the cannibal cavalier: sir thomas lunsford and the fashioning of the royalist archetype PDF
Preview the cannibal cavalier: sir thomas lunsford and the fashioning of the royalist archetype
TheHistoricalJournal,pageof ©CambridgeUniversityPress doi:./SX 1 2 THE CANNIBAL CAVALIER: SIR THOMAS 3 LUNSFORD AND THE FASHIONING OF 4 5 THE ROYALIST ARCHETYPE* 6 7 MARK STOYLE 8 University of Southampton 9 10 11 ABSTRACT. Thisarticlere-examinesthecareerofSirThomasLunsford,oneofthemostnotorious 12 royalistofficersoftheEnglishCivilWar.Drawingonawiderangeofcontemporarysources,itnot 13 only casts new light on the pre-war activities of Lunsford himself but also explores the ways in 14 which his blood-thirsty reputation was exploited by parliamentarian polemicists on the eve of the 15 conflict.Thearticlearguesthat,followingthedeathoftheproto-royalistplaywrightandplotterSir John Suckling in , Lunsford inherited Suckling’s mantle as the archetypal ‘cavalier’, and 16 thatitwasinassociationwithSirThomas’sname,ratherthanSirJohn’s,thatthehostilecaricature 17 of the royalist gentleman-at-arms was first introduced to the English population as a whole. The 18 article concludes by exploring the persistent rumours of cannibalism which have swirled around 19 Lunsford’s name for the past years–and by demonstrating that, while the claim that Sir 20 Thomaspossessedatasteforhumanfleshmaywellhaveoriginatedintheparliamentariancamp, 21 itwas,rathersurprisingly,royalistwriterswhosubsequentlydidmosttokeephisanthropophagical 22 reputationalive. 23 24 25 26 27 ‘Cavaliersandroundheads’:thepopularparty-labelswhichwereappliedtothe 28 supporters of Charles I and parliament during the Great Civil War of – 29 have continued to haunt the English historical imagination ever since. It 30 seems fair to suggest that–of the two stereotypical figures which those nick- 31 names instantly summon up in the mind’s eye–that of the cavalier is, by 32 some way, the most vivid and powerful. Over the past years, the figure of 33 the cavalier has proved a rich source of inspiration for creative souls of all 34 35 36 HistoryDepartment,TheUniversity,Southampton,SO[email protected] 37 * This article is a revised version of my inaugural lecture, which was delivered at the 38 UniversityofSouthamptonin.Iamgratefultoeveryonewhoattendedonthatoccasion 39 andwhospoketomeaboutthecavalierarchetypeafterwards,mostofalltoJohnWalter.Iam indebtedtotheeditoroftheHistoricalJournalandtothetwoanonymousreadersfortheircom- 40 mentsonanearlierdraftofthisarticle–andtoGeorgeBernard,whoalsoreadthetext.Finally, 41 IwouldliketothankalloftheformerstudentswhohavediscussedSirThomasLunsfordwith 42 meovertheyears,especiallyChrisLawrence,HenryGill,andStephKirkham. MARK STOYLE sorts, including dramatists, novelists, journalists, painters, and poets. As a 43 result, that figure enjoys remarkable brand-recognition, brand-recognition 44 which both popular and academic historians of the Civil War have simultan- 45 eouslycapitalizeduponandhelpedtoreinforce:byinsinuatingtheword‘cava- 46 lier(s)’ into the titles of their books, for example, by choosing Victorian 47 paintings of imagined cavaliers to adorn their dust-jackets, and by employing 48 the term ‘cavalier’ as a synonym for ‘royalist’ in their texts. Yet despite–or 49 even, perhaps, because of–the word’s continued ubiquity, the origins of this 50 most familiar of English historical soubriquets remain surprisingly obscure. 