Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 2.djvu/631

] more rare. Thus gradually departed the spirit of the feudal system, the principle that those who held the land should fight for it; armies lost their national character, the power of the king was increased, and the first steps laid towards the establishment of standing armies as instruments in his hand. The feudal system had not, however, abrogated the old Saxon levies; and while in the former we trace the source of our stipendiary forces, from the latter arose two national institutions, the posse comitatus, liable to be called out by the sheriff to maintain the king s peace, and later the militia force. The posse comitatus, or power of the county, included all males capable of bearing arms, peers and spiritual men alone excepted; and though its primary object was to maintain peace and pursue felons under the command of the sheriff, it was also bound to attend upon summons for the military defence of the country. This levy was organised as an armed force by an Act of 27 Henry II. (1181 A.D.), and subsequently by the 13 Edward I. (1285 A.D.), commonly known as the &quot; Statute of Winchester,&quot; which determined the num bers and description of weapons to be kept by each man according to his property, and also provided for their periodical inspection. This force was only liable to home service, but even in early days seems to have been used, as now, as a feeder to the army. The armies with which our kings carried on their foreign wars consisted mainly of paid troops. Many, in the days of the earlier kings especially, were foreign mercenaries, and these were sometimes imported to England to the great discontent of the country. But the Edwards found that there was better material to be had in this country than abroad; and the army which Edward III. took to France, and with which he won the battle of Crecy, was composed exclusively of English, Welsh, and Irish. A muster-roll, still preserved, of the army with which he besieged Calais is interesting as giving the numbers and rates of pay of the different ranks. The prince received 1 a day, and the bishop of Durham, Gs. 8d. Then follow:—

13 Earls,. . . .at 6s. 8d. per diem. 44 Barons and bannerets at 4s. 1,046 Knights,. . . at 2s. 4,022 Esquires, captains, and leaders, at Is. 5,104 Vintenars and mounted archers, at 6d.. 15, 4SO Foot archers,. . . at 3d. 314 Mechanics, gunners, &c., from 12d. to 3d. 4,474 Welsh foot, ... at 2d.

These armies were raised partly from those bound to cerve by tenure, partly by forced levies, which, though illegal and often strenuously resisted by Parliament, were i;ot unfrequent ; but mainly by contracts entered into &quot; with some knight or gentleman expert in war, and of great revenue and livelihood in the country, to serve the king in war with a number of men.&quot; Copies of the in dentures executed when Henry V. raised his army for the invasion of France in 1415 are in existence. Under these the contracting party agreed to serve the king abroad for one year, with a given number of men equipped according to agreement, and at a stipulated rate of pay, the items of which are set forth, and agree generally with those given above. A certain sum was usually paid in advance, and in many cases the Crown jewels and plate were given in pledge for the rest. The profession of arms seems to have been a profitable one, and there was no difficulty in raising men where the commander had a good military reputation; Edward III. is said to have declined the services of num bers of foreign mercenaries, who wished to enrol under him in his wars against France. The pay of the soldier was high as compared with that of the ordinary labourer, and he had the prospect of a share of plunder in addition. The funds for the papncnt of these armies were provided nirt .y from the royal revenues, partly from the fines paid in lieu of military service, and other fines arbitrarily imposed, and partly by grants from Parliament. As the soldier s contract usually ended with the war, and the king had seldom funds to renew it even if he so wished, the armies disbanded of themselves at the close of each war. To secure the services of the soldier during his contract, Acts wcro passed (18 Henry VI. c. 19 ; and 7 Henry VII. c. 1) inflict ing penalties for desertion; and in EdwardTVI. s reign an Act &quot; touching the true service of captains and soldiers &quot; was passed, somewhat of the nature of a Mutiny Act.

The six centuries which elapsed between the Norman Conquest and the Rebellion may be treated as one period in the history of the military institutions of England. Though considerable changes had taken place, though the feudal armies in which the great nobles rode at the head of their retainers, and whose main fighting strength lay in the number of knights and men-at-arms, had given place to armies raised by contract, commanded by officers having no personal connection with the men, and in which the com mon infantry formed the real fighting strength, still these changes had taken place gradually, and fundamentally the principles remained the same. The army seldom came in collision with the nation. Latterly indeed, in Queen Elizabeth s time, the demands of the Irish wars had led to frequent forced levies, and the occasional billeting of the troops in England also gave rise to murmurs, but the brilliancy and energy of her reign covered a great deal, and the peaceful policy of her successor removed all immediate cause of complaint. But with the accession of Charles I. a new period commences, and we find the army a constant and principal source of dispute between the king and Parliament, until under William III. a standing army is finally established on its present constitutional footing. Charles wished to support his brother-in-law, the Elector Palatine, in his struggle for the crown of Germany, and for that purpose raised an army of 10,000 men. He was already encumbered with debts, and the Parliament refused all grants, on which he had recourse to forced loans to supply the funds. The army was sent to Spain, but re turned without effecting anything, and was not disbanded, as usual, but billeted on the inhabitants. The billeting was in itself illegal, and was the more deeply resented as it appeared that the troops were purposely billeted on those who had resisted the king s loan. Finally, the dis orders committed by these troops caused the king to issue a commission to certain persons, officers and others, to proceed against offenders &quot; according to the justice of martial law/ thus establishing martial law in England in time of peace. These three breaches of the law forced loans, billeting, and martial law all directly connected with the maintenance of the army, formed the main sub stance of the grievances set forth in the celebrated &quot; Peti tion of Plight.&quot; In accepting this petition, Charles gave up the right to maintain an army without consent of Parliament ; and when in 1639 he wished to raise one to act against the rebellious Scotch, Parliament was called together, and its sanction obtained, on the plea that the army was necessary for the defence of England. This army again became the source of dispute between the king and Parliament, and later some of the hottest contests arose on the question of the command of the armed forces : finally both sides appealed to arms, and the parliamentary army, after having overthrown the monarchy, upset the Parliament also, and remained undisputed master. Under Cromwell, the force which had raised him to power was naturally augmented and encouraged. For the first time a real standing army, amounting at one time to 80,000 men, was maintained. This army of the Commonwealth differed in character from those which preceded or followed it, the men as a rule being taken from a better class, 