The Life of John Bunyan [6]
clue to the name of
the besieged place, or even to the side on which he was engaged.
The date of the event is left equally vague. The last point
however we are able to determine with something like accuracy.
November, 1644, was the earliest period at which Bunyan could have
entered the army, for it was not till then that he reached the
regulation age of sixteen. Domestic circumstances had then
recently occurred which may have tended to estrange him from his
home, and turn his thoughts to a military life. In the previous
June his mother had died, her death being followed within a month
by that of his sister Margaret. Before another month was out, his
father, as we have already said, had married again, and whether the
new wife had proved the proverbial INJUSTA NOVERCA or not, his home
must have been sufficiently altered by the double, if we may not
say triple, calamity, to account for his leaving the dull monotony
of his native village for the more stirring career of a soldier.
Which of the two causes then distracting the nation claimed his
adherence, Royalist or Parliamentarian, can never be determined.
As Mr. Froude writes, "He does not tell us himself. His friends in
after life did not care to ask him or he to inform them, or else
they thought the matter of too small importance to be worth
mentioning with exactness." The only evidence is internal, and the
deductions from it vary with the estimate of the counter-balancing
probabilities taken by Bunyan's various biographers. Lord
Macaulay, whose conclusion is ably, and, we think, convincingly
supported by Dr. Brown, decides in favour of the side of the
Parliament. Mr. Froude, on the other hand, together with the
painstaking Mr. Offor, holds that "probability is on the side of
his having been with the Royalists." Bedfordshire, however, was
one of the "Associated Counties" from which the Parliamentary army
drew its main strength, and it was shut in by a strong line of
defence from any combination with the Royalist army. In 1643 the
county had received an order requiring it to furnish "able and
armed men" to the garrison at Newport Pagnel, which was then the
base of operations against the King in that part of England. All
probability therefore points to John Bunyan, the lusty young tinker
of Elstow, the leader in all manly sports and adventurous
enterprises among his mates, and probably caring very little on
what side he fought, having been drafted to Newport to serve under
Sir Samuel Luke, of Cople, and other Parliamentary commanders. The
place of the siege he refers to is equally undeterminable. A
tradition current within a few years of Bunyan's death, which Lord
Macaulay rather rashly invests with the certainty of fact, names
Leicester. The only direct evidence for this is the statement of
an anonymous biographer, who professes to have been a personal
friend of Bunyan's, that he was present at the siege of Leicester,
in 1645, as a soldier in the Parliamentary army. This statement,
however, is in direct defiance of Bunyan's own words. For the one
thing certain in the matter is that wherever the siege may have
been, Bunyan was not at it. He tells us plainly that he was "drawn
to go," and that when he was just starting, he gave up his place to
a comrade who went in his room, and was shot through the head.
Bunyan's presence at the siege of Leicester, which has been so
often reported that it has almost been regarded as an historical
truth, must therefore take its place among the baseless creations
of a fertile fancy.
Bunyan's military career, wherever passed and under whatever
standard, was very short. The civil war was drawing near the end
of its first stage when he enlisted. He had only been a soldier a
few months when the battle of Naseby, fatal to the royal cause, was
fought, June 14, 1645. Bristol was surrendered by Prince Rupert,
Sept. 10th. Three days later Montrose
the besieged place, or even to the side on which he was engaged.
The date of the event is left equally vague. The last point
however we are able to determine with something like accuracy.
November, 1644, was the earliest period at which Bunyan could have
entered the army, for it was not till then that he reached the
regulation age of sixteen. Domestic circumstances had then
recently occurred which may have tended to estrange him from his
home, and turn his thoughts to a military life. In the previous
June his mother had died, her death being followed within a month
by that of his sister Margaret. Before another month was out, his
father, as we have already said, had married again, and whether the
new wife had proved the proverbial INJUSTA NOVERCA or not, his home
must have been sufficiently altered by the double, if we may not
say triple, calamity, to account for his leaving the dull monotony
of his native village for the more stirring career of a soldier.
Which of the two causes then distracting the nation claimed his
adherence, Royalist or Parliamentarian, can never be determined.
As Mr. Froude writes, "He does not tell us himself. His friends in
after life did not care to ask him or he to inform them, or else
they thought the matter of too small importance to be worth
mentioning with exactness." The only evidence is internal, and the
deductions from it vary with the estimate of the counter-balancing
probabilities taken by Bunyan's various biographers. Lord
Macaulay, whose conclusion is ably, and, we think, convincingly
supported by Dr. Brown, decides in favour of the side of the
Parliament. Mr. Froude, on the other hand, together with the
painstaking Mr. Offor, holds that "probability is on the side of
his having been with the Royalists." Bedfordshire, however, was
one of the "Associated Counties" from which the Parliamentary army
drew its main strength, and it was shut in by a strong line of
defence from any combination with the Royalist army. In 1643 the
county had received an order requiring it to furnish "able and
armed men" to the garrison at Newport Pagnel, which was then the
base of operations against the King in that part of England. All
probability therefore points to John Bunyan, the lusty young tinker
of Elstow, the leader in all manly sports and adventurous
enterprises among his mates, and probably caring very little on
what side he fought, having been drafted to Newport to serve under
Sir Samuel Luke, of Cople, and other Parliamentary commanders. The
place of the siege he refers to is equally undeterminable. A
tradition current within a few years of Bunyan's death, which Lord
Macaulay rather rashly invests with the certainty of fact, names
Leicester. The only direct evidence for this is the statement of
an anonymous biographer, who professes to have been a personal
friend of Bunyan's, that he was present at the siege of Leicester,
in 1645, as a soldier in the Parliamentary army. This statement,
however, is in direct defiance of Bunyan's own words. For the one
thing certain in the matter is that wherever the siege may have
been, Bunyan was not at it. He tells us plainly that he was "drawn
to go," and that when he was just starting, he gave up his place to
a comrade who went in his room, and was shot through the head.
Bunyan's presence at the siege of Leicester, which has been so
often reported that it has almost been regarded as an historical
truth, must therefore take its place among the baseless creations
of a fertile fancy.
Bunyan's military career, wherever passed and under whatever
standard, was very short. The civil war was drawing near the end
of its first stage when he enlisted. He had only been a soldier a
few months when the battle of Naseby, fatal to the royal cause, was
fought, June 14, 1645. Bristol was surrendered by Prince Rupert,
Sept. 10th. Three days later Montrose