51 In recent years, the work of Alexandra Walsham, Ethan Shagan, Phil 52 Withington, and others has taught us to pay far more careful attention to the 53 precise meanings with which specific words were freighted during the early 54 modernperiod–and to how those meanings could sometimes alter over time 55 as familiar terms became, in Withington’s words, ‘politicised, appropriated 56 and popularised in new and unexpected ways’. The party label ‘cavalier’–a 57 label which, as Blair Worden has well observed, was a product of that pre-war 58 processofideologicalmobilizationbywhich‘theopposingsideslearnedtocari- 59 cature one another’–is clearly worthy of consideration through a similarly 60 close-up lens. For while there are scores of more or less detailed definitions 61 of what the partisan term ‘cavalier’ was held to denote after , there are far fewer discussions of precisely when that term first appeared on the public 62 stage–and of how the anonymous individuals who coined it had thereby 63 64 65 See, for example, A. Benn, The rover, or the banish’t cavaliers (London, ); W. Scott, Woodstock, or the cavalier ( vols., Edinburgh, ); E. Warburton, ed., Memoirs of Prince 66 Rupert and the cavaliers ( vols., London, ); W.S. Burton, ‘The wounded cavalier’ 67 (paintedin,exhibitedin);andR.Browning,Cavaliertunes:thelostleaderandother 68 poems(Boston,MA,). Forcavalierbook-titles,see,forexample,M.Bence-Jones,Thecavaliers(London,); 69 andC.Spencer,PrinceRupert:thelastcavalier(London,).Forbook-coversfeaturingpaint- 70 ingsofimaginedcavaliersbyCharlesLandseer,andJohnPettierespectively,seeP.Tennant, 71 Edgehill and beyond: the people’s war in the South Midlands, – (Stroud, ); and 72 M.Bennett,TheCivilWarsinBritainandIreland,–(Oxford,).Fortheuseof ‘cavalier’ as a synonym for ‘royalist’ by modern academic historians, see, for example, 73 D. Underdown, Revel, riot and rebellion: popular politics and culture in England, – 74 (Oxford,),p.. 75 See A. Walsham, Charitable hatred: tolerance and intolerance in England, – (Manchester,);E.H.Shagan,Theruleofmoderation:violence,religionandthepoliticsofre- 76 straint in early modern England (Cambridge, ); and P. Withington, ‘The semantics of 77 “peace”inearlymodernEngland’,TransactionsoftheRoyalHistoricalSociety(TRHS),thser., 78 (),pp.–,atp.. B.Worden,Roundheadreputations:theEnglishCivilWarsandthepassionsofposterity(London, 79 ),p..Fortheconceptofrivalideological‘mobilizations’duringthemonthsbeforethe 80 conflictbegan,seeM.J.Braddick,‘PrayerbookandProtestation:anti-popery,anti-puritanism 81 andtheoutbreakoftheEnglishCivilWar’,inC.W.A.PriorandG.Burgess,eds.,England’swars of religion revisited (Aldershot, ), pp. –, passim, especially pp. –; and idem, 82 ‘History,liberty,reformationandthecause:parliamentarianmilitaryandideologicalescalation 83 in’,inM.J.BraddickandD.L.Smith,eds.,TheexperienceofrevolutioninStuartBritainand 84 Ireland(Cambridge,),pp.–,especiallyp.. THE CANNIBAL CAVALIER succeeded in fashioning an overarching royalist stereotype even before the 85 conflict had begun. The best work on this neglected subject has been 86 carried out by the literary scholars T.N. Corns, Timothy Raylor, and Robert 87 Wilcher,allofwhomhavearguedthatthehostilecaricatureofthecavalierini- 88 tiallybegantocoalescearoundthepersonofthepre-warpoetanddramatistSir 89 JohnSuckling.Thepresentarticlesuggeststhat,whilethisthesisisundoubtedly 90 correct,ittellsonlypartofthestory,andthatthesecondkeyfigureintheproto- 91 parliamentarian invention of the cavalier was the Sussex gentleman Colonel 92 ThomasLunsford. 93 Thearticleisdividedintosixparts.Thefirstconsiderswhatprevioushistor- 94 ians have had to say about Lunsford. The second reviews the events of 95 Lunsford’s turbulent youth, and his service as a regimental commander in 96 the army which Charles I sent to fight the Scots in . The third part 97 showshow,followingCharles’shumiliatingdefeatandtheconsequentcollapse 98 oftheroyalregime,LunsfordreturnedtoLondon,wherethekeyingredientsof 99 whatwouldlaterbecometheroyalistarchetypewerealreadybeginningtoform. 