Fall$ 08!

! ! ! ! ! ! Context The Journal for History & Archaeology Postgraduate Students at the University of Chester Issue 1 October 2014

Conflict: society & self ! !

Context The Journal for History & Archaeology Postgraduate Students at the University of Chester Issue 1 October 2014

Postgraduate Conference Programme Cover – May 2014

Published by the Department of History & Archaeology University of Chester October 2014

ISSN 2056-6603

In this issue of Context:

Acknowledgments 2

Introduction 2

Foreword 3 by Professor Peter Gaunt

Conflict within Conflict: Indian War 1688 4 by Rachael Abbiss

‘Masters and Men’ – Industrial Conflict in Gaskell’s ‘Mary Barton’ 13 by Chris Green

Chester under Siege: An old city under fire from a new technology 22 by Sam Chadwick

'They are all there divided... and violently bent for war': The 31 Conflict of War Effort in the English Civil War by Jonathan Worton

‘The sinews of war are infinite money’: The Finance of War and the 39 Sequestration of some Shropshire Estates during the Civil Wars and Interregnum by Isobel Jones

Conflicting bodies, Conflicting Identities: Creating Cyborgian 49 Bodies in the Mesolithic by Ben Wills-Eve

About our contributors 57

Context 1 Issue 1 October 2014

Introduction Acknowledgements

Welcome to the first issue of This project could not have got off the Context, a new journal made by ground without the hard work of the students for students, specifically students contributors. We appreciate the time and doing postgraduate courses or research effort they put into first contributing to work in the Department of History & the conference, and then transforming Archaeology at the University of Chester. their presentations into the papers you see We hope you will find the papers that here. we’ve gathered within its covers interesting and informative and maybe Many thanks to Dr Hannah Ewence for even occasionally enlightening. all the invaluable assistance she has given us both in the organisation of the This edition of the journal had its origins conference and in the production of this in papers presented at the annual History journal. We hope we followed most of & Archaeology Postgraduate Conference, her advice! held this year on 15th May. The theme of the conference was ‘Conflict: society & Finally, our thanks go to the University of self’. Conflict entails more than just the Chester Print Unit for their help martial machinations of nations. producing the journal, to Dr Keith Whether within nations, societies or McLay and the Department of History & families, conflict can be interpreted in Archaeology for supporting and funding various ways: military, social, political, its production, to Professor Peter Gaunt even personal. The centenary of the start for providing the foreword, and to Brenda of the First World War imbues this Davies and Maxine Reed for theme with a particular resonance. administrative support.

The papers that have been collected Chris Green within this journal are a selection from Isabel Jones that conference and present various ways Ben Wills-Eve in which the word ‘conflict’ can be Karen Witt Rowlands interpreted and should give us pause for (editors) thought when we consider the parallels with the many conflicts, big and small, internal and external, that still afflict the world today. They also reflect the variety of archaeological and historical research interests present within the department.

Context 2 Issue 1 October 2014

Foreword by Professor Peter Gaunt

It is a pleasure to welcome this first edition of CONTEXT. Springing from an annual conference which the Department of History & Archaeology holds for its research students, this journal and its contents reflect the growing number of historians and archaeologists undertaking post-graduate research with us but also demonstrates the increasing vitality, importance and maturity of their work.

When I had the honour of giving the opening, introductory address at the 2014 conference, from which the papers printed here are drawn, I spoke about the very varied nature, experience and impact of the conflict in which I specialise, the English civil war of the mid seventeenth century, and about how current historical and (a growth area) archaeological work on that war ranges very widely across themes of military, political, administrative, religious, socio-economic, cultural, intellectual and local history, drawing upon very diverse evidence and sources, and touching too upon landscape and environment, racial disharmony and the memory of conflict. It is good to see a trio of papers printed here – on sieges, war effort and a source of war-time income – grounded in the military history of the civil war and its consequences but going further and embracing some of these rich and diverse themes.

However, when I opened the conference I went on draw attention to how contributors were interpreting the overarching theme of ‘Conflict: society and self’ very broadly, in terms of chronology and geography certainly, but also in their approach and use of source material. Three such broader papers are included here, exploring inter-army disputes during an early modern colonial conflict in New England, reflecting upon how English provincial industrialisation was represented in a contemporary literary source and examining the nature of the human body in the Mesolithic.

Just as the conference itself was interesting, engaging and thought provoking, so this journal and the papers which have made their way into it will be warmly appreciated by all those with an interest in stimulating new work. The contributors and the editorial team are to be warmly congratulated on its appearance.

Context 3 Issue 1 October 2014

Conflict within Conflict: Indian War 1688 by Rachael Abbiss

This article focuses on internal discord in colonial warfare and examines the relationship and conflict between regular officers and provincial soldiers during the Indian War 1688. The historical consensus that regular officers were unnecessary brutal and abusive which prompted widespread desertion is reassessed. Undeniably there were problems uniting professional and amateur troops but despite division and animosity within some garrisons, soldiers continued in their post. Accordingly, the article demonstrates the success of joint operations in North America. Officers and soldiers performed a function irrespective of their concerns and personal desires and the military remained united until the dissolution of the Dominion of New England in April 1689

Sir Edmund Andros (Source: New York Public Library Digital Gallery)

3 The Dominion of1 New England was army. Andros had extensive colonial and established in 1686 by James VII & II. The military experience and was Governor of New design united Massachusetts, Connecticut, York from 1674 to 1683 and proved himself Maine, New Hampshire, Plymouth, Rhode an effective officer during King Philip’s War Island, New York and New Jersey into one 1675-1678 and the Battle of Sedgemoor, crown colony. The primary objective was to 1685.4 The major advantage of the Dominion consolidate and secure colonies to prevent was defence. The establishment of a united French invasion. 2 By April 1688 royal military force under a single commander authority stretched from Delaware to Maine strengthened security against hostile Indians under the supervision of Sir Edmund Andros, and Louis XIV’s expansionist schemes.5 an army officer, supported by the standing

Context 4 Issue 1 October 2014

King Philip’s War took place in New England of combining a distinct and disparate body of between 1675 and 1678 and was a bitter troops resulted in methods of command being conflict between English colonists and native viewed very differently. Regular soldiers Indians, with intermittent support from the punished aversion to command with firm

French, related to disputes over6 authority, discipline whereas colonial15 troops viewed this economy and land claims. While the method as ‘bestial cruelty’. colonists eventually achieved victory, the war demonstrated the ineffectiveness of The majority of American literature presents independent colonial military systems. They British discipline as unnecessarily brutal and did not work against increased attacks because damaging to morale. Douglas Leach, Stephen superior weaponry and protection of Saunders Webb and Owen Stanwood focus individual homesteads were insufficient upon the reaction and16 effect on provincial defence 7 against combined French-Indian soldiers and colonists. In Maine, provincial assault. The colonies had displayed an soldiers were forcibly marched through frozen inability to maintain a permanent military wilderness with limited rations and17 suffering force and that resulted in weak defence,8 disease and enemy attacks. Despite inadequate discipline and leadership. inhospitable conditions, regular officers are Warfare had prompted change in colonial credited with creating the majority of misery conflict with emphasis on offensive and resentment. Leach argues that callous and expeditions, better organisation of militia, abusive behaviour reduced18 morale and respect improved training9 and desire for professional for commanding officers. Harsh disciplinary armed soldiers. The Dominion of New methods including beatings, whipping and England offered a solution and placed Andros torture involving stakes, pickets and pig ropes at the head of fifteen thousand militia troops10 were used on recalcitrant soldiers. Webb has and two hundred and forty regulars. As described discipline as ‘brutal’ and suggested19 commander, he could call militia units from only regular officers viewed it as acceptable. all colonies to defend any 11 area of New Leach acknowledges that officers required England against enemy attack. In 1688 the obedience but claims severe discipline was threat of war in Maine prompted the cruel, unwise and stirred hatred between deployment12 of a combined regular-provincial officers and provincials. The militia were army. The force comprised of two and a half accustomed to less severe punishment and companies of regular soldiers from were previously commanded by officers whom Massachusetts and New York alongside nine they personally knew. Provincial recruits militia companies. The force of seven regarded regular officers as representatives of hundred and nine men intended to quell a suppressive regime 20 who favoured martial disorder and 13 secure Maine against French- discipline over welfare. Indian attack. The Dominion was the first substantial attempt to consolidate colonies An alternative argument would suggest this and the military under royal authority. The method of control was required to reduce operational use of regular and provincial desertion and secure loyalty. In the British soldiers was intended to combine experienced Isles, James VII & II worked hard to eradicate regular officers with a large supply of colonial disobedience, promote professionalism, troops. The Indian War 1688 resulted from reward loyalty and ensure the armies of all21 Anglo-French conflict and attacks conducted three kingdoms were devoted to the crown. by and on their respective Indian allies. The In New England regulation and discipline of war highlighted the problems of uniting the military was also monitored. On 12 professional and amateur troops and issues October 1686 Andros received detailed22 code relating to competence, loyalty and command of conduct known as Articles of War. The caused disagreement. The militia fell under Articles for New England were transcribed the command of regular army officers whose from the Articles printed for James’s forces in control and discipline methods14 emerged from England and were named the Rules and their professional experience. The difficulty Articles to be Observed in His Majesty’s

Context 5 Issue 1 October 2014

23

Territory and Dominion of New England. of achieving little above 25an affable relationship This comprised of sixty-four rules, which with native Indians. This and cruelty were primarily concerned with control, towards his troops fuelled speculation that loyalty, discipline24 and punishment of the Andros and other commissioned officers were standing army. James was determined to Catholics. In Europe, James VII & II meekly eradicate discontent and ensure the army was nurtured a relationship with Louis XIV26 and governed under appropriate military law. conceded to his dominance. This Professionalism and discipline were features relationship sparked fears that New France of command and military training and thus would conspire with Andros to destroy

Dominion of New England (Source: ‘Map-Novi Belgii Novæque Angliæ’ (Amsterdam, 1685) by Nicolaes Visscher I - Licensed under Public domain via Wikimedia Commons) 27 provides reasoning for behaviour displayed by Puritanism in North America. Suspicious regular officers in Maine. provincial soldiers became increasingly alienated from Andros and his regular Interpretation of command and discipline officers. Webb describes that soldiers despised during the Indian War 1688 has created a methods of command and without order divide in the historiography. Douglas Leach many deserted their posts and returned to argues Andros’s campaign achieved nothing Boston in 1689. When Andros attempted to above upsetting the New England populace. arrest deserters and send28 them back to Maine Troops were dispersed into isolated garrisons, the result was mutiny. Furthermore, public crowded in despair and survived on limited resentment over unfavourable policies and provisions. Rather than forestalling an reports of invasion in the British Isles by uprising, Leach has accused Edmund Andros William of Orange encouraged rebellion

Context 6 Issue 1 October 2014

29 against Andros in April 1689. undertake exercise 39 and artillery training once every fortnight. Experienced English

The contrary view denies a futile expedition officers coordinated training and Edmund40 and instead contends that Andros30 secured Andros carried out inspection of soldiers. temporary peace in Maine. Mary Lou Training of all regular and militia troops was Lustig has reasoned military success to the not excessive and marches, musters and effectiveness of a united military force but she exercise were ordered41 not to impede upon has recognised that order between officers and local populace. Discipline and loyalty were soldiers was unstable. Allegiance from the paramount and any officer or soldier found militia had waned and sufferings led to some guilty of misdemeanour would be suspended42 desertion but this did not prevent the or discharged according to military law. combined army from securing Maine and31 Under that framework, regular officers were bringing Indians to the brink of surrender. stringent but some colonists considered that

