CHAPTER I. COMPOSITION OF THE NEW MODEL, AND VIEW OF THE WORK LYING BEFORE IT-FIRST ACTIONS OF THE NEW MODEL-CROMWELL RETAINED IN COMMAND: BATTLE OF NASEBY: OTHER SUCCESSES OF THE NEW MODEL-POOR PERFORMANCE OF THE SCOTTISH AUXILIARY ARMY-EPISODE OF MONTROSE IN SCOTLAND-FAGEND OF THE WAR IN ENGLAND, AND FLIGHT OF THE KING TO THE SCOTS-FALLEN AND RISEN STARS. By the Ordinance for New-Modelling the Parliamentarian Army, passed February 15, 1644-5, and by the Self-Denying Ordinance, which followed April 3, 1645, excluding all members of either House from commands in the New Army, the prospects of the war had been completely altered. From these dates people everywhere were talking of the New Model, and what it was likely to accomplish, the only difference being that the bulk of the Parliamentarians expected great things from it, while the Royalists, and perhaps also those of the Parliamentarians who resented the removal of Essex from the chief command, and their own removal from commands under him, regarded the whole experiment rather sneeringly, and ridiculed it as the New Noddle. Which of these sets of prophets were in the right will appear presently; meanwhile it is desirable that we should know as exactly as possible what the New Model or New Noddle really was. COMPOSITION OF THE NEW MODEL, AND VIEW OF THE WORK LYING BEFORE IT. The following is an account of the organization of the New Model, with a list of its chief Officers when it was first organized : TOTAL ARMY ESTIMATED AT 22,000. Commander-in-Chief: SIR THOMAS FAIRFAX (ætat. 33). Second-in-Command (for the present): PHILIP SKIPPON, with the rank of Serjeant-Major-General. Chief of Ordnance: THOMAS HAMMOND. He was a brother of the Royalist Scout-Master-General: LEONARD WATSON, "originally a goldsmith in Lincoln." I. FOOT 14,400. These consisted of twelve Regiments, each of 1,200 men, and each divided into ten Companies. The officers of the Regiments, respectively, were as follows: 1. (The Commander-in-Chief's Regiment) :-Colonel SIR THOMAS FAIRFAX ; Lieutenant-Colonel JACKSON; Major COOKE; and seven Captains. 2. (The Serjeant-Major-General's Regiment):-Colonel PHILIP SKIPPON; Lieutenant-Colonel FRANCIS; Major ASHFIELD; and seven Captains. 3. Colonel HOLBORN; Lieutenant-Colonel COTTESWORTH; Major SMITH; and seven Captains. 4. Colonel CRAWFORD or CRAYFORD, succeeded soon by young Colonel' ROBERT HAMMOND (ætat. 24), a nephew of the chief of the Ordnance and of the Royalist Dr. Henry Hammond; Lieutenant-Colonel ISAAC EWER (reported to have been " serving man"); Major SAUNDERS; and seven Captains. 5. Colonel BARCLAY; Lieutenant-Colonel EWINS (INNES?); Major CowELL; and seven Captains. 6. Colonel EDWARD MONTAGUE (ætat. only 20: he was cousin of the Earl of Manchester, being son of the Earl's brother, Sir Sidney Montague, who had been M.P. for Hunts, but was now dead); Lieutenant-Colonel ELLIS GRIMES; Major KELSEY; and seven Captains. 7. Colonel ALDRIDGE; Lieutenant-Colonel WALTER LLOYD (who succeeded to the Colonelcy); Major READ; and seven Captains. 8. Colonel JOHN PICKERING (of the family of the Pickerings, of Tichmarsh, Northamptonshire, "a little man," quite young, and cousin of the boy who was to be known as the poet Dryden); Lieutenant-Colonel JOHN HEWSON (originally a shoemaker in Westminster, but who had risen from the ranks by his valour); Major JUBBS; and seven Captains, one of whom was a Captain AXTELL. 9. Colonel FORTESCUE; Lieutenant-Colonel BULSTRODE; Major RICHBELL; and seven Captains. 10. Colonel RICHARD INGOLDSBY (etat. 23: his father was Sir Richard Ingoldsby of Lenthenborough, and his mother was a cousin of Cromwell's); LieutenantColonel FARRINGTON; Major PHILIP CROMWELL (a cousin of Cromwell's: second son of his uncle Sir Philip Cromwell); and seven Captains. 11. (Artillery) Colonel THOMAS RAINSBOROUGH (once "a skipper of Lynn," who had seen service at sea); Lieutenant-Colonel OWEN; Major Dove; and seven Captains. 12. (Artillery) Colonel RALPH WELDEN, a veteran; whose under-officers I have not ascertained, save that one of them seems to have been ROBERT LILBURNE (brother of John Lilburne), who in time succeeded to the Colonelcy. II. HORSE AND DRAGOONS = 7,600. The Horse (6,600) consisted of eleven Regiments, each of 600, divided into six troops; the Dragoons consisted of one Regiment (1,000), in ten troops of 100 each. They were officered thus:1. (The Commander-in-Chief's Regiment):-Colonel SIR THOMAS FAIRFAX Major JOHN DESBOROUGH (a brother-in-law of Oliver Cromwell's: married to his younger sister, Jane Cromwell); and four Captains, one of them a Captain BERRY. 2. Colonel MIDDLETON; Major RICHARD NORTON; and four Captains. 