100 ThefourthpartshowshowLunsfordsuddenlyshottonationalprominencein 101 ,whenhewasappointedaslieutenantoftheTowerbyCharles,andhowhe 102 was then subjected to a campaign of vilification by the king’s critics in parlia- 103 ment, as they sought to discredit the new lieutenant and, through him, his royal master. Here, it will be argued that, with Suckling now dead, 104 Lunsford–whowaspresentedinthemostluridlightintheproto-parliamentar- 105 ianpamphletswhichwerethenbeginningtoproliferateinthecapital–effect- 106 ively inherited Sir John’s mantle. As a result, he became the first notorious 107 ‘cavalier’, and, in the process, played a significant, if wholly involuntary, role 108 in the fashioning of that hostile caricature of the royalist gentleman-at-arms 109 110 Foradetaileddiscussionofsomeofthewaysinwhichtheword‘cavalier’wasusedduring 111 the Civil War itself, see I. Roy, ‘Royalist reputations: the cavalier ideal and the reality’, in 112 J. McElligott and D.L. Smith, eds., Royalists and royalism during the English Civil Wars 113 (Cambridge,),pp.–. 114 See T.N. Corns, J.A. Downie, and W.A. Speck, ‘Archetypal mystification: polemic and realityinEnglishpoliticalliterature’,EighteenthCenturyLife,(),pp.–,atp.;T.N. 115 Corns, ed., The Cambridge companion to English poetry: Donne to Marvell (; Cambridge, 116 edn), pp. –; T. Raylor, Cavaliers, clubs and literary culture: Sir John Mennes, James 117 SmithandtheOrderoftheFancy(Newark,DE,),p.;andR.Wilcher,Thediscontentedcava- lier:theworkofSirJohnSucklinginitssocial,religious,politicalandliterarycontexts(Newark,DE, 118 ),pp.–. 119 ForpreviousaccountsofLunsford,seeG.Steinman-Steinman’spioneering‘MemoirofSir 120 ThomasLunsford,baronet’(parts–),Gentleman’sMagazine(GM)(Apr.),pp.–; GM(June),pp.–;GM(July),pp.–;GM(Aug.),pp.–;W.H. 121 Blaauw, ‘Passages of the Civil War in Sussex from to ’, Sussex Archaeological 122 Collections (SAS), (), pp. –; ‘W.A.S.’, ‘Lunsford, Sir Thomas, ?–?’, in 123 S.Lee,ed.,Dictionaryofnationalbiography(London,),pp.–;C.Thomas-Stanford, Sussex in the Great Civil War and Interregnum, – (London, ), pp. –; P.R. 124 Newman,RoyalistofficersinEnglandandWales,–:abiographicaldictionary(London, 125 ),p.;andB.Morgan,‘Lunsford,SirThomas,b.circa,d.inorbefore’,in 126 Oxforddictionaryofnationalbiography(ODNB)(Oxford,),pp.–. MARK STOYLE whichwouldshortlygoontoestablishitselfasoneofthemostenduringparty 127 stereotypesinEnglishhistory.HavingdemonstratedhowLunsfordwaspressed 128 intoserviceasaproto-royalistbugbearduring–,thearticlethengoeson 129 explore how his fearsome reputation continued to be elaborated upon as 130 England fell into civil war during –. Finally, it investigates the tangled 131 origins of the most famous of all the contemporary rumours that circulated 132 about Lunsford: the rumour that he possessed a penchant for eating human 133 flesh. 134 135 I 136 137 ‘A debauched ruffian’, a ‘bold and violent swaggerer’, and ‘ablustering rake- 138 hell’: these are the epithets which were chosen by S.R. Gardiner, C.V. 139 Wedgwood, and J.P. Kenyon respectively to describe Sir Thomas Lunsford. 140 Norshoulditbethoughtthatthesewriterswereinanywayatypicalintheirat- 141 titudetowards Lunsford,for–althoughhewasoneoftheminor celebrities of theCivilWar,andmakesatleastafleetingappearanceinmostgeneralhistories 142 ofthe conflict–fewhistorians havefound anythingverycomplimentary tosay 143 abouthim.Onthecontrary,Lunsfordhasbeenalmostuniversallycondemned 144 by scholars, who have variously characterized him as ‘brutal’; ‘notorious’; 145 ‘unscrupulous’; ‘thuggish’; and straightforwardly ‘murderous’. The 146 present article does not seek to turn this hostile view of Lunsford on its head; 147 tosuggest,withPeterNewman–oneofSirThomas’sfewscholarlydefenders– 148 that he was the blameless victim of ‘innuendo and hearsay’. Rather, what it 149 setsouttodoistoprovideaslightlymorenuancedviewofLunsfordthanthe 150 onewhichappearsinthestandard histories–aviewwhichoccasionallycomes 151 perilously close to being a simple restatement of what was said about Sir 152 Thomas by his enemies at the time. That this should be so, of course, 153 reflectstheabidingpowerofthenegativeimageofhimwhichwasconstructed 154 155 156 Forapreviousone-linesuggestionthattheimageofthecavaliermighthavebeenpartly 