Conflict between officers and soldiers cannot attitude deplorable and viewed the permanent43 be disputed but the claim by Webb that stationing of regular soldiers as disturbing. desertion from Maine provoked the Boston This feeling however was not widespread and

Revolt 1689 seems exaggerated and 32 is did not effect coordination of the military. supported by carefully selected evidence. Regular and provincial soldiers typically Webb suggests majority of soldiers abandoned enjoyed an amicable relationship and were not their posts believing the Indian War and only trained together but also conducted military discipline were attempts to destroy ceremonial, funerary and political44 duties in provincial soldiers. Accordingly, Webb coordination with each other. considers widening mutiny and Andros’s decision to arrest deserters33 as provocation for Reorganisation of the militia in 1686, to rebellion in Boston. The unpredictable and replace Puritan officers with members of the harsh reality of wilderness campaigning, Church of England, did cause45 distress but coupled with cowardice, 34 magnified the there was no public outcry. Militia officers brutality of British discipline. This however continued to demonstrate their allegiance to did not dissolve military authority in Maine the crown by fastening red crosses to their nor did it cause widespread desertion hats and were often trusted to oversee detrimental to security. Indeed the newly administration46 in towns across New formed royal army 35 fell apart only after the England. Edmund Andros was recognised Boston Revolt 1689. for providing peace and protection but the

emergence of anti-redcoat propaganda47 The Dominion of New England created a attempted to erode that opinion. The new military system whereby all independent Puritan community had aroused suspicion of militias were united under a single leader and the standing army by publicly criticising and could be dispatched36 anywhere throughout denouncing the force. Soldiers were New England. Military failings and weak condemned for obscene behaviour on the organisation by colonial militia and Council streets of Boston including intoxication and of New England reinforced37 the need for a violence. The majority of criticism was combined military effort. Provincial soldiers written to justify the Boston Revolt 1689, had to be disciplined, like regulars, so they however, the amount of complaints suggests would not be a handicap or hazard during regular forces were offensive to some colonists joint operations and thus were subject to during the Dominion administration. These English military authority and law. In March ill feelings would no doubt have influenced 1688 an Act for settling the Militia ensured resentment of command and speculation authority rested with Andros, Commander- about the purpose48 of the campaign in Maine in-Chief, and training, 38 professionalism and during 1688. reliability were improved. Between 1686 and

1688 companies belonging to the Andros rebuked claims made against soldiers49 Massachusetts militia were ordered to and was more concerned with security.

Context 7 Issue 1 October 2014

Although he preferred a diplomatic parties to pursue Indians and others destroyed settlement with Indians, Andros took enemy forts, settlements,58 corn, ammunition immediate action to secure New England at supplies and canoes. Regular officers the outbreak of Anglo-Indian hostilities. In commanded regular and provincial soldiers at September 1688 Andros wrote to Lieutenant forts throughout Maine: Captain Thomas Colonial Tyng, a militia commander in Treffrey was sent to Pemaquid, Lieutenant

Maine, requesting that all parts as far50 as John Jordan to New Dartmouth and Kennebec River were ready for war. In Lieutenant James Weems to Falmouth and

October 1688, after receiving reports of Ensign Ames Andros to the fort59 at Sagadahoc Indian attacks at Northfield and Springfield, at the mouth of Kennebec. Immediately Andros visited all towns upon Connecticut Andros ordered clothes, arms, ammunition,

River to reassure51 colonists and view military vessels and provisions for all the soldiers and provisions. Lieutenant Colonel John Allyn sailors pressed into service. Captain George was ordered to arm and detach sixty soldiers had above eighty men onboard his vessel from Hartford, Connecticut. Troops were HMS Rose but the ship was in poor condition marched seventy miles and quartered at and needed repair. Andros had intended to Northfield in Massachusetts and other places launch a combined operation using crown and along the Connecticut River. The intention colonial personnel. He wanted the large was to raise and arm colonial troops from frigate to sail from Nantasket to Piscataqua to across the Dominion to help defend52 areas frighten Indians and sailors onboard intended recently disturbed by Indian attacks. Andros to assist land operations. Unfortunately due to however could not rely solely on provincial the state of the boat Captain60 George could commanders and the militia. Edward not comply with the order. Randolph astutely identified the problem facing Andros and accused some colonists as Despite wintery conditions, the rivers and being resistant to change and53 wedded to lakes had not frozen when the force first previous policies and customs. In October arrived in Maine. This allowed soldiers to

1688 Andros had requested the service of build forts61 and march after Indians in Major General Fitz-John Winthrop, a woodland. New forts were constructed near colonial officer, to lead an expedition against rivers, such as Fort Ann at Kennebec, to hostile Indians. After first accepting the monitor tribe activities62 and prevent Indian position, he very soon after declined and movement by canoe. Marches after Indians amongst the Council of New England there sometimes involved walking above one63 was not one fit or willing individual to go out hundred miles into unknown territory. and help preserve Maine. Andros had54 no Following the distribution of many troops at choice but to command the force himself. fortified posts, Andros led one hundred and twenty men through dense woodland and In October 1688 Andros sent one hundred swamps to pursue the enemy. The soldiers soldiers with regular55 officers to posts destroyed Indian canoes and managed to throughout Maine. In November 1688 a restrict enemy movements throughout the combined regular-provincial army followed province. Soon after, one hundred and sixty intending to wage an aggressive campaign soldiers were ordered to march deep into against French allied Indians, build new forts Maine where they discovered two Indian and restore garrisons. The army was forts. The forts were subsequently burned, dispatched into ten companies of sixty men twenty-eight canoes destroyed and all stolen and distributed to 56 ten forts and garrisons beaver and ammunition was reclaimed. The throughout Maine. Several new forts were Indians had been reduced to reliance upon constructed alongside improvements to their bow and arrows 64in the hope that would dilapidated garrisons. Vessels were employed weaken their position. to mind security on the coast and stores57 were furnished with military supplies. Regular Severe weather and living conditions affected and provincial soldiers formed scouting the emotional and physical state of officers

Context 8 Issue 1 October 2014

and soldiers. Some were marched above two Boston became increasingly concerned about hundred miles in extreme cold and unfamiliar sick soldiers and desired their return from topography. Edward Randolph, Secretary and Maine.70 Treasurer of the Dominion of New England In this environment, emotions were running and supporter of Andros,65 described ‘impassable high and harsh weather conditions, limited swamps’ and ‘deep snow’. Between November supplies and sickness would have encouraged 1688 and March 1689 it reportedly snowed regular-provincial conflict in some forts and garrisons. Officers carried out punishment for eleven66 times and every week during January 1689. Some forts were desperate for supplies misdemeanours and to uphold discipline and loyalty. Lieutenant John Jordan hung a soldier including cap papers for cartridges,67 food, candles, soap and new boots. Some military from his wrist using fishing line and had his resources were insufficient and there was one foot balanced upon a sharp stake. The urgent need of chain, crossbar and round shot man was taken down and his neck and heels tied together. He was strung up a second time at Falmouth and bullets,68 match and small arms at Great Island. Conditions and for two to three hours and when taken down sickness eroded morale and even regular he was strapped to a rail with stakes in his back. Three other soldiers had neck and heels tied together and officers would often beat disobedient men. Reportedly nothing was proven against the soldiers, it was only that

Jordan mistrusted them and this71 form of discipline was common practice. Incidents

Soldier tied to rail with stakes in back (Source: Mary Abbiss/Stuart Ridge) such as these were unnecessarily severe but majority of cases suggest harsh punishment was used to set an example but not carried out frequently. Accordingly, discipline was in line with misconduct. Provincial officers and soldiers were struck after failing to take up arms and obey orders. One soldier deserted the fort against orders and struck his commanding officer, breaking his gun. That Soldier suspended over stake offense was punishable by death but was (Source: Mary Abbiss/Stuart Ridge) settled by the soldier being strung up by his 69 72 officers desired to leave Maine. Rumours thumbs for one hour. This method of and complaints also fuelled problems. In discipline was common practice in the November 1688 rumours started to circulate standing army and was used on regular that Andros intended to lead the French soldiers as well as provincial. The intention against English colonies and inhabitants of was to reduce desertion and ensure soldiers

Context 9 Issue 1 October 2014

were effective in duty. Brutal discipline was April 1689, the new government recalled all usually promised through verbal threats and forces from Maine and left inhabitants rarely carried out physically. To encourage vulnerable to enemy attack. The Indians, with confession for theft of provisions, Lieutenant assistance from the French, took advantage of John Jordan threatened death if the culprit weak defences and no military support by did not confess and Lieutenant James Weems destroying colonists’ cattle, burning homes, responded to soldiers’ complaints with empty killing many and capturing others. Regular threats of prolonged service. In reaction to officers were seized and treated like criminals, complaints of cruelty, Lieutenant Jordan accused of committing heinous acts despite described provincial soldiers as cowardly and securing Maine and protecting settlements80 ineffective. Soldiers were reportedly idle, between November 1688 and April 1689. filthy, refused to carry out duties and stole supplies from storehouses. For this insolence Up until the Boston Revolt 1689, the joint soldiers were appropriately 73 punished but not operation in Maine can be considered a bullied or frequently abused. success. Upon their return to Boston, soldiers publicly declared that Andros cared for them Conditions in Maine magnified discipline during sickness, visited them in lodgings and methods and admittedly some punishment loosened knee81 strings on sleeping soldiers’ was brutal but it was not widespread and breeches. Andros was an effective desertion was small in scale. More soldiers commander, displayed concern for soldiers, suffered from hardships of winter and sickness74 built ovens to bake bread and endured his full82 than cruelty of commanding officers. The share of hardships during the campaign. majority of desertion occurred after Andros Andros claimed they managed to secure the had left Maine on 16 March and75 during the country and prevented any ‘loss, damage or Boston Revolt in April 1689. Andros left spoil’ to the inhabitants or fisheries. Indians forces in Maine after receiving rumours of a were ‘dispersed and reduced . . . to the uttermost revolution in the British Isles. Some militia wants and83 necessities and so secured the soldiers, having being corrupted and stirred by Country’. The combined army had ‘blockaded incendiaries from Boston, took advantage of76 all the rivers’ preventing Indians from fishing the governor’s absence and rejected service. and hunting, ‘routed them out of their forts and Desertion that did occur in Maine did not strongholds’ and all provisions such as corn, impact on security and was punished gun powder, pistols, muskets and canoes were accordingly. In his capacity as an Assistant seized. The Indians were ‘reduced to a very Magistrate, James Russell ordered seventeen great poverty and forced to the use of their bows soldiers that deserted the garrison at Saco to and arrows’, thus Maine was secure, appear before court to give an account of their inhabitants safe and the war was close to actions. They were accused of abandoning the ending.84 king’s service, and so to were some77 soldiers from the garrison at Cocheco. Unlawful Notes behaviour was punished during war to prevent widespread desertion and regular officers used 1 punishment methods for the same reason. Dates are in New Style (N.S.). The year is taken to Discipline prevailed and majority of soldiers begin on 1 January 2 Hutchinson Papers, Vol. II. (1967). New York: Burt maintained an aggressive and confident stance Franklin, 302 against the Indians. Forces managed to secure 3 Hall, M. G. (1960). Edward Randolph and the