3. Colonel THOMAS SHEFFIELD (a younger son of the aged Earl of Mulgrave, and uncle of Sir Thomas Fairfax); Major SHEFFIELD (the Colonel's son or brother?); and four Captains. 4. Colonel CHARLES FLEETWOOD (a young man of a good Buckinghamshire family, and well known to Milton from his childhood, as Milton himself tells us: he had served first as a private trooper in the Earl fo Essex's guards, and had rapidly distinguished himself); Major THOMAS HARRISON (formerly an attorney's clerk in London); and four Captains. 5. Colonel EDWARD ROSSITER; Major TWISTLETON; and four Captains. 6. Colonel VERMUYDEN (a Dutchman, who resigned after a month or two of good service, and returned to Holland, where his father, Sir Cornelius Vermuyden, was engaged in engineering works); Major HUNTINGDON (who succeeded Vermuyden in the Colonelcy); and four Captains. 7. Colonel ALGERNON SIDNEY (famous long afterwards for his death: now atat. 23: third son of the Earl of Leicester: had served as a Captain in Manchester's army-he and his eldest brother, Philip, Lord Lisle, being more actively Parliamentarian than their father); Major ALFORD; and four Captains. 8. Colonel SIR ROBERT PYE, junior (son of the Sir Robert Pye who had been M.P. for Woodstock, as colleague with Speaker Lenthall, since the beginning of the Long Parliament, and was now a conspicuous man in the House); Major MATTHEW TOMLINSON (said to have been "a gentleman-usher to a lady"); and three Captains, one of whom was HENRY IRETON (a B.A. of Oxford, and barrister of the Middle Temple, atat. 35, who had taken to soldiering: described as of "a melancholic, reserved, dark nature," and great ability). 9. Colonel EDWARD WHALLEY (rumoured by the Royalists to have been "a woollen-draper or petty merchant in London," who had got into debt and migrated to Scotland for a time; but certainly of a Nottinghamshire family of mark, and certainly a cousin of Cromwell's; recently also known for excellent service under Cromwell as Major in Cromwell's own regiment); Major BETHELL; and four Captains. 10. Colonel RICHARD GRAVES; Major ADRIAN SCROOP; and four Captains. 11. Colonel Sir MICHAEL LIVESEY, Bart., of Co. Kent; Major SEDASCUE; and four Captains. Regiment of Dragoons: Colonel JOHN OKEY (originally, it is said, a "drayman," thenstoker in a brewhouse at Islington," and next a "most poor chandler in Thames Street;" said also to have been "of more bulk than brains;" but certainly of late an invincible dragoon-officer); Major WILLIAMS or GWILLIAMS; and eight Captains. N. B. Some of the above-mentioned officers (such as Colonels Middleton, Livesey, Holborn, and Barclay) do not seem to have taken the places assigned them in the New Model. Others therefore had to be brought in by Fairfax almost at once. Among these were:-1. As Colonels of Horse: Colonel BUTLER; the Hon. JOHN FIENNES (third son of Viscount Saye and Sele); CHARLES RICH (he had been nominated in the Commons for a Colonelcy Feb. 28 and March 1, 1644-5, and rejected both times; but must have been appointed soon afterwards). 2. As Colonels of Foot: EDWARD HARLEY (whose Lieutenant-Colonel was THOMAS PRIDE, a foundling who had been a drayman); JOHN LAMBERT (who had been a Colonel under Fairfax in the North); SIR HARDRESS WALLER (ætat. 41, cousin of Sir William Waller).1 1 In the Lords Journals, date March 18, 1644-5, there is a list of the intended officers of the New Model as then agreed to, after a month or two of, choosing, between the Lords and the Commons. This has been my chief authority; but it has been aided and checked by the Anglia Rediviva of the New Model chaplain Sprigge (pp. 8-10 et seq. of Oxford Edition of 1854) and by Rushworth (VI. 13-17 et seq.). Mr. Clements Markham's account of the New Model Army in his life of Fairfax (pp. 188-202) has likewise been of use, though it does not profess to be more than general, nor to be calculated for the very commencement of the New Model. Some particulars of information respecting persons I have taken from Mr, Markh; others I have had Such was the famous New Model.' Where was it first to be employed? This was an anxious question; and, to understand it, we must have the map of England before us as it appeared to the Parliamentarians in the early months of 1645. England then, in the eyes of the Parliamentarians, consisted of four regions, as follows:-(I.) The Pre-eminent and assured Parliamentarian Region. This included London and Middlesex, with the Eastern and South-Eastern counties at their back, or immediately flanking them north and southviz. Herts, Essex, Cambridge, Bedford, Northamptonshire. Hunts, Suffolk, Norfolk, and almost all Lincoln, together with Kent, Surrey, and Sussex. All this sweep of country was now thoroughly in the possession of the