157 modelledonLunsford,seeD.Hirst,Englandinconflict,–:kingdom,community,com- 158 monwealth(London,),p.,and,forarecentdescriptionofLunsfordas‘anarchetypal 159 cavalier’,seeD.Cressy,Englandonedge:crisisandrevolution,–(Oxford,),p.. S.R.Gardiner,HistoryofEnglandfromtheaccessionofJamesItotheoutbreakoftheCivilWar( 160 vols.,London,),x,p.;C.V.Wedgwood,Theking’swar,–(;London, 161 edn),p.;andJ.P.Kenyon,TheCivilWarsofEngland(London,),p.. 162 A.Woolrych,Britaininrevolution,–(Oxford,),p.. A.Hughes,ThecausesoftheEnglishCivilWar(London,),p.. 163 R.Cust,CharlesI:apoliticallife(Harlow,),p.. 164 J.Miller,TheEnglishCivilWars:roundheads,cavaliersandtheexecutionoftheking(London, 165 ),p.. N.Carlin,ThecausesoftheEnglishCivilWar(Oxford,),p.. 166 SeeP.R.Newman,Theoldservice:royalistregimentalcolonelsandtheCivilWar,– 167 (Manchester,),pp.,–,(quotationatp.). 168 AsNewmanrightlyobserves,seeOldservice,p.. THE CANNIBAL CAVALIER duringthes:asubjectwhichwewillreturntolater.Butfirstwemustcon- 169 siderthemanbehindthemyth. 170 171 172 II 173 ThomasLunsford,theeldestsonofThomasLunsfordofEastHoathlyinSussex 174 andhiswife,Katherine,wasprobablybornatBearsteadinKentin.The 175 Lunsfordswereanancientgentryfamily,whocouldtracetheirrootsinSussex 176 backtothetimeoftheConquest,butbythetimethatCharlesIaccededtothe 177 thronetheirfinancialpositionwasdeteriorating–and,tomakemattersworse, 178 they had fallen out with a wealthy neighbour, Sir Thomas Pelham. Thomas 179 Lunsford grew up to be a strapping young fellow–according to a later writer, 180 indeed, he was one of ‘the biggest men…you could likely see’–and several 181 pieces of evidence suggest that he soon developed a propensity for brawling 182 and violence. By the early s, Thomas had become an active participant 183 in his family’s continuing feud with Pelham. The latter subsequently com- plained that Thomas had not only poached deer from his park, but that he 184 had violently assaulted his park-keepers and had publicly declared that ‘he 185 cared not a fart’ for Pelham himself. In , Lunsford, infuriated by the 186 legal proceedings which Pelham had initiated against him, determined to 187 exact a wild revenge. It was subsequently claimed that Thomas lay in wait for 188 Pelham one Sunday as he was leaving church and fired two or three shots 189 into his coach as it passed by. This could clearly have been construed as an 190 act of attempted murder–as, indeed, it probably was–and, soon afterwards, 191 Lunsford was committed to prison in London by order of the privy council, 192 193 194 Lunsford is usually said to have been born in ‘circa ’; see, for example, Morgan, ‘Lunsford’,p..Forwhatappearstobethetrue,ratherearlier,dateofhisbirth,seeKent 195 Archives Office, Kent History and Library Centre, Maidstone, DCa/BT/. (Archbishop’s 196 Transcripts for Bearstead), fo. . I owe my knowledge of this document to my former 197 student, Steph Kirkham.For further information about Lunsford’s parentage and ancestry, 198 seeBritishLibrary(BL),HarleyMS,,fo.v. OntheLunsfords’feudwithPelham,seeSteinman-Steinman,‘Memoir’,part,pp.– 199 ;idem,‘LettersrelatingtotheLunsfordfamily’,GM(Mar.),pp.–;andM.Lower, 200 ‘Observationsonthebuckle:thebadgeofthefamilyofPelham’,SAS,(),pp.–.On 201 Pelham himself, see A. Fletcher, A county community in peace and war: Sussex, – (London,),pp.,–,–,,,–,,,,. 202 ForLunsford’sphysicalbulk,seeD.Lloyd,Memoiresofthelives…ofthose…thatsuffered…for 203 the Protestant religion (London, ), p. . For his attempts to provoke a duel with 204 another young man in London, see R. Cust and A. Hopper, eds., Cases in the High Court of Chivalry, – (Harleian Society, New Series, , ), pp. –; and R. Cust, 205 CharlesIandthearistocracy,–(Cambridge,),p.. 206 J.Rushworth,Historicalcollectionsofprivatepassagesofstate(vols.,London,–),III, 207 Appendix(StarChamberreports,MichaelmasCharlesI),pp.–. 208 )I,bIiId,.p,.III,pp..