Maine, protect inhabitants and78 push Indians American Colonies, 1676-1703. Chapel Hill: University to the brink of surrender. When soldiers of North Carolina Press, 107-109; Craven, W.F. heard of rebellion in Boston some abandoned (1968). The Colonies in Transition, 1660-1713. New York: Harper & Row, 216-218 their post, some revolted and some seized 4 79 Lustig, M.L. (2002). The Imperial Executive in their commanding officers. It was only then America: Sir Edmund Andros, 1637-1714. London: that command and organisation started to Associated University Press, 38-41, 67-98, 131-133 break down. After the Boston Revolt on 18 5 Chet, G. (2003). Conquering the American Wilderness: The Triumph of European Warfare in the Colonial

Context 10 Issue 1 October 2014

Northeast. Amherst & Boston: University of 30 Lustig, M.L. (2002), 180-182; Barnes, V. F. (1960). Massachusetts Press, 87; McLay, K. A. J. (2006). The Dominion of New England: A Study in British Wellsprings of a ‘World War’: An Early English Colonial Policy. New York: Frederick Ungar Publishing, Attempt to Conquer Canada during King William’s 229 War, 1688-97. The Journal of Imperial and 31 Lustig, M.L. (2002), 180- 182 Commonwealth History, 34, 159-160 32 6 Webb, S. S. (1998), 183, 185-186 Steele, I. (1994). Warpaths: Invasions of North America. 33 ibid, 184-187 Oxford: Oxford University Press, 98-102; Pulsipher, J. 34 Leach, D. E. (1973), 18-19; Webb, S. S. (1998), 184 H. (2007). Subjects unto the Same King: Indians, English 35 Webb, S. S. (1998), 17 and the Contest for Authority in Colonial New England. 36 Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 101-110, Brodhead, J. R. (Ed.) (1853). Documents Relative to 220, 227-228, 233 the Colonial History of the State of New York; Procured in 7 Holland, England and France, Vol. III: 1614-1692. Selesky, H. E. (1984). Military Leadership in an Albany: Weed, Parsons & Company, 537-542; Toppan, American Colonial Society: Connecticut, 1635-1785. PhD, R. N. (Ed.) (1899). Edward Randolph: Including his Yale University, 1984, 3-4 Letters and Official Papers from the New England, Middle 8 Selesky, H. E. (1984), xiv-xv, 4; Chet, G. (2003), 70- and Southern Colonies in North America with other 71 Documents relating chiefly to the vacating of the Royal 9 Steele, I. (1994), 108-109 10 Charter of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, 1676-1703, The National Archives (TNA), Colonial Office, CO Vol. IV. Boston: The Prince Society, 278 1/60, f. 74, ‘America and West Indies, Colonial Papers, 37 Sewall, S. (1878). The Diary of Samuel Sewall, 1674- July to Nov. 1686’, 30 Aug. 1686; TNA, CO 5/904, f. 1729’, Vol. I: 1674-1700. Collections of the Massachusetts 204, ‘New England: Entry Books, 1679-1688’, 1 Aug. Historical Society, 5th Series, Vol. 5. Boston: MHS, 150- 1688. 11 152; Whitmore, W. H. (Ed.) (1874). The Andros Tracts: Lustig, M.L. (2002), 158, 175 A Collection of Pamphlets and Official Papers issued during 12 ibid, 174-179 the period between the overthrow of the Andros Government 13 ibid, 179-182 and the establishment of the Second Charter of 14 ibid, 181 Massachusetts, Vol. III. Boston: The Prince Society, 87- 15 Leach, D. E. (1973). Roots of Conflict: British Armed 88; Scrope, A.T. (Ed.) (1909). Edward Randolph: Forces and Colonial Americans, 1677-1763. New York: Including his Letters and Official Papers from the New The Macmillan Company, 15; Lustig, M.L. (2002). The England, Middle and Southern Colonies in America and the Imperial Executive, 181 West Indies, 1678-1700, Vol. VI. Boston: The Prince 16 Society, 272 Leach, D. E. (1973), 14-15, 17-19; Webb, S. S. 38 (1998). Lord Churchill’s Coup: The Anglo-American Trumbull, J. H. (Ed.) (1859). The Public Records of the Empire and the Glorious Revolution Reconsidered. Colony of Connecticut, May 1678 – June 1689, Vol. III. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 183-184; Hartford: Case, Lockwood & Co, 429-433 39 Stanwood, O. (2011). The Empire Reformed: English Sewall, S. (1878), 145, 150-151, 173-175, 191, 210, America in the Age of the Glorious Revolution. 215, 220 Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 74-75 40 ibid, 173-175 17 Lustig, M.L. (2002), 181; Webb, S. S. (1998), 184 41 Labaree, L. W. (Ed.) (1935). Royal Instructions to 18 Leach, D. E. (1973), 15-19 British Colonial Governors, 1670-1776, I. New York & 19 Webb, S. S. (1998), 182-186 London: D. Appleton-Century Company, 393 42 20 Webb, S. S. (1998), 182-186; Leach, D. E. (1973), Labaree, L. W. (Ed.) (1935), 393-394; Documents of 15-19 New York, III. 537-542 43 21 Manning, R. B. (2006). An Apprenticeship in Arms: Whitmore, W. H. (Ed.) (1868). The Andros Tracts: A The Origins of the British Army, 1585-1702. Oxford: Collection of Pamphlets and Official Papers issued during Oxford University Press, 346-351 the period between the overthrow of the Andros Government 22 TNA, CO 1/60, f. 201, 12 Oct. 1686 and the establishment of the Second Charter of 23 Massachusetts, Vol. I. Boston: The Prince Society, 13 TNA, CO 5/904, f. 158, 12 Oct. 1686 44 24 Sewall, S. (1878), 177, 193, 202-203, 217, 218 Winthrop, W. (1896). Military Law and Precedents, 45 II, 2nd Ed. Boston: Little, Brown & Company, 1434- Massachusetts State Archives (MSA), GC3-327, 1445 Council Records: 1686-1687, II, ff. 9, 15, 23 May/June. 25 1686; Lustig, M.L. (2002), 158 Leach, D. E. (1973), 15 46 26 Sewall, S. (1878), 173-175; MSA, GC3-327, Council Pincus, S. (2012). Rethinking Mercantilism: Political Records: 1686-1687, II, f. 42, 17 June. 1686 Economy, the British Empire and the Atlantic World in 47 the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries. The William Sewall, S. (1878), 164; Hutchinson, T. ed. Mayo, L. and Mary Quarterly, 69, 20 S. (1936). The History of the Colony and Province of 27 Massachusetts-Bay, Vol. I. Cambridge: Harvard Webb, S. S. (1998), 185; Leach, D. E. (1973), 14-15 University Press, 314 28 Webb, S. S. (1998), 185-187 48 American Antiquarian Society (AAS), Mather 29 Webb, S. S. (1998), 184-186 Papers: Transcript of Increase Mather Diary, 1688-

Context 11 Issue 1 October 2014

1689, 12, 1 June. 1688; Whitmore, W. H. (Ed.) MSA, SC1-45x, CXXIX, f. 361b, 11 April. 1689 (1868), 153; Whitmore, W. H. (Ed.) (1869). The 70 Scrope, A.T. (Ed.) (1909), 281; Baxter, J. P. (Ed.) Andros Tracts: A Collection of Pamphlets and Official (1900). Documentary History of the State of Maine Papers issued during the period between the overthrow of the containing the Baxter Manuscripts, Vol. VI. Portland: Andros Government and the establishment of the Second Maine Historical Society, 472 Charter of Massachusetts, Vol. II, 49-50, 54; Whitmore, 71 Baxter, J. P. (Ed.) (1900), 469; MSA, SC1-45x, W. H. (Ed.) (1874), 194-195 Volume XXXV: Inter-Charter Period 1689-1690, ff. 49 Whitmore, W. H. (Ed.) (1868), 153. 275-276 50 MSA, SC1-45x, Felt Collection: 1603-1799, Volume 72 Fortescue, J. W. (Ed.) (1901). Calendar of State Papers CXXIX: Usurpation 1688-1689, f. 194, 20 Sept. 1688. Colonial, America and West Indies: 1689-1692, Vol. 13. 51 Scrope, A.T. (Ed.) (1909), 272 London: HMSO, 23 June. 1689, 71-72; MSA, SC1- 52 Documents of New York, III, 557; Connecticut State 45x, XXXV, ff. 275-276 73 Library (CSL), RG 001:010, Connecticut Archives CSPC, 23 June. 1689, 71-72; Baxter, J. P. (Ed.) 1625-1856, Colonial Wars, Series 1, 1675-1786, V.2 (1900), 426, 469; Whitmore, W. H. (Ed.) (1868), 54- 1688-1694, ff. 2, 3a-3b 55, 171-173. 74 53 Scrope, A.T. (Ed.) (1909), 224 Whitmore, W. H. (Ed.) (1868), 54-55; Hutchinson, 54 ibid, 281 T. ed. Mayo, L. S. (1936). The History of Massachusetts- 55 Bay, Vol. I, 314-315 ibid, 280 75 56 Whitmore, W. H. (Ed.) (1874), 31-33; MSA, SC1- Baxter, J. P. (Ed.) (1900), 473-475; Whitmore, W. 45x, Volume CCXLII: Hutchinson Papers (Vol. 3) H. (Ed.) (1874), 232; MSA, SC1-45x, CXXIX, ff. 368, 369, 371-372, April. 1689. 1681-1770, ff. 352-352a 76 57 Whitmore, W. H. (Ed.) (1874), 22, 31-33 Toppan, R. N. (Ed.) (1899), 277-278; Whitmore, W. 58 H. (Ed.) (1874), 232; Hutchinson, T. (1936), 316; ibid, 22 CSPC, 3 Aug. 1689, 114-115 59 Scrope, A.T. (Ed.) (1909), 280 77 Baxter, J. P. (Ed.) (1900), 470 60 ibid, 281 78 MSA, SC1-45x, CCXLII (3), ff. 351-351b; 61 Toppan, R. N. (Ed.) (1899), 277 62 Whitmore, W. H. (Ed.) (1868), 54-55, 176-178 MHS, PN-350 13, ‘Winthrop Papers 1686-1693’, 25 79 Toppan, R. N. (Ed.) (1899), 277-278 Dec. 1688. 80 Andrews, C. M. (Ed.) (1967). Narratives of the 63 Whitmore, W. H. (Ed.) (1869), 181 Insurrections, 1675-1690. New York: Barnes & Noble, 64 Toppan, R. N. (Ed.) (1899), 277 65 204-205, 232-236. ibid, 277 81 66 ibid, 197-198 MHS, P-363 7.8, ‘Diary of John Pike’, 9 Nov. 1688 82 MHS, PN-350 13, 5 Jan. 1688; Hutchinson T. to 12 Mar. 1689 67 (1936), 314-315 MSA, SC1-45x, CCXLII (3), f. 351b, 3 Sept. 1688 83 68 Whitmore, W. H. (Ed.) (1869), 181 MSA, SC1-45x, CXXIX, ff. 199-200, 217, 218 84 Andrews, C. M. (Ed.) (1967), 198 69 MSA, SC1-45x, CCXLII (3), f. 351b, 3 Sept. 1688;

Context 12 Issue 1 October 2014

‘Masters and Men’ – Industrial Conflict in Gaskell’s ‘Mary Barton’ by Chris Green

Is it possible to look at novels spanning the period from 1800 to 1930, the period when the industrialisation of Britain was at its height, in order to see how, and to what extent, the economic, social and cultural consequences of that industrialisation were represented in fiction and the extent to which they can be used as a form of historical resource? This paper looks at the ways in which industrial conflict is portrayed in one representative novel of the period, Elizabeth Gaskell’s ‘Mary Barton’. It examines the historical veracity of the novel, as perceived at the time and in the early 21st century, particularly by examining one specific incident, the murder of mill-owner’s son Harry Barton.

