Parliament; though of course
there were many exceptions on both sides. The fashionable, worldly, and
gay were with Charles, the serious-minded, austere, and visionary with
the Parliament. But there was more than this: even the “people” found a
recruiting ground, for London trained bands and peaceful traders donned
buff and bandolier to fight in the national cause. As at Barnet, though
now much more so, the commercial class stood side by side with that
which deemed itself, by birth and education, more military.
The gradual introduction of the supply train had introduced the
elements of strategy, though the study was still in its infancy. The
strategical objectives were rather more distinct, but even now there
is little trace of a connected serious strategic plan. The isolated
armies did not yet unite to a definite strategic end; the plan of
campaign was much the same as before, though a little less so. The king
assembled an army at X, the Parliament formed one at Y to beat it. The
main difference is, that in the Wars of the Roses defeat generally
meant dispersion, in this Civil War it meant more or less retreat to
re-form. The art of war was growing up, that was all.
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