–;andT.Birch,ed.,ThecourtandtimesofCharlesthefirst(vols.,London, 209 Rushworth,Historicalcollections,IV,p.;andTheNationalArchives,Kew(TNA),SP/ 210 ,fo.. MARK STOYLE for what his gaoler later described as ‘a foul attempt upon Sir Thomas 211 Pelham’. 212 In October , Edward Sackville, fourth earl of Dorset, wrote to Pelham 213 assuring him that he and the rest of the council were poised to act against 214 ‘thatt yong outtlaw, Mr Lunsfurd, who nether feares God nor man, and who, 215 havinge given himselfe over unto all leudness and dissoluteness, only studyes 216 to affront justice…[taking] a glory to bee esteemed…a swaggeering 217 ruffian’. This lively description of Thomas has been reproduced by legions 218 of historians and may well be a fair summing-up of his character, but, in 219 justice to Lunsford, it must be stressed that Dorset–who was clearly friendly 220 with Pelham–should not be regarded as an entirely unbiased witness. Over 221 the following months, Lunsford continued to languish in Newgate prison, 222 but in –after his gaoler had rashly permitted him to exchange his 223 prison cell for more comfortable lodgings in town–Lunsford broke his 224 parole and made his way to the continent. Here, he embarked on a career 225 as a soldier of fortune, and in it was reported from Paris that Lunsford 226 was in Picardy where he was planning to raise a regiment of soldiers to fight 227 for the king of France. 228 Ayearlater,thecaseagainstLunsfordwasfinallyheardinStarChamber.He 229 wasfined£,forhisattemptonPelham,andoutlawedforhisownfailureto appear–and at this point it must have seemed probable that Thomas would 230 either remain in exile for ever or die in the French king’s service. Yet the 231 Scottish rebellion of – transformed Lunsford’s fortunes. In , 232 Charles began to raise an army to bring the Scots to heel. It was obvious that 233 he would need experienced officers, and at some point somebody seems to 234 have suggested that Thomas–who was by now serving as a colonel in the 235 French king’s service–might well prove a useful commander, despite his 236 rackety past. Certainly, Lunsford returned to England in and received a 237 royal pardon for his crimes. Then, in early , he was commissioned as 238 colonel of an infantry regiment, which he was to raise in Somerset and lead 239 240 241 242 ForaletterofAug.fromAttorneyGeneralNoy,askingtosee‘theexaminations 243 concerningMrLunsford’,whichalmostcertainlyreferstothecaseofThomasLunsfordjunior, seeCalendarofstatepapers,domestic(CSPD),–,p..Forthegaoler’ssubsequent 244 comment,seeCSPD,–,p.. 245 SackvilletoPelham,Oct.,HamptonCourt,BL,AdditionalMS,,fo.. 246 CSPD,–,pp.,,. CSPD,–,p.. 247 ‘W.A.S.’,‘Lunsford’,p.;andTNA,SP/,fos.–. 248 ForLunsford’sundatedpetitionaskingCharlestopardonhimandtoremitthetwofines 249 whichwereowedbyhimtothecrown,seeSteinman-Steinman,‘Memoir’,part,pp.–. NotealsoSirJohnCoke’sendorsementofthepetition,confirmingthatCharles‘isgraciously 250 pleasedtopardonhisoffences,andtoremityefine’,dated‘attheCourtatYork,April 251 ’.SeealsoHistoricalmanuscriptscommission(HMC),DeLisleandDudley,VI(),p.; 252 andCSPD,,p.. THE CANNIBAL CAVALIER northtofighttheScots.Thiswasasignalmarkofroyalfavour,ofcourse,but, 253 likesomanyofthegentlemenwhohadbeencommissionedtoserveasofficers 254 inthenewarmy,Lunsford swiftlyfoundthathehadbeenhandedapoisoned 255 chalice. The English people had little appetite for the fight and hundreds of 256 the soldiers who had been pressed for the service proved openly mutinous. 257 This was certainly true of Lunsford’s recruits and no sooner had Thomas set 258 out for the north than he found that he was in grave danger of being killed 259 by his own men. On June, Lunsford sent a gloomy letter to the general of 260 theEnglisharmyfromWarwick,wherehehadmadeahaltonhismarch.