Elizabeth Gaskell: Portrait by George Richmond (1851) © National Portrait Gallery, London

The research for this paper addresses the conditions and customs. links between fiction and history, prompted by the thought that our view of the past is to My approach considers the way in which a very large extent conditioned by what we information moves from the author’s head to see on television, both in documentaries but our own. This can be viewed as a process also particularly in adaptations of classic that starts with the initial description by the novels of the past. The research looks author of a supposed historical ‘reality’ and therefore at the ways in which we use the ends with our reading of the novel or our English novel as a resource for the viewing of its TV or film adaptation here in description of historical landscapes, social the 21st century. The main proposition here

Context 13 Issue 1 October 2014

is that there are a number of filters through North and South by Elizabeth Gaskell and which the message of the novel passes on that Hard Times by Charles Dickens. To address journey – perception, adaptation, the theme of conflict we can therefore focus interpretation and reception – all of which in on the element of conflict within these can and do materially change the message. novels to see how closely novelists can reflect the real relationships and tensions between The resources for the research are those Masters and Men. To apply these ideas artifacts upon which these processes and further, we can concentrate on a key incident filters act: the novels themselves and in Gaskell’s Mary Barton. contemporary reviews of them; contemporary historical sources that either corroborate or Elizabeth Gaskell, though brought up in the otherwise the facts within the fiction; the country town peace and quiet of Knutsford author’s own memoirs and correspondence; which she recreated in her later Cranford literary biographies, guidebooks, heritage stories, was by the time she wrote Mary tourist site interpretations; and film and TV Barton living in the centre of Manchester, adaptations of the novels. These are the one of the fastest growing cities in the stepping-stones along the way from the industrial world, having married William author’s conception of the story from a perceived reality to our own perception of that reality. Together with visits to the places and landscapes within which the novels were set they should help test the validity of the proposed process. Initial research is looking at the period of the production of the fiction itself, at the influences at work on the author when writing a particular novel, at the links within the fiction with real contemporary events and at contemporary critical assessments of the veracity of the fiction. So, taking this journal’s theme of conflict, what examples can we find in fiction where real-life conflict finds its way, in some form or other, into that fiction? Realistically, you could take almost any novel and find that conflict in some form or other forms part of the basic skeleton of the story, be it family, military, religious or emotional conflict. Within the study period chosen for this research there is one genre in Mary Barton: First Edition Title Page which conflict is very much an essential (Source: Gaskell, E. (1848), Mary Barton. London: ingredient, namely the ‘Industrial’ Novel. Chapman and Hall)

Industrial Novels form a major element of Gaskell, a Unitarian minister at the Cross the canon of early 19th century novels, Street Chapel. All her family were devout including within their plots descriptions of Unitarians and shared that movement’s firm the growth of the new industrial towns and belief in social duty and reform. In the industries contained therein, the Manchester, she observed at first hand the increasing social and economic issues within industrial life of the North – the strikes, riots, those towns, and the conflicts that resulted epidemics, depression, poverty, and along between owners and workers, or ‘Masters and with her minister husband engaged in much Men’1. Key novels within this genre include social and charitable work, and this was an Shirley by Charlotte Bronte, Mary Barton and obvious choice as setting for her first novel,

Context 14 Issue 1 October 2014

Mary Barton, first published in two volumes factory owner; and finally Mary’s two suitors, in 1848. Harry Carson, son and heir of John and anti- union firebrand and Jem Wilson, apprentice The setting for Mary Barton was Manchester engineer. in the late 1830s and early 1840s, a period of manufacturing depression sparked by a The relationship between owners and financial crisis in USA in 1837, which led to workers is crucial to the plot. The book a fall in cotton prices and to the Lancashire details the diverging paths of the owning and mills being undercut by foreign competition. working class. This can be exemplified by This depression is crucial in providing the the contrast between many of the older background to the stories of conflict within generation of owners, such as John Carson, the novel. It was also the time of the who began as a worker himself and worked beginnings of Chartism, the movement his way up and can therefore empathise with dedicated to political reform and greater the plight of the workers, and the younger representation for working people. The first generation who would inherit from them, Chartist petition was presented to Parliament such as Harry Carson, who have become in 1839, and the second Chartist petition of gentrified and more detached from the 1842 is described in some detail within the everyday concerns of working people. The novel. book also details the responses of owners to Mary Barton uses real Manchester locations poor market conditions, such as instituting

McConnel & Company's Mills, Ancoats c.1820 (Source: McConnel, John W. (1913), A Century of Fine Cotton Spinning: 1790-1913: McConnel & Co. Ltd. Manchester: Faulkner) and institutions, such as Ancoats, Oxford wage cuts, part-time working and layoffs, and Road, the Bridgewater Canal (the Duke’s modernising factory machinery and processes Canal) and the New Bailey courthouse and to reduce labour cost. prison in Salford. Pictured below are mills of the period in Ancoats2. Towards the end it Important also within the novel are the also visits real locations in Liverpool. descriptions of how the workforce combined The main characters at the time of the key and agitated. As well as the coverage of incident are as follows: John Barton, Chartism, it covers the Union system and the unemployed factory worker, Chartist delegate principles of collective action, strikes (or and union activist; Mary Barton, daughter of 'turn-outs’) and the concept of strike pay, as John Barton and a milliner; John Carson, well as strike-breakers (or ‘knob-sticks’). The

Context 15 Issue 1 October 2014

process of negotiation between the Unions encourage all workmen willing to accept and associations of mill-owners are a vital employment on those conditions, and at ingredient of the novel. The effect of the rate of wages first offered’.4 impasse in these negotiations, with threats of retribution on the management side and the Carson also draws an unflattering caricature formation of cabals on the union side, and of the union negotiators on a scrap of paper the violence that ensues, is the subject of the that he discards having shown it, to general key plot development in the novel. Let us amusement, to other members of the owners’ look therefore at how the novelist may have faction. used a real event as the inspiration for this plot point, how she then turned it into The scrap of paper is later discovered by a dramatic fiction, and how contemporary union man and exacerbates the anger in the reviewers and later critics and biographers breakdown in negotiations resulting in an perceived the reality behind the fiction. oath being sworn by a group of disaffected workers to kill one of the owners, the obvious This key event in the novel is the violent target being Harry Carson. Lots are drawn murder of the Harry Carson. To explain how to determine who should be the murderer this unfolds within the novel, a dispute arises and John Barton draws the marked lot. He over wage cuts introduced by the mill- carries out the murder in Turner Street, owners, including John Carson, to combat described by Gaskell as a ‘lonely unfrequented foreign competitors who are undercutting way’5. The victim is shot and killed at close their prices: range. The police later find the card used as wadding for the shot, part of a Valentine sent ‘Class distrusted class, and their want of by Jem Wilson to John Barton’s daughter, mutual confidence wrought sorrow to Mary. both. The masters would not be bullied, and compelled to reveal why they felt it Jem Wilson is arrested and charged with wisest and best to offer only such low murder of Harry Carson. The alleged motive wages; they would not be made to tell is an argument witnessed between him and that they were even sacrificing capital to Harry Carson over the girl they both love, obtain a decisive victory over the Mary Barton. The trial is set to take place at continental manufacturers. And the Liverpool Assizes the following week, and workmen sat silent and stern with folded Jem is eventually cleared following the late hands, refusing to work for such pay. production of alibi evidence. In the final There was a strike in Manchester.’3 scenes of the book, the true identity of killer is revealed (though the reader and Mary Negotiations break down amidst much Barton have known all along), reconciliation recrimination. Harry Carson, the main is reached between John Barton and John spokesmen for the owners’ faction, withdraws Carson, and John Barton dies of natural a compromise proposal declaring: causes before he can be brought to trial.

‘…all communication between the That was a fictional account, but let us look masters and that particular Trades’ at the following real event that occurred in Union at an end; secondly, declaring that Hyde, a town less than five miles from the no master would employ any workman parts of Manchester where Mary Barton is in future, unless he signed a declaration set. that he did not belong to any Trades’ Union, and pledge himself not to assist or On 3rd January 1831, Thomas Ashton, son subscribe to any society having for its of a well-to-do mill owner is walking home object interference with the masters’ from the mill he manages on behalf of his powers; and thirdly, that the masters father. A group of what the Stockport should pledge themselves to protect and Advertiser later described as ‘assassins’ 6 are

Context 16 Issue 1 October 2014

lying in wait behind a hedge in Apethorn Gaskell, there appears to be something of a Lane, a quiet country byway. They confront consensus that it was, at least in part. To Ashton and he is killed by a pistol shot give a few examples, Nancy Weyant’s delivered at close range. The wadding for the chronology in the Cambridge Companion to pistol shot is discovered and used as evidence. Elizabeth Gaskell says under the entry for Though the Ashtons were generally reckoned 1831: ‘January 3 - Thomas Ashton murdered, to be good employers, there had been a strike an event… fictionalized in the death of Harry of cotton-spinners in the area. As James Carson in Mary Barton’9. Louis James in the Ashton, brother of the deceased, said at the Encyclopedia of Literature & Criticism states subsequent murder trial: ‘At this time there that ‘The murder of a millowner’s son by an was considerable excitement amongst the embittered worker [in Mary Barton] is largely workpeople in Ashton and Stalybridge. I had based on the notorious murder of Thomas discharged one man the day before for belonging Ashton. 10 ’ Jenny Uglow in her 1993 to the Union.’7 biography of Gaskell backs up her attribution by quoting the nephew of Thomas Ashton describing his mother reading Mary Barton: ‘on coming to the chapter of the murder she suddenly realised that it was a description of her own brother’s assassination, and she fainted’11.