Parliament, and constituted the region whence it drew its main strength. The services of the New Model were not required in it; for it was the main feeder and support of the New Model. (II.) The Northern Counties. Here, beyond the Humber and Mersey, or perhaps even beyond the Trent, the cause of Parliament was also in the ascendant. Since Marston Moor Royalism lingered here only in a few towns and garrisons. to gather miscellaneously from the Parliamentary Journals, Wood, Carlyle's Cromwell, Walker's Hist. of Independency, Reprint of The Mystery of the Good Old Cause (a satirical tract of 1660) at end of Vol. III. of Parl. Hist., &c. I have had to rectify the spellings of some of the names in the original Lords Journals list, and to find out the Christian names where possible. It is not always so easy as one might suppose to ascertain the Christian name of a man who may have been of considerable note in his day and have left his mark. 1 In the New Model the reader ought to note three things: (1) The comparative youth of the officers. There were veterans; but the Commander-inchief was but thirty-three years of age, and most of the Colonels were still younger. (2) The blending of different ranks of society in the body of the officers. The majority were decidedly from the ranks of the aristocracy and gentry-peers' younger sons, knights, sons of knights and country-gentlemen, &c.; but in men like Skippon, Colonel Okey, Colonel Rainsborough, Lieutenant-Colonel Ewer, LieutenantColonel Hewson, Lieutenant-Colonel Pride, Major Harrison, and Major Tomlinson, there was a conspicuous sprinkling of stout representatives of a lower and more popular stratum. The Royalists, and even the Presbyterians, fastened on this fact and exaggerated it. All the army, from the general to the meanest sentinel, could not muster £1,000 a year in lands among them so it was laxly said. (3) Another fact, of which the Presbyterians and the Royalists, and other anti Cromwellians, afterwards made the most, was the unusual number of relatives of Cromwell that there were among the officers. To those who regarded the whole invention and organization of the New Model as a deep design of Cromwell's craft, with Fairfax as his temporary tool, this fact was blackly significant. But, apart altogether from that theory, the fact is important, and ought to be borne in mind. There was not only much of the Cromwell spirit in the New Model from the first, but a large leaven of the Cromwell kin. In Cumberland, Carlisle still held out for the King, and the siege of this city, together with the preservation of the North generally, was the work now specially expected from the Scottish auxiliary army. In Yorkshire, the castles of Skipton, Pontefract, Scarborough, Sandal, and Bolton, and, in Lancashire, Latham House and Greenhaugh Castle, kept up the King's flag, but were surrounded by local Parliamentary besiegers. On the whole there was no reason for anxiety now about the North within itself; and the hope was that the Scottish Army and other stray forces in those parts might be able soon to move southwards and co-operate with the New Model. (III.) The South-West and Mid-Southern Counties. Here the King was vastly in the ascendant. Cornwall was absolutely his; Devon was wholly his, with the exception of the port of Plymouth, still held for the Parliament, but besieged by the King's forces; Somerset was wholly his, save that Taunton was holding out for Parliament in great distress; all Wilts was his, except Malmesbury Castle; in Dorset he was nearly master, though the three port-towns of Poole, Lyme, and Weymouth (Melcombe) had Parliamentary garrisons; and even in Hants, where the Parliament divided the power with him more equally, he held the two strong places of Winchester and Basing. The King's field-forces in all this southwestern and southern region were extremely numerous, apart from the garrisons, and were commanded by Lords Goring and Hopton, Sir Richard Greenville, Major-General Sir John Digby, and others. With them was the Prince of Wales, now fifteen years of age. He had been recently sent from Oxford into those parts, with a view both to his own safety and to the effects of his influence. (IV.) The English Midlands, backed by Wales. Here also the King was firmly established. Here it was that, with the Princes Rupert and Maurice as his chiefs in command, he directly faced the massed Parliamentarianism of London and the Eastern Counties. In Bucks and Berks, indeed, his forces and those of the Parliament overlapped each other. Aylesbury, the chief town in Bucks, was the Parliament's, while Boarstall House, ten or twelve miles east from it, was the King's; and, similarly, the east of Berks, |