‘My 261 Lord’,wroteLunsford: 262 Ifindmyregimentin[the]greatestdisorder;diversofthemintroopesretourned 263 home,[and]allinaforwardnestodisbande…We[thatistosay,Lunsfordandhis 264 officers]…are daily assaulted by sometimes of them togeither, [and] have 265 hurt and killed some in our owne defence…Notwithstanding, we march still 266 forward with as many as we can but…I assure your Excellency, the officers…lives 267 havebinindangereveryhouresincetheiremarch. 268 Itisworthobservinghere,perhaps,thatthisletterisperfectlywellphrasedand 269 literate;whatever else Lunsford may have been, hewasclearly not the unedu- 270 cated brute of legend. And while he certainly reported that he and his 271 officers had been forced to kill several of their mutinous soldiers ‘in our 272 owne defence’, this is not quite the same thing as ‘boast[ing]’ that he had 273 ‘shot a couple of mutineers out of hand’, as his biography in the most recent 274 editionoftheDictionaryofnationalbiographyclaimsthathedid. 275 Lunsfordwasclearlyfearfulofbeingkilledhimself,andhewasbynomeans 276 alone in this, for across the whole of England, the king’s disaffected soldiers 277 were by now mutinying, rioting, and attacking their officers–several of whom 278 were savagely beaten to death. The Scots were well aware of the chaos in 279 280 ForaletterfromthelordlieutenantofSomersettothegeneraloftheEnglisharmy,dated 281 May,statingthat‘ColonelLundesfords’officerswerealreadyraisingsoldiersinSomerset, 282 seeCSPD,,p.. LunsfordtotheearlofNorthumberland,June,Warwick,TNA,SP/,fo.. 283 Fortheprivycouncillors’discussionofthemutinyamongLunsford’stroopssixdayslater,see 284 Rushworth,Historicalcollections,III,p..Fortheroyalproclamation‘for[the]apprehending 285 andpunishingof[mutinous]souldiers’whichwasissuedinthewakeofthisdiscussion,on July, see J.F. Larkin, ed., Stuart royal proclamations, II: Royal proclamations of King Charles I, 286 – (Oxford, ), pp. –. For the subsequent misbehaviour of Lunsford’s 287 mennearDerby,seeHMC,Twelfthreport,appendix,partII,themanuscriptsoftheearlofCowper 288 (),pp.–. ForEdwardHyde’scommentthatLunsfordwas‘ofnogoodeducation’,seeE.Hyde,earl 289 ofClarendon,ThehistoryoftherebellionandCivilWarsinEngland,ed.W.DunnMacray(vols., 290 Oxford,),I,p.. 291 Morgan,‘Lunsford’,p.. Onthesoldiers’mutiniesof,seeM.C.Fissel,Thebishops’wars:CharlesI’scampaigns 292 againstScotland,–(Cambridge,),ch.,pp.–;M.Stoyle,Loyaltyandlocal- 293 ity:popularallegianceinDevonduringtheEnglishCivilWar(Exeter,),pp.–;andCressy, 294 Englandonedge,pp.–. MARK STOYLE their enemies’ ranks, and on August, they invaded England. Eight days 295 later, they attacked the English forces which had gathered to block their way 296 at Newburn. Lunsford was on the front line and during the engagement 297 which followed he displayed real courage. His example was not enough to 298 infuse the king’s army with the fighting spirit it so patently lacked, though, 299 and it was not long before the English forces retired from the fray, leaving 300 theexultantScotsinpossessionofthefield.Newburnwasoneofthemosthu- 301 miliating defeats in English military history. But Lunsford emerged from the 302 debacle with his reputation intact–and indeed Conrad Russell has gone so 303 far as to suggest that the battle was the making of him, observing that those 304 ‘who foughtbravely at Newburn, including…Lunsford, retained for ever after 305 a special hold on Charles’s affections’. The evidence on which Russell 306 based this claim is not entirely clear, as far as Lunsford is concerned, but the 307 suggestion that Thomas’sconspicuous display of valour at Newburn may have 308 confirmedtheking’strustinhimdoesseemperfectlyplausible. 309 Certainly,Newburnmarkedtheendofthelineforthepersonalrule.Worsted 310 by the Scots, Charles was forced to patch up a hasty treaty with them, by the 311 terms of which he agreed to pay the Scottish army–as well as his own army, 312 in Yorkshire–until a permanent peace settlement had been concluded. 