However, Gaskell herself fought shy of making such a direct link. In a letter to the former Liberal Mayor of Manchester, Sir John Potter in August 1852, after he had commented on the perceived similarities, she said the following:

‘Of course I had heard of young Mr Ashton’s murder…. but I knew none of Scene of Thomas Ashton's Murder the details, nothing about the family…. (Source: Middleton, T. (1899), Annals of Hyde. if the circumstance were present to my Manchester: Cartwright & Rattray) mind at the time of writing Mary 12 It took a long time to bring anyone to trial Barton it was so unconsciously.’ for the murder. It is not until the 6th August 1834, more than three years after the original She suggests other incidents that might also have been in her mind, such as ‘One or two event that we find James Garside and Joseph 13 Mosley being tried for the murder of Thomas similar cases at Glasgow’ , a reference to the Ashton at Chester Crown Court. The trial of five Glasgow Cotton-Spinners in charges are largely brought on account of 1838 on charges of murder, intimidation and William Mosley, brother of Joseph, turning conspiracy, and ends by saying ‘I would rather King’s evidence. He states at the trial that never have written the book, than have been the motive for the murder was, ‘on account of guilty of the want of all common feeling…. if I 8 had made Mr Ashton’s death into a mere subject the Union – the turnout’ and he talks about a 14 conspiracy of silence sworn after the murder. for a story.’ A guilty verdict is reached and on 25th November 1834 at Horsemonger Lane Gaol, Was Gaskell’s denial somewhat Southwark, Garside and Mosley are executed. disingenuous? Several elements are present in both the factual and fictional events: the Did Gaskell use the Ashton murder as source murder of the son of mill-owning father; the material in Mary Barton? Reading recent idea of conspiracy and oath taking; an critical articles and biographies about isolated location for the murder; a similar modus operandi for the murder, i.e. a gun

Context 17 Issue 1 October 2014

shot at close range; and the use of wadding in somewhat different view, namely William the identification process. Rathbone Greg in the Edinburgh Review, April 1849. He was the son of Samuel Greg However, there are significant differences founder of Quarry Bank Mill at Styal and like between the real and the fictional events. For Gaskell a Unitarian. Within his review he example, in the murder of Harry Carson, as states: opposed to the murder of Thomas Ashton timescales are foreshortened. The arrest of ‘There are representations made…. Jem Wilson is made immediately and the which we have signalled as inaccurate case is brought to trial at Liverpool Assizes and full of harm... and first among these, within the week, as opposed to the three the exaggeration of describing an years in the Ashton case. Also melodramatic animosity against masters and employers devices are used; an alibi for Jem, his cousin as the common quality and characteristic Will Wilson, is identified after he has left of the operative population.’16 Manchester to go to sea resulting in a race against time to trace Will and bring him to As a mill-owner himself he was well placed the trial. There is also the deathbed to view the other side of the argument. reconciliation between ‘masters’ in the form However, the relatively humane conditions at of John Carson and ‘men’ in the form of the Quarry Bank Mill need to be taken into murderer John Barton. account when reading his arguments – Styal was not Ancoats17. What was the immediate critical response to Mary Barton? For the most part And if we look specifically at the issue of contemporary reviews praised the industrial violence, contemporary reportage verisimilitude of the novel, though would suggest that Gaskell was writing interestingly none of the reviews currently against a real backdrop of industrial violence, available make mention specifically of the which stirred up opinion both for and murder of Harry Carson, more of the general against, evidenced by the following two atmosphere of confrontation and violence examples. present within labour relations. An example of this type of review is John Forster writing Friedrich Engels was living in Manchester at in The Examiner of 4th November 1848. the same time as Gaskell, working for his Forster was a barrister, historian and father’s textile firm. In The Condition of the journalist, as well as a friend and confidant of Working-Class in England in 1844 he quotes Dickens, and recommended Mary Barton to several examples of industrial violence at the its eventual publisher. He praised the novel time Gaskell was writing, including the as follows: Ashton and Glasgow Spinners incidents. He saw how conditions could excite such ‘We defy any one to read Mary Barton violence. This quote could almost come without a more thoughtful sense of what straight from the pages of Mary Barton: is due to the poor; without a stronger and healthier persuasion of the justice they ‘That these Unions contribute greatly to have the right to claim… This is not nourish the bitter hatred of the workers done in the least by contrasting class and against the property-holding class need class, for the faults of the poor are not hardly be said. From them proceed, spared any more than the thoughtlessness therefore, with or without the connivance of the rich. The aim is rather to lessen the of the leading members, in times of interval that separates them, and show unusual excitement, individual actions with what advantage to both each might which can be explained only by hatred know more of the other.’15 wrought to the pitch of despair, by a wild passion overwhelming all restraints.’18 There was one reviewer, however, who took a

Context 18 Issue 1 October 2014

Later on he concludes that: Horsfall on Crosland Moor in the same year22. ‘These facts are proof enough that in England, even in good business years, Elizabeth Stone’s novel, ‘William Langshawe, such as 1843, the social war is avowed The Cotton Lord’ is another novel using the and openly carried on, and still the Ashton murder as a source, but this time a English bourgeoisie does not stop to direct connection is made in a footnote to reflect!’19 leave us in little doubt as to her inspiration.

The Scottish thinker, Thomas Carlyle quotes ‘Let not my readers image that this awful the example of the Glasgow Spinners Trial incident has been invented for the nonce. (or ‘Glasgow Thuggery’ as he calls it) and A few years ago a young cotton while sympathetic to the plight of the poor manufacturer of the highest working classes, he decries the use of violence respectability, and most excellent in attempting to get reform in his book on character, was murdered even so, and as Chartism published in 1840: suddenly, as we have described, by order of the Spinners’ Union.’23 ‘The melancholy fact remains, that this thing known at present by the name Finally there are direct references to real Chartism does exist; has existed; and events in novels such as Benjamin Disraeli’s either 'put down' into secret treason, with Sybil, which includes a description of the rusty pistols, vitriol-bottle and match- Birmingham Bull Ring riots of 1839, box, or openly brandishing pike and torch following the rejection of the first Chartist (one knows not in which case more fatal- petition24. looking), is like to exist till quite other methods have been tried with it. What It is inevitable that novelists use real events as means this bitter discontent of the source material or inspiration for fiction, as Working Classes? Whence comes it, has been shown by the way these acts of whither goes it? Above all, at what price, industrial violence found their way into on what terms, will it probably consent various novels. However, the way the authors to depart from us and die into rest?’20 perceive, and then interpret and transform those events is important in determining how If we look at other novels of the time Gaskell they are described in those novels. Those wasn’t the only writer who may have used real descriptions in turn influence the way we instances of industrial violence as the basis of view those events through the literature or fictional stories of conflict, for example through adaptations of that literature. This Charlotte Brontë’s Shirley, set during the brings us back to the idea of filters, time of the Napoleonic Wars. This was a particularly those of perception and time when the so-called ‘Luddites’ 21 were adaptation. Part of my ongoing research will protesting against the increasing look at the kind of factors that may affect the mechanisation of the mills and the way such events as have been described are consequent reduction in employment during filtered. a period of intense hardship. In Shirley there is a description of an attack by Luddites on First, the point of view of the author is the mill of Robert Moore, one of the four important. Gaskell’s Unitarian instincts, and main characters in the novel, and later in the her belief in compassion and reconciliation novel the attempted murder of Moore by a between the classes, were strong. At the end member of the faction. The historian Asa of Mary Barton, John Barton actually dies in Briggs suggests a possible source for the mill the arms of John Carson, whose son he has attack in the attack on William Cartwright’s murdered but who has forgiven him, and the factory in 1811 and for the attempted murder novel then goes on to describe improvements in the murder of mill-owner William made to the systems at Carson’s factories as a

Context 19 Issue 1 October 2014

result of his acknowledgement of some of the whose traces were still visible in the streets grievances against him: around her. By contrast, the period Charlotte Bronte describes in Shirley was 30 ‘those that were admitted into his [John years in the past. Had there been time for a Carson’s] confidence were aware that the build up of received wisdom about those wish that lay nearest to his heart was events in the interim? A parallel would be that none might suffer from the cause writing fiction about the Miners’ Strike of from which he had suffered; that a perfect 1984/5 now. When does contemporary understanding, and complete confidence fiction, based largely on personal experience and love, might exist between masters and observation, become historical fiction, and men; that the truth be recognised based largely on research? To what extent is that the interests of one were the interests one more ‘real’ than the other? of all, and as such, required the consideration and deliberation of all; that Thirdly and finally the creation of ‘a good hence it was most desirable to have story’ is important to a novelist. The educated workers, capable of judging, not differences between the fictional murder mere machines of ignorant men: and to account in Mary Barton and the factual have them bound to their employers by account described above can be explained to the ties of respect and affection, not by an extent by the need to produce a dramatic mere money bargains alone; in short, to narrative, and if this requires a compression acknowledge the Spirit of Christ as the and conflation of the events and the regulating law between both parties.’25 introduction of elements of melodrama, then so be it. And though tragic events occur Gaskell’s reconciliatory approach may also be throughout novels of this period, not least in in part due to recognition of the likely Mary Barton where the body count is consumers of her novel. Gaskell’s intended sometimes alarming, such novels, especially readership would have included those with a those serialised in regular instalments, needed similar background to herself, including the solace of a happy ending. In Mary Barton many who would have been termed ‘Masters’, though the happy ending is somewhat including indeed Ashton’s own family. ambivalent. Though we see the Maybe this also helps explains why she takes reconciliation between John Barton and John care to produce an even-handed view of the Carson and Carson’s improvements in factory industrial situation, emphasizing good and practices, it’s telling that at the very end of bad aspects of the way both Masters and the novel Mary Barton herself and her new Men organize themselves. Is this a true husband Jem Wilson can only find true reflection of the way things were? Greg in happiness by emigrating to Canada and his review argued that it was too severe a starting a new life, away from the system that picture and Engels might have argued, if he caused them so much pain. had reviewed the novel, that it was too rosy a picture. Both, as Gaskell did, had their own These processes of perception and adaption points of view, their own prejudices and therefore change what would otherwise be beliefs that coloured how they saw the world. raw historical fact into what the author hopes Does that invalidate novels such as Mary will be a compelling story, where the Barton as history? Historians have their own historical background provides the skeleton points of view too, but by the nature of the on which the skin of the drama hangs. What subject do not have the benefit that Gaskell further research will attempt to show is the had of living in the times they are describing. extent to which we can pierce that skin and view the skeleton as reliable history, as well Secondly, the passage of time since the events the extent to which layers of clothing over being described may affect perception. that skin in the form of, for example, film Gaskell was writing about the immediate past adaptations and heritage interpretations, help that was presumably fresh in her mind and or hinder that ability to view the history.

Context 20 Issue 1 October 2014

Notes Critical Heritage. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 68-9 16 1 Greg, W. R, Edinburgh Review, April 1849, 402-35, ‘Masters and Men’ is also a chapter heading in quoted in A. Easson (Ed.) (1991), Elizabeth Gaskell - Gaskell’s novel North and South 2 The Critical Heritage. London: Routledge & Kegan Although undergoing considerable redevelopment at Paul, 183 the moment, Ancoats today still shows hints of the 17 The recent Channel 4 drama series ‘The Mill’ is a industrial landscape that Gaskell would have known, fictionalised account of life at Quarry Bank Mill around albeit in an increasingly sanitised form 3 the time Mary Barton is set. Interestingly it deliberately Gaskell, E. (1848). Mary Barton. Ware: Wordsworth incorporates elements of conflict and dissension which Books edition, 161 4 were not necessarily present at the mill at the time, a ibid, 172 5 point made in a series of interpretive panels set up by ibid, 195 6 the National Trust at the site. Stockport Advertiser, 7 January 1831, quoted in 18 Engels, F. (1845). The Condition of the Working-Class Middleton, T. (1899). Annals of Hyde. Manchester: in England (1943 edition). London: George Allen & Cartwright & Rattray, 85 7 Unwin, 219-20 Middleton, T. (1899), 90 19 8 ibid, 221 ibid, 91 20 9 Carlyle, T. (1840). Chartism. London: James Fraser, Weyant, N. (2007). Cambridge Companion to Elizabeth 2 Gaskell. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, xii 21 th 10 Active during the second decade of the 19 century, James, L. (1990). The Nineteenth Century Social the Luddites, named after the mythical ‘King Ludd’, Novel. In Coyle, M, Garside, P, Kelsall, M, & Peck, J were skilled textile workers who grouped together to (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Literature & Criticism ( 551). actively protest against the introduction of new textile London: Routledge 11 machinery that would potentially put them out of work Uglow, J. (1993). Elizabeth Gaskell. London: Faber and replace them with lesser-skilled workers. and Faber, 216 22 12 Briggs, A. (1985). The Collected Essays of Asa Briggs Letter from Elizabeth Gaskell to Sir John Potter, (Vol. 2). Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 74 quoted in Chapple, J, & Pollard, A. (Eds.) (1997). The 23 Stone, Mrs E. (1842). William Langshawe, The Cotton Letters of Elizabeth Gaskell. Manchester: Manchester Lord (Vol. 2). London: Richard Bentley, 305 University Press, 195 24 13 Disraeli, B. (1845). Sybil or, The Two Nations (Vol. Chapple, J, & Pollard, A. (Eds.) (1997), 195 14 3). London: Henry Colburn, 1 ibid, 195 25 15 Gaskell, E. (1848), 361 Forster, J, The Examiner, 4 November 1848, quoted in A. Easson (Ed.) (1991), Elizabeth Gaskell - The

