• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

9. Charles Carlton, Going to the Wars: The Experience of the English Civil Wars, 1638–1651 (London, 1992), pp. 134, 137–9.

10. Richard Wiseman, Severall Chirurgicall Treatises (London, 1676), pp. 348–9.

11. Oliver Lawson Dick (ed.), Aubrey’s Brief Lives (Harmondsworth, 1972 edn) p. 287. For the stripping of corpses, see Carlton, Going to the Wars, p. 146.

12. Dick, Aubrey’s Brief Lives, pp. 286–7.

13. Carlton, Going to the Wars, pp. 146–7, 227.

14. John Kenyon, The Civil Wars of England (London, 1989 edn), p. 57. Kenyon’s is another political narrative firmly grounded in a knowledge of military affairs.

15. Wanklyn and Jones, Military History, p. 56; Young and Holmes, English Civil War, p. 80.

16. Young and Holmes, English Civil War, p. 79; Carlton, Going to the Wars, p. 50. For Verney’s commitment to the royalist cause see above, p. 226.

17. Wanklyn and Jones suggest that Essex withdrew northwards expecting the King, who had suffered heavy losses of infantry, to retreat towards Wales. They also argue that the suggestion of a rapid advance on London by the royalists was probably not made until four days after the battle, when it had more chance of success, rather than the morning after, as is often maintained. In any case, they suggest, it probably had less hope of success than is often argued: Military History, pp. 56–60. For the likely strategic effect of the taking of London see Woolrych, Britain in Revolution, p. 242.

18. Carlton, Going to the Wars, pp. 230–31; See also Wanklyn, Decisive Battles, chs. 1–2.

19. Gardiner, I, pp. 53–7. For Brentford see The humble petition of the inhabitants of the town of Old Braintford (London, 27 November 1642). According to the Oxford English Dictionary, ‘the word was much used in Germany during the Thirty Years War, in reference to which it was current in England from c. 1630; here word and thing became familiar on the outbreak of the Civil War in 1642, being especially associated with the proceedings of the forces under Prince Rupert’ (accessed online 7 March 2006: http://dictionary.oed.com/). This may be to accept parliamentarian propaganda at face value. The word was also used prior to active hostilities in relation to parliamentarian crowds or mustering soldiers: it was applied retrospectively to the Stour Valley rioters by Bruno Ryves (writing in 1643), but also appears in a document describing the fears of Lady Goring: EL 7795. The document is undated, but clearly comes from mid-August 1642.

20. Young and Holmes, English Civil War, pp. 82–3. Wanklyn and Jones cast doubt on the usual claim that Skippon, a man of military experience, added to the parliamentarian advantage by taking better advantage of the ground: Military History, pp. 60–61.

21. For good examples see A. R. Warmington, Civil War, Interregnum and Restoration in Gloucestershire 1640–1672 (Woodbridge, 1997), pp. 43–50; John T. Evans, Seventeenth-Century Norwich: Politics, Religion and Government, 1620–1690 (Oxford, 1979), pp. 119–28. In Lincolnshire, as in many other counties, a ‘snarling modus vivendi’ had survived up until the eve of Edgehill: Clive Holmes, Seventeenth-Century Lincolnshire (Lincoln, 1980), p. 159. The Staffordshire neutrality pact was agreed after Edgehill, and parties crystallized slowly thereafter: D. H. Pennington and I. A. Roots (eds.), The Committee at Stafford, 1643–1645: The Order Book of the Staffordshire County Committee, Collections for a History of Staffordshire, 4th ser., 1 (Manchester, 1957), pp. xx-xxi.

22. Gardiner, I, pp. 13–14; David L. Smith, Constitutional Royalism and the Search for Settlement, c. 1640–1649 (Cambridge, 1994), pp. 109–10.

23. Gardiner, I, pp. 15–18.

24. Smith, Constitutional Royalism, pp. 110–11. For a general account of royalist politics see Richard Cust, Charles I: A Political Life (Harlow, 2005), ch. 6. Ronald Hutton’s brief account has been very influential: ‘The Structure of the Royalist Party, 1642–1646’, HJ, 24 (1981), 553–69. For some revision see James Daly, ‘The Implications of Royalist