313 Without the help of parliament, there was simply no way that he could do this and, accordingly, writs went out for the momentous assembly which 314 would later become known as the Long Parliament. Once the new MPs had 315 begun to sit, in November , they quickly seized the initiative. Rather 316 than helping the king against the Scots they set to work to reform the state, 317 to dismantle the structures on which the personal rule had been based. A 318 new political world was rapidly evolving and, as we shall see, it was a world in 319 which army officers like Lunsford were soon to find themselves increasingly 320 embroiled. 321 322 323 III 324 Duringtheearlymonthsof,thepaceofpolitical‘reformation’inLondon 325 quickened, as many of the king’s ministers were arrested, and his prerogative 326 courts were voted down. Charles I’s critics seemed to be in complete control. 327 Yet, already, knots of ultra-loyalists were scheming to turn the tide, and 328 among them were a number of army officers: some of whom had by now 329 made their way to the king’s side in the capital, others of whom were still at 330 the head of theirunits in the north.In March, asmall coterie of these men 331 332 Cust,CharlesI,p.. 333 Fissel,Bishops’wars,pp.–. 334 RCu.Rshuwssoerltlh,,THheisftaorllicoafltchoellBecrtiitoinshs,mIIoI,npaprc.hies,–.–(Oxford,),p.. 335 For these machinations, see C. Russell, ‘The first army plot of ’, TRHS, th ser., 336 (),pp.–. THE CANNIBAL CAVALIER begantodiscussthepossibilityofbringingtheEnglisharmydowntoLondonin 337 ordertooverawetheparliament,whileplansweremadetoseizetheTower. 338 Prominent among the conspirators was the courtier-poet, Sir John Suckling, 339 who had served, like Lunsford, in the army raised during the previous year. 340 On May, Suckling gathered a party of armed men and attempts were made 341 to have these irregular soldiers admitted to the Tower in the king’s name. 342 Yettheplanfailed,and,asnewsofwhatappearedtohavebeenanabortivemili- 343 tary coup spread, protests erupted on the city’s streets. Soon afterwards, 344 Suckling and several of the other officers who had been involved in what 345 their enemies now termed ‘the Army Plot’ fled abroad, where Sir John subse- 346 quentlydied. 347 The flight of Suckling and his co-conspirators is a key episode for our pur- 348 poses, because it was in the wake of their hurried departure that a hostile 349 writer first seems to have referred to the most militant supporters of the king 350 as ‘cavaliers’. Before we examine precisely how that crucial conjunction oc- 351 curred, though, we should pause for a moment to consider the etymology of 352 the word ‘cavalier’–which was not newly minted in , as general histories 353 of the Civil War so often imply, but had instead been familiar in English for 354 many years before. Originally derived from the Latin word caballarius, 355 meaning ‘a horseman’, the term had later become transmuted into the Spanish caballero and the French chevalier, and had then been imported from 356 those languages into English, where it was already well-established by 357 Shakespeare’s day. It is important to stress, however, that, in sixteenth- 358 century English, the word had two variant forms, which possessed distinct, if 359 oftenoverlapping,meanings. 360 Ontheonehand,therewas‘thecavalier’,or‘courageousmilitaryman’:the 361 sort of person whom Shakespeare clearly had in mind when he caused the 362 ChorusinHenryVtorefer,admiringly,tothose‘culledandchoice-drawncava- 363 liers’whowerepreparingthemselvesforbattleonthevastyfieldsofFrance.On 364 theotherhand,therewas‘thecavaleiro’,or‘gallantmanoffashion’:thesortof 365 personwhomShakespeareequallyclearlyhadinmindwhenhecausedJustice 366 Shallow to swear that he would drink a health to ‘all the cavaleros about 367 London’inHenryIV,part.AsShallow’sspeechsuggests,theword‘cavaleiro’ 368 369 Russell,‘Armyplot’,passim. 370 OnSuckling,seeT.Clayton,‘Suckling,SirJohn(–)’,inODNB,pp.