Context 21 Issue 1 October 2014

Chester under Siege: An old city under fire from a new technology by Sam Chadwick

The siege of Chester was a key example of the conflict that wracked the kingdom during the English Civil Wars. Early on in the conflict, Chester was a significant location; it was a major port, considered strategically key to Ireland, Wales and the North. Both sides attempted to recruit it to their side of the conflict, in the end the Royalists were successful and it took a long time for the Parliamentarians to finally take the city. During a particularly intense siege, Chester was bombarded by the relatively new, more efficient pieces of artillery. During this conflict, not only were solid cannon shots fired into the walls, but also at the City itself along with mortars firing shells called ‘Grenadoes’. By the end of the fighting Chester’s place in society was somewhat lower, the city’s silver plate had been used up, its populace reduced and starved, becoming vulnerable to society’s other great foe – disease.

Hemingway's Map of Chester in 1645 (Source: Hemingway, J. (1836). Panorama of the City of Chester. Chester: T. Griffiths) ! Prior to the commencement of hostilities, stronghold. As a result of the siege by the Chester was one of the major cities in Parliamentarians, and the plague that struck England. It was a large trading port, had it in 1647 (where twenty per cent of the substantial rights and was considered the key remaining population perished)2, Chester had to Ireland. It had many links to the Crown deteriorated to such a state that grass was including a royal charter in 15061, so perhaps, growing in the central streets3. The walls not surprisingly it became a royalist around it were originally built during its time

Context 22 Issue 1 October 2014

as a Roman Fort. These walls were extended Parliamentarian cause; however the Royalist during the medieval period, and Chester City Council ejected him from the city in Castle was constructed. Though these walls August 164213. Once ejected he was certain were reinforced during the first English Civil that Chester was a location, ‘whose reduction War, they show old-fashioned defences will tend much to the settling of these parts and against the new military revolution of Wales and may have great influence also upon technology of efficient ordnance and mortars. Ireland’. The city, under Sir Nicholas Byron, had already prepared for war and had Chester was a Royalist city in a arranged for men, arms and powder to be Parliamentarian county; however it managed available on short notice14. Brereton started to avoid any real involvement in the Civil to move against Chester and seized Wars until January 16434. Ward separates Hawarden Castle in attempt to cut Chester the history of the city’s involvement in the off from outside relief. However before he Civil Wars into four phases. The first phase could lay siege to it, Royalist troops from lasted from January 1643 to March 1644; for Oxford and Ireland under Lord John Byron, this time period Chester was mostly out of hereafter referred to as Byron, arrived 15 , the direct conflict, although Sir William forcing Brereton to withdraw. Brereton had taken the rest of the county for Parliament 5 . During this time, a large amount of defensive outworks were built around Chester and its suburbs6. The second phase stretched from March 1644 to November 1644, when the defences were shortened and improved by Prince Rupert7. The third phase came about following the Royalist’s defeat at Montgomery, where a large number of royalist troops were taken out of action. This meant that Lord John Byron was no longer able to meet the Parliamentarian forces on the field8, and gave Parliament the freedom to begin a siege of the city9. There was a partial relief of the siege by Prince Maurice and his men on 19th February 164510; however this did not last long as the Parliamentarians took the suburbs of Chester on 20th September11. The final phase lasted from October 1645 to February 1646. This phase consisted of the main John, 1st Lord Byron (Source: Licensed under Public domain via Wikimedia Commons) bombardment of Chester and ended with the surrender of Chester on 3rd February 164612. Chester held an important strategic position The last two phases of this siege were where geographically, as it was on one of the two the significance of the artillery was most main roads to the North of England, and also evident. on the path to Northern Wales. Brereton mentioned how significant an effect ‘the The siege of Chester was fought between two reducing of Chester may be to the whole of the 16 key commanders, the Royalist Lord John North’ . That the City was also a large port, Byron and the Parliamentarian commander and was England’s main access to Ireland, Sir William Brereton. Both armies made it a significant target worthy of fluctuated as troops came in to support a side attention from both sides. After the loss of and then left for battle elsewhere. Initially, Bristol, Chester had become the King’s main Brereton had presumed that Chester would port and access point for his army in 17 follow the rest of the county and join the Ireland , making the city a pivotal location

Context 23 Issue 1 October 2014

for the Royalist cause. As the majority of the letter books also provided valuable naval officers had declared for Parliament in information. Byron’s own personal account 164218, Chester was under a loose blockade contained several letters and useful pieces of by ships from Liverpool19. This meant that information; it is possibly quite biased, being supplies and support by sea were possible but that it was written by Byron to justify the intermittent. With the exception of Beeston events that had occurred23. Byron’s account Castle, Chester was the sole royalist seemed to record a large number of guns on stronghold in Cheshire with the remainder of the Parliamentarian side, with numerous the county supporting Parliament. It was reports of guns being placed at different therefore believed that the city would fall locations. It is quite possible he exaggerated quickly under a full siege, which led Brereton these to make his defence look more to comment to his commanders as early as impressive; however most of the arms were March 1645 that it would be a short siege20. situated at known battery sites, areas where Chester itself sat on a ridge in the land the wall is known to have come down or guns surrounded by the River Dee. The walls of had been dismounted 24 . A small account the city at the commencement of the Civil from Mrs Alice Thornton also covered the Wars were in a ‘very ruinous’ state, ‘some part earlier stages of the siege from a civilian’s fallen down and in other parts ruddy to fall into viewpoint, providing some small detail with further decay’.21 The walls were repaired and little obvious bias, though her work contains extensive works were undertaken in 164222. negativity towards the Parliamentarians later on25. The archaeological record in Chester There are many notable sources relating to was incredibly detailed and many of the the siege at Chester. Brereton’s letter books buildings and structures still remain. are very useful, as not only do they contain his reports of the siege, but they included Once the full bombardment started, it was reports from spies and deserters as well as notably intense in comparison to others requests for supplies, troops etc. These during the Civil Wars. Indeed, Dore states letters showed how physically significant the that ‘the city had been subjected to a bombardments were, their psychological bombardment that by Civil War standards was effect on both the defenders and attackers, devastating, not a house in the four central and how well supplied the Parliamentarian streets was left undamaged and many civilians ordnance was. The letters had various were killed’ 26 . The intensity of the degrees of bias; letters to friends and allies bombardments had a large psychological were likely to show Brereton’s needs and effect. J. Werden wrote to Lady Salusbury opinions, and a similar theme runs through ‘only we have been kept waking, for the enemy the intercepted letters from the Royalists. hath shot day and night’ 27. The psychological Reports from spies and scouts had good threat of the guns appeared to be quite severe, quantitative information, but may of course not only from the big guns but also the be inaccurate. Unfortunately, these books are smaller guns that could fire over the wall. not a complete record, and there were many Byron states that the populous were ‘so references to letters being sent or received terrified by the great guns, and the small shot that do not appear in the letter books. from St Johns steeple’ 28. In one of the first Randle Holme’s writings on the siege days of bombardment, Byron claimed that provided a detailed account, especially when nearly 400 cannon balls were fired at the relating to number of artillery fired, the city29, and Randle Holme gave a count of 357 damage inflicted and the state of the ‘tennis balls [that were] cast against our populous. His work provided a view from battlement’ 30 . This was a vast number of within Royalist Chester, but lacks significant shots to be fired in one day, as Holme insight into the Parliamentarian besieger. reported only 14 shots fired when the Nathaniel Lancaster gave an account from a Parliamentarian forces were attempting to Parliamentarian viewpoint within Chester. breach the walls on 27th September 1645. Byron’s accounts and letters in Brereton’s This number of 357 was corroborated by a

Context 24 Issue 1 October 2014

letter in Brereton’s letter books from M. much more effective than the ordnance on Thelwall to his wife stating that ‘they shot 356 the North side, presumably those firing at cannon shots 1000 small shot at the least’ 31. Morgan’s Mount40. Holme noted that the This was a significant amount for the 7 large large cannon flanking them from the Welsh guns that Brereton possessed. William side inflicted a large amount of damage to Eldridge suggested in the Gunner’s Glass that both buildings and to the people about the 20 shots would be a large number for a city, and that it ‘took them in the back during cannon to fire in one day and that 120 balls the storm’. The significance of Brereton’s should be enough for 15 days of artillery was perhaps reduced somewhat due bombardment32. He did state that smaller to the lack of Siege guns. The description of guns could fire more often, but not an ‘ideal artillery train’ from A Short Treatise substantially more – demi cannon 150 balls, Concerning All Things Needfull in an Armye quarter demi cannon (culverin) 170 balls and According to Modern Use in 1660 stated it demi culverin 210 balls in 15 days33. During should contain 2 whole cannons, 8 demi the later parts of the siege of Chester, it cannons, 6 12lb field pieces, which would be became apparent to the Parliamentarian demi-culverins, many smaller guns, 2 heavy commanders that Chester would be very mortars (100lb), 3 medium mortars (50lb) difficult to capture by direct attack. A and 3 small mortars41. Holme accounts that decision was made by the Parliamentarian Brereton only had 7 large pieces of ordnance; force to change the artillery’s tactic to one of four pieces of ordnance placed against the bombardment rather than breaching34. This North wall once the piece at Morgan’s decision came around the time of a failed Mount was dismounted; two pieces at the attempt to storm the city, which occurred on east side, presumably either at the battery on the 8th October 164535. Before this change, Foregate Street or else at St John’s Church, small amounts of bombardment were used and the large cannon on the Welsh side at alongside breaching techniques. Randle Brewers Hall Hill. It is also known from Holme comments on shots being fired at the Brereton’s requests that one of the large guns walls on 27th September 1645, then shots he had was a culverin, as he wrote to being fired into the church the next day36. Liverpool, ‘I desire that some of those whole The bombardment technique had been used, culverin bullets, for which you have no suitable but not intensely, before the major change of and which came for my use are remaining at focus. Brereton did say, after they had put a Liverpool, may be likewise sent’ 42. Thus he mortar into action, that: only had a maximum of 6 cannons comparable to the 10 he should have had. ‘To correct them in the city we have made Brereton himself must have believed that he use of our mortar piece and shot several was underequipped, as he requested the ‘great granadoes into the town, all or most gun in Hawarden Castle’ 43 on May 5th 1645 which have done execution. So it would and had it sent to him ten days later44. The be no difficult work to consume the city, ideal artillery train also stated that a besieging but that would be no delight to us nor army should have 800 Grenadoes45. From advantage, who much rather desire the Holme we know that the Parliamentarian reducement and preservation than ruin forces only fired around 70-80 grenadoes. and destruction thereof.’ 37 On 18th December he said ‘either their grenadoes are all spent or else too costly, and The main damage inflicted on the city was by therefore to kill us with less charge, they toss three two pieces of ordnance in particular; the huge stones’ 46 . He later stated that on mortar located at Foregate Street38, and the December 25th, ‘Because it is a festival, instead large gun on Brewers Hall Hill located on the of stones they send us in a token of four grenadoes Welsh (West) side of Chester39. Nathaniel sent in’ 47, but this is the last time he mentions Lancaster noted that there was a ‘large any grenadoes fired. There is an earlier cannon’ on the Welsh side of Chester. account of grenadoes being sent over, Alice Lancaster stated that this large cannon was Thornton put the earliest bombardments

