Thus in Scotland, as in Ireland, the stern discipline of Cromwell’s
army, though the religious feeling was in this case more or less
common to both, prevailed when the time came. Notwithstanding the
theoretical, and to a certain extent practical, sympathy which linked
the two nations of Great Britain together, all the wild and undoubted
bravery of the Northern Celt availed the royal cause at the end as
little as, or even less than, that of his more emotional brother across
the channel of St. George. But it must be remembered that the racial
antipathy between the two great branches of the inhabitants of Britain
had never been so accentuated, certainly not for half a century, as
that which existed then, and long after, between the Irish and the
British.
What is clear in this last campaign is, that Cromwell had little in
common with those who governed the sister kingdom. “You ken very well,”
said the Lord Chancellor of Scotland in 1645, “that Lieutenant-General
Cromwell is no friend of ours.” He knew this, and his personal and
possibly religious antipathies were therefore in no wise lessened.
But with the general and steady improvement in the systematic conduct
of war that is increasingly apparent as time went on, there is evidence
of an attempt at organising a system of supply; an attempt that, though
in a very sketchy and elementary way, foreshadows the higher strategy
that is more and more noticeable as the eighteenth century grew from
youth to old age.
There is no doubt that in many of the battles the baggage trains were
more considerable than heretofore, and formed an important element
in the operations of the campaign. Instances of their presence, in
sufficient strength to be mentioned in the contemporary accounts, are
shown both in the first battle of Newbury, where they were collected
at Hampstead Park; as also at Naseby, where, far in rear of Mill Hill,
Rupert attacked Fairfax’s baggage train and its guard. Essex, in
his march to Newbury in 1643, complains of the want of food and the
difficulty in foraging, owing to the small amount of supplies they
could carry; and in passing through Aldbourne two ammunition waggons
broke down, and were consequently blown up. Doubtless they were even
then only improvised from private sources, and only the ordinary
vehicles used in the districts where war was being carried on were
employed. Even then, be it remembered, roads were still few and bad,
though probably more numerous and somewhat better than when Barnet was
fought. But firearms and what not had increased the importance of not
being dependent for supplies on what could be locally collected in
towns and villages, or what the soldier could himself carry; and thus
with the need for their replenishment at recognised _bases_, and their
protection before, during, and after a battle, began the true strategy
of modern war. Supply trains, _organised_ supply trains, alone render
an army really mobile and capable of carrying out a connected serious
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