–;and 371 Wilcher,Suckling,passim. 372 ForSuckling’sbotchedattemptedtoseizetheTower,seeRussell,‘Armyplot’,pp.–; andJ.Adamson,Thenoblerevolt:theoverthrowofCharlesI(London,),pp.–. 373 SeeAdamson,Noblerevolt,pp.–;andB.Manning,TheEnglishpeopleandtheEnglish 374 revolution(London,),p.. 375 Russell,‘Armyplot’,passim;and,forSuckling’sdeath,Wilcher,Suckling,pp.–. ApointwhichiswellmadeinCressy,Englandonedge,p.. 376 TheOxfordEnglishdictionary. 377 W. Shakespeare, King Henry V, Act III, prologue; and idem, Thesecond part of HenryIV, 378 Act V, Scene iii. MARK STOYLE tendedtobeespeciallyassociatedwithdrinkandsexuallicenceandinwe 379 find the ‘water-poet’, John Taylor, painting a splendid portrait of a young 380 London gallant–or ‘Cavalero Hot-shott’, as Taylor vividly terms him–being 381 rowed across the Thames in a wherry, yelling all the while at the sweating 382 oarsmen ‘Zoun[d]s! Rowe, ye Rog[ue]s!Ye lazy knaves, make hast; anoyse of 383 Fidlersandabraceofwhores[awaitme]atLambeth!’ 384 WhileShakespeareappearstohavedrawnadistinctionbetweenthecavalier 385 andthecavaliero,thetwofiguressoonbecameincreasinglyblurred–andthis 386 was certainly the case in an anonymous graphic satire which was published in 387 London at some point after Suckling’s flight to France in May : a satire 388 whoseiconography–asHelenPiercehasrightly noted–waslatertoinform‘a 389 host of cavalier images’. Entitled The Sucklington Faction: Or (Suckling’s) 390 Roaring Boyes, this engraved broadsheet depicts two fashionable young gentle- 391 men sitting together in a low room, with drink, dice, and playing-cards by 392 their sides (Figure ). It is almost superfluous to point out that, as Pierce 393 implies, in their costume and general demeanour these two individuals may 394 be said to epitomize the way in which most people still imagine ‘the cavalier’ 395 to this day. What Pierce does not comment upon, though–and what is 396 crucialforourpurposes–isthatinthehighlycondemnatorytextwhichaccom- 397 panies the engraving, the two gallants are specifically described as ‘hot-spur Cavaliers’. Here, then, we find the word ‘cavaliers’–which was already sug- 398 gestive both of military men and drunken roisterers–being specifically asso- 399 ciatedwiththemosthard-linesupportersoftheking. 400 Itwasduringtheliteraryoffensivewhichwasmountedbyproto-parliamentar- 401 ian polemicists against Sir John Suckling in mid- that the word ‘cavalier’ 402 first seems to have been appropriated and subtly re-modelled in order to 403 serve as a partisan term of abuse, in other words. Nor can there be much 404 doubt that it was from Suckling’s own literary oeuvre that the soubriquet 405 which would later go on to become so famous had initially been derived, for, 406 in the letters, poems, and plays which he had written during the s, Sir 407 John had made frequent use of the term ‘cavalier’ to describe both gallants 408 and soldiers, while in his stage-play, Brennoralt, written in the aftermath of the 409 FirstBishops’War,Sucklinghadincludedthreecharacterswhomhespecifically 410 termed‘Cavaliers’,andwhoweresurelyintendedtorepresentofficerswhohad 411 412 413 J.Taylor,Thesculler,rowingfromTibertoThames(London,),epigram. 414 BL,E.,f.(),TheSucklingtonFaction:Or(Sucklings)RoaringBoyes(single-sidedbroad- sheet, n.p., ); and H. Pierce, Unseemly pictures: graphic satire and politics in early modern 415 England(London,),p..JohnAdamsonsuggeststhatthisbroadsheetwasfirstpub- 416 lishedinDec.–orevenin–butprovidesnoevidencetosupportthiscontention, 417 seeNoblerevolt,platebetweenpp.and,caption;andp.n..Itissurelymoreprob- ablethatthebroadsheetmadeitsappearanceduringtheperiodinwhichpublicinterestin 418 Suckling was at its height; that is to say, during the weeks immediately following Sir John’s 419 attempttointroducesoldierstotheTowerinMayandhissubsequentflight. 420 BL,E.,f.().
Description:The list of books you might like