Context 25 Issue 1 October 2014

down at the 17th July 1643. Her account much destruction in breaking and rending’ 53. stated that 3 grenadoes were fired at Chester Charles Walley, however, stated that most of with one being put out and two landing his property in Chester had been ‘burnt to the outside the city walls 48 , and described ‘a ground’ 54. Holme supported this point of cannon bullett’ flying toward the window view, when he stated that when 11 grenadoes facing St Marie’s Church49. The siege only were fired over the walls they ‘threaten to set lasted between 17th July and 19th July 1643, the city, if not the world on fire’ 55. While it is brought to an end in her account by three likely that a few buildings were set on fire, grenadoes. She gives an account of one shot including those belonging to Walley, it is landing in Chester (where it was smothered unlikely that this had a large contribution to to put it out), one landing outside the city, the damage inflicted by the ordnance. but in a ditch where it put itself out. The last However, it was obviously a significant actually landed ‘amongst theire [the enough threat that Byron had several Parliamentarians] owne horrse, short of the preventative measures put in place to prevent towne, slaing many of them, and by that meanes the spread of the fire 56. Though fire was the seige was raised’ 50. However, this seems to often caused by ordnance, it was not always have been an unusual occurrence that was not the case. Holme reported that on October replicated. Ward states that during the year 30th the Parliamentarians attacked with bows of 1643 ‘the outworks were subjected to raids by and fire arrows57. This could imply that the Brereton’s force but to no serious attack’ 51. ‘revolutionary’ ordnance was not viewed as that effective, though alternatively could be a last resort due to lack of ammunition for the big guns. Of course without having dominated the area with heavy ordnance first, they would not have been able to get close enough to use bows and arrows.

Brereton’s artillery was not just intended to damage the city and panic its citizens. Heavy ordnance was designed to penetrate walls and create opportunities for assaults to be made on the location. By the end of the siege Holme wrote that the ‘whole [of] our walls and edifices within the city were defaced or battered down by the destructive cannon’ 58 . Though the walls were initially in a poor state, the delay in Chester being directly sieged Sir William Brereton (Source: licensed under Public gave time for Randle Holme esquire to domain through Wikipedia Commons) improve the city’s defences and build up the Fire was a serious threat to 17th century mounts59. Holme recorded the two times buildings. Artillery could cause fires both when breaches were successfully made. On through heated shots and grenadoes setting 22nd September 1644, he reports that: fire when they explode. Porter stated that though the grenadoes ‘did do considerable ‘the east side of our walles neere to the damage and destroyed some buildings no major new gate receive a visit from there fires were started’. This suggests that the fire artillery, beginning about twelve of the damage was only minimal, and that it was the clock and continued till four - thirty-two shots are made them a breach at which explosive properties of the Grenadoes that 60 did the most damage. Brereton only made a ten men abreast may enter.’ few comments about buildings being set on th fire, which supports this interpretation52, but Then on the 27 ‘they let fly fourteen of their he did say that ‘the mortar piece have done great shott at the Eastgate…They imployed these

Context 26 Issue 1 October 2014

to work a reformation upon it and bring it low nearly £65 lost £15 of its value due to ‘housing and uniform with her neighbour walls’ 61 . damaged by grenadoes’. Another tenant, These appear to be spontaneous events, as Widow Streete, formerly paid him £13 for a Holme did not report that these structures house in St Peter’s Parish, ‘but one half of the were damaged before the breach. A steady house having been ‘beaten downe by a grenado’ it bombardment occurred at the Water Tower will not yield more than £5 over annum’ 68. In as well. Holme accounts showed that it was fact such was the extent of the damage that hit by 17 ‘huge balls’ 62, presumably Cannon or Brereton began to worry about the damage Cannon Royale shots from the battery at that they were causing. On 10th December Brewers Hall Hill. This was followed the he wrote ‘yet this [the mortar] doth nothing at next day by another burst of 16 shots that all work upon them but they seem still to remain caused serious damage to the water tower and as stubborn as formerly, so as to judge it more cut their water pipes63. The damage to the easy to fire and destroy than to reduce the city’ 69. water pipes was repaired the next day, Though after this letter he maintained the however the bombardment continued. By bombardment over the next five nights the end of the siege, Holme reports ‘the water following 29 grenadoes were launched ‘which tower at Dee bridge, shot downe in tyme of siege’ break down divers houses in the Eastgate and 64. The Water Tower was a medieval tower Watergate streets’ 70. St Peter’s Church had not reinforced by earth banks like the city two grenadoes hit it; Holme told us that it walls65. The psychological effect of ordnance was ‘much defaced and pews torn, and all attempting a breach seems a great deal less windows broken by two grenadoes that fell than that of bombardment. During the therein’ 71. Though significant damage could particularly vicious day when over 300 shots occur if wooden buildings received strikes were fired at the walls, Holme dismisses from grenadoes, two direct hits to a large them as 357 of their ‘tennis balls are cast stone building has little damage to the against our battlement’ 66 , a completely structure. As well as having a devastating different image to the 17 ‘huge balls’ that were physical effect mortar fire, or more fired at the houses days later. specifically the grenadoes that it could fire, had a huge psychological effect on the Mortars are one of the main points of the general populace. Holme reported on 10th siege that the populace and accounts dwelled November: on. This is to be expected, as by nature they affect the people inside a siege rather than ‘by this time they have unmusled death just the defenders on the walls, but this also and sweare theyle let him loose amongst shows the mortars’ prominence and us, a wide mouth’d mortarpiece in which significance in bringing a siege to an end. the mouth of etna spits little mountaines Holme wrote about the damage caused by the in our faces and grinds our dwellings into end of the siege: dust and ashes, three of these bombards or huge stones light amongst us, and the day ‘Destruction of divers other houses in the following three more, the uncapt houses cittie, with grenadoes, not a house from crouch from feare, and beg forbearance on Eastgate to the middle of Watergate their bended knees, but it seems these but street on both sides but received some hurt forerun a greater judgment. Two great by them, many sleyne by the fall of houses grenadoes are by this time mounted, one which were blown up, St. Peters Church of which being too full of spirits it much defaced and pews torne, and all becomes its own executioner,by pursting windows broken by two grenadoes that [bursting] in the aire, the other lights in fall therein.’ 67 a backside without doing any harme at all.’ 72 Holme’s report on the situation is supported by council reports, which list Alderman Even though neither of these grenadoes Thomas Troppe’s house that was worth managed to cause any damage, they created

Context 27 Issue 1 October 2014

such terror that, two days later, Holme century defences were, managed to withstand recalled: substantial bombardment and still provided protection against the assaults on Chester. ‘all this while our women like soe many All the sources seem to agree that the walls she astronomers have so glewed their eyes began the war in a very ruinous state. The to heaven in expectation of a second walls and defences were repaired and thunder that they cannot easily got to bed upgraded and changed at various points 78 , lest they dream of a grenado, and indeed, and were reinforced with a layer of earth not without cause, for the very next night placed behind them79. Byron stated that: they toss us three grenadoes and one huge stone, but they do no harm at all to ‘The wall of the City (the only maintaine that miracles have a being.’ 73 fortification we had) was found generally to be very weak upon experiences of the By 10th December the pressure from the former breach so soon and so easily made. grenadoes is reaching its zenith. Holme Whereupon (for the better encouragement wrote 11 huge grenadoes are fired that of others) I had begun not long before ‘threaten to set the city, if not the world on fire’ with some officers and Gentlemen to The Talbot just off Eastgate Street is throw up a rampier [rampart] against destroyed. Two houses in Watergate Street the wall strengthening it....[it] was in are destroyed as well killing the people short time brought to so good effect that inside 74 . Brereton confirmed the damage the weakest parts of the wall were in sustained here but stated the fire was quickly most places well secured.’ 80 put out. The danger of spontaneous fire from these devices seems to be a major part These reinforced and repaired walls must of the terror they inflict. Holme’ narrative have been of a fair height, as when the further revealed that on 27th November ‘A Parliamentarians tried an assault, Chester’s great grenado is fired into one of the mills but is walls were too high for the ladders to get up. discovered and drowned in water’ 75 . This Indeed there is an interesting report on the shows that the threat of fire and damage to assault - The Kings Forces totally routed by the the mill was worth the soldiers risking their Parliaments Army, under the command of Major lives to put out the grenade rather than Generall Poyntz and Cheshire Forces, on evacuate the building. Though these Routon-Heath ... together with the state of the terrifying effects are reduced when stones are Siege at Chester, which is a Parliamentarian fired from the mortar, for the night attack on report of the state of Chester, sent to 11th December Holme simply stated ‘At Parliament. It describes a breach being made night another three are stones are fired’ 76, The very quickly in Chester’s walls on Monday significance of this weapon was obviously 25th September 1645: hamstringed by Brereton’s lack of ability to obtain grenadoes for a constant siege. The ‘Upon the lords day we brought in our indiscrimination of the weapon has a unique Artillery, fixt a battery, & upon Monday effect; to begin with Byron claimed that the made a great breach in the wall, mortar being fired at the city produced an resolving to storm it at night, which we anger at Parliament, and caused the citizens endeavoured in 3. Or 4. Places, but the Ladders proved too short and the breach of Chester to become negatively disposed to 81 the Parliamentarian cause, however as time too high on the inside.’ goes on he noted that the mortar fire drained the citizens morale and caused them to be Though the walls were breached quickly, angry at him for maintaining the resistance77. which would suggest they were not suitable as defences, they still remained enough to The city walls at Chester, though they repel the Parliamentarians in a direct assault. originated from a period of much earlier technology and were not built the way 17th Lack of powder seems to have been a serious problem for both sides of the siege. Brereton

