bject in its essential aspects, without unnecessary dealing
with minor details.

LORD MACAULAY

In August, 1642, the sword was at length drawn; and soon, in almost
every shire of the kingdom, two hostile factions appeared in arms
against each other. It is not easy to say which of the contending
parties was at first the more formidable. The Houses commanded London
and the counties round London, the fleet, the navigation of the Thames,
and most of the large towns and seaports. They had at their disposal
almost all the military stores of the kingdom, and were able to raise
duties, both on goods imported from foreign countries and on some
important products of domestic industry.

King Charles was ill provided with artillery and ammunition. The taxes
which he laid on the rural districts occupied by his troops produced,
it is probable, a sum far less than that which the Parliament drew from
the city of London alone. He relied, indeed, chiefly, for pecuniary aid
on the munificence of his opulent adherents. Many of these mortgaged
their land, pawned their jewels, and broke up their silver chargers and
christening-bowls in order to assist him. But experience has fully
proved that the voluntary liberality of individuals, even in times of
the greatest excitement, is a poor financial resource when compared with
severe and methodical taxation, which presses on the willing and
unwilling alike.

Charles, however, had one advantage, which, if he had used it well,
would have more than compensated for the want of stores and money, and
which, notwithstanding his mismanagement, gave him, during some months,
a superiority in the war. His troops at first fought much better than
those of the Parliament. Both armies, it is true, were almost entirely
composed of men who had never seen a field of battle. Nevertheless, the
difference was great. The Parliamentary ranks were filled with hirelings
whom want and idleness had induced to enlist. Hampden's regiment was
regarded as one of the best; and even Hampden's regiment was described
by Cromwell as a mere rabble of tapsters and serving-men out of place.

The royal army, on the other hand, consisted in great part of gentlemen,
high-spirited, ardent, accustomed to consider dishonor as more terrible
than death, accustomed to fencing, to the use of fire-arms, to bold
riding, and to manly and perilous sport, which has been well called the
image of war. Such gentlemen, mounted on their favori