Context 28 Issue 1 October 2014

frequently wrote requesting additional ‘I endeavoured also ... to beat it [the money, in one instant, just after receiving steeple] down but, having only one piece £2000 as part of a payment, he wrote stating of battery and that but a twelve- that he needed more as £1600 had already pounder, and finding that it would cause been spent on ammunition and that if he the expense of more powder than I could paid the remainder to the soldiers ‘it would well spare was forced to give it over’. 89 make their discontents greater’ 82. In Brereton’s absence the ‘Gentlemen’ of Cheshire In his report Byron appeared to put more chastised the other commanders ‘did you emphasis on the lack of gunpowder and consider the mass of money that it hath cost in match than he does on any other resource, ammunition and in paying but a month’s pay’ 83, including food, artillery and troops. which shows that ammunition was expensive and therefore bombardment required a steady The main factor in Chester’s surrender seems flow of income to continue. The besieging to have been one of starvation, rather than forces were not the only ones suffering, for subdual by artillery. Chester’s lack of Brereton wrote that ‘this town is scarce of ammunition and ability to return fire helped powder’ 84 ; a later report showing that the the Parliamentarians surround Chester and Royalists were worried about their production keep control of its supplies. On 14th April and that due to the heavy bombardment 1645 Brereton proudly reported that he ‘They fear also for their…powder mills’ 85. A managed to get his force to establish batteries report from Brereton at the same time stated within ½ to ¾ mile from the outworks on the that ‘there are three mills spoiled only two left Cheshire side (east) and only ½ mile on the standing’ 86 , though this could have been Welsh (west) Side90. This would have been a referring to grain rather than gunpowder. much more difficult task had the Royalists Indeed it appears that the Royalists had little been in control of well-stocked artillery, as powder as early as May 1645. A letter from both of these would have easily been within Captain Richard to Brereton on 18th May cannon, demi-cannon or culverin range. As told of how the Rebecca (his ship) ‘was at Brereton’s soldiers’ grip became tighter Chester and gave the town an alarm and shot supplies became much more sought after. into it with one of our guns. But by their By 17th December 1645 a steady stream of slowness in shooting I conceive it may be very defenders started to desert. Brereton’s probably that they are slenderly provided with interrogations showed the problems within powder’ 87. This is a useful letter as it not only the city. Giles Hurst reported that: shows that the Royalists were suffering for lack of powder, but that they considered it ‘the poor are in very great want and was worth risking a ship to test the many that have lived well are begging, opposition’s defences and armaments. A spy that there is but little bread or beer left reported on Royalist attempts to obtain £150 and beef is scarce…The Welsh soldiers are of Brimstone (sulphur), one of the key almost famished and there is a general ingredients in gunpowder 88 . That such want amongst all, the gentry excepted… efforts were taken to obtain powder, limit He thinks the city cannot hold out above a fortnight (there being little corn or malt their opponents’ powder and investigate its 91 availability in the other camp shows that it left).’ was an important resource. Byron, throughout his report of the siege, constantly If possible, John Fletcher presented an even reported how little gunpowder he had more dire picture, ‘the poorer sort are in available. Indeed he blamed his lack of extreme want and of late some of the Welsh powder on his inability to remove the soldiers have perished for want of food…The soldiers are much discontented and have twice musketeers in the steeple of St John’s 92 Church, he said: mutinied of late’ . For the Royalists the lack of a gun at Morgan’s mount was the beginning of the end, it allowed the

Context 29 Issue 1 October 2014

Parliamentarian lines to tighten, reducing the

Royalists ability to sally and scavenge for food. 39 Ward, S.W. (1987), 12 40 Notes Lewis, J. (1987). The Siege of Chester, Nathaniel 41Lancaster’s Narrative. Raider Books, 22 Bull, S. (2008). The Furie of the ordnance: artillery in

1 42the English civil wars. Martlesham: Boydell Press, 188 Carrington, P. (1994). English Heritage Book of 43 Dore, R.N. (1984), 359 Chester. Chester: Chester Archaeological Society, 65 2 44 ibid, 364 ibid, 91 3 45 ibid, 426 Easton, J. and Heke, D. (1999). A Chester Miscellany: 46 Bull, S. (2008), 188 a collection of historical documents gleaned from The 47 Morris, R.H. and Lawson, P.H. (1924), 235 Cheshire Sheaf, 26 4 48 ibid, 235

5 Carrington, P. (1994), 84 Gardiner, S.R. (1876). The Autobiography of Mrs. Alice Ward, S.W. (1987). Excavations at Chester: the Civil 49Thornton. London: Academy Publishing Co., 32-33 War Siegeworks:1642-6. Chester: Chester 50 ibid, 33 Archaeological Society, 2 6 51! ibid, 32-33 Carrington, P. (1994), 85 7 52 Ward, S.W. (1987), 6-11 ibid, 86 8 53 Dore, R.N. (1984), 335 Barratt, J. (2003). The Great Siege of Chester. Stroud: 54 ibid, 366

9Tempus Publishing, 62 Sanders, F. (1896). The Cheshire Sheath: Volume 1 Ward, S.W. (1987), 2 10 55Series 3, 51 Barratt, J. (2003), 10 11 56 Morris, R.H. and Lawson, P.H. (1924), 234 ibid, 10 12 57 Barratt, J. (2003), 136-7 Ward, S.W. (1987), 4 13 58 Morris, R.H. and Lawson, P.H. (1924), 230 ibid, 2 14 59 ibid, 204-5 Young, P. and Emberton, W. (1978). Sieges of the 60 ibid, 207 Great Civil War. London: HarperCollins, 108 15 61 ibid, 225 Ward, S.W. (1987), 2 16 62 ibid, 226 Dore, R.N. (1984). The Letter Books of Sir William 63 ibid, 228 Brereton, Volume I: January 31st - May 29th, 1645. The 64 ibid, 230 Record Society Of Lancashire And Cheshire, 397 17 65 ibid, 204 Ward, S.W. (1987), 1 18 66 Ward, S.W. (1987), 5 Burne, A.H. and Young, P. (1998). The Great Civil 67 Morris, R.H. and Lawson, P.H. (1924), 229 War: a military history of the first Civil War, 1642-1646. 68 ibid, 205 London: Windrush Press, 6 19 69 ibid, 205 Wanklyn, M. and Jones, F. 2005). A Military History 70 Dore, R.N. (1984), 349-50 of the English Civil War, 1642-1646: strategy and tactics. 71 Morris, R.H. and Lawson, P.H. (1924), 235 London: Routledge, 133 20 72 ibid, 205 Dore, R.N. (1984), 120 21 73 ibid, 231 Young, P. and Emberton, W. (1978), 109 22 74 ibid, 232 ibid, 109 23! 75 ibid, 234 Byron, J. (1971). John Byron's account of the siege of 76 ibid, 233 Chester 1645-1646. The Cheshire Sheaf, 4th series, 1-4 24! 77! ibid, 235 ibid, 1-21 25 78!Byron, J. (1971), 21 Gardiner, S.R. (1876). The Autobiography of Mrs. Alice 79!Ward, S.W. (1987), 5-11 Thornton. London: Academy Publishing Co, pp36-38 26 80!ibid, 11 Dore, R.N. (1984), 585 27 81!Byron, J. (1971), 13

28! ibid, 80 Anon (1645). The King’s Forces! Totally Routed by the Byron, J. (1971), 9 29 82Parliaments army. Pamphlet, 4 Barratt, J. (2003). 112 30 83 Dore, R.N. (1984), 183-4 Morris, R.H. and Lawson, P.H. (1924). The Siege of 84 ibid, 330-1 Chester, 1643-1646. Chester, 228 31 85 ibid, 190 Dore, R.N. (1984), 93 32 86 ibid, 211 Eldred, W. (1647). The gvnners glasse, 118 33 87 ibid, 190 ibid, 118 34 88 Dore, R.N. (1984), 454 Carrington, P. (1994), 88 35 89 Dore, R.N. (1984), 211 Dore, R.N. (1966). The Civil Wars in Cheshire. 90 Byron, J. (1971), 23 Chester: Cheshire Community Council, 53 36 91 Dore, R.N. (1984), 218-9 Morris, R.H. and Lawson, P.H. (1924), 226-7 37 92 Dore, R.N. (1984), 374

38 Dore, R.N. (1984), 335 ibid, 375 Osborne, M. (2004). Sieges and Fortifications of the Civil Wars in Britain. Imprint unknown, 48

Context 30 Issue 1 October 2014

'They are all there divided... and violently bent for war': The Conflict of War Effort in the English Civil War by Jonathan Worton

During the First English Civil War of 1642 to 1646 the county of Shropshire was contested and widely fought over by the forces of King Charles I and Parliament. Given the eventful military history of the county at this time, Shropshire as a case study provides a suitable subject for a broad examination of the organisational and operational aspects of war effort during the English Civil Wars. In order to direct, coordinate and manage war effort, key tasks for both sides were to establish structures of leadership, command and administration. Some of these efforts were novel, some based on precedent, wherein the hierarchy of prevailing military custom and practice co-existed awkwardly with civilian officialdom. Undue responsibility and great reliance was placed on the many local civil officials at town and parish level who were repeatedly engaged to procure warlike resources. Despite underlying tensions, both sides maintained generally workable wartime organisations.

Civil wars are often the most divisive and territory. Stephen Porter's work, for example, damaging of conflicts. The division into has shown how the English Civil Wars warring parties of a society previously united caused localised, but extensive and by shared linguistic, cultural and economic widespread, structural damage, to buildings, norms is a shocking event. Civil wars are that as strongholds were caught up in the often fought with as much, and often much fighting, or when adjacent to fortifications more, vehemence and damaging effect as were demolished to3 provide a garrison with a warfare between rival nation states or clear field of fire. Furthermore, agriculture, kingdoms. The harm wrought on a country trade, commerce and economic activity in wracked by such conflicts can exceed that general can in many ways be disrupted, suffered during external war with a foreign harmed or depressed by civil war. enemy. Indeed, in the case of the English, or wider British Civil Wars of the mid- These damaging consequences are the seventeenth century, that are the backdrop to inevitable result of war effort: a useful catchall this paper, it has been suggested that directly phrase that enables historians broadly to or indirectly the conflict caused the deaths of encompass wartime activity. More exactly, more than eight per cent of the population of war effort may be defined as those the British Isles; a far greater loss of life coordinated means by which military proportionate to population than suffered 1 in operations are conducted and sustained in either the First or the Second World Wars. furtherance of the political and military In a civil war the opposing forces exploit the object of war. Given this definition, war same territories and economy. Accordingly, effort provides the broad context in which in prophesising the financial turbulence that activities that embrace the battlefield as well the feared approaching internecine conflict as the home front may be studied: leadership would bring, a clergyman in Essex wrote and administrative structures, the nature of how: 'Civil war exhausts the exchequer, or military forces, logistics and finance being brings the treasures or riches of the land into a prime examples. Other themes - less distinct, hectic fever, being like a vessel2 tapt at both ends, perhaps, than overtly military matters - such which quickly runs out'. During civil wars as economic factors, allegiance, and political civilians are unavoidably drawn into localised and religious motivations may, moreover, be fighting, and what dispassionate reporting of addressed in the wider substance of war late twentieth century and early twenty-first effort. century warfare has termed 'collateral damage' - civilian casualties and damage to property - This paper stems from the writer's research is inflicted on home soil instead of foreign concerned primarily with the practical means

Context 31 Issue 1 October 2014

of sustaining war effort in the English Civil enlarged field army that took on Parliament's War by taking the example of the English forces in the first pitched battle of the Civil county of Shropshire. Between 1642 and Wars, fought at Edgehill in Warwickshire on 1646, and again in 1648, Shropshire was 23 October. Thereafter Shropshire may be contested between Royalists and considered as a Royalist county, and it was Parliamentarians. It will, however, take as its not until a year after King Charles's arrival timeline the First, or Great, Civil War, that in September 1643 the Parliamentarians fought from 1642 to 1646 between the forces were able to establish a garrison there by of King Charles I and his Parliamentarian fortifying the small market town of Wem in opponents. the north of the shire. From then on the progress of the First Civil War in Shropshire It should be borne in mind that at the entailed much skirmishing, often undertaken outbreak of civil war across England and to secure the resources of war effort, the Wales both sides, especially at the county establishment of many garrisons and level, had to develop a war effort very much meanwhile several minor battles were fought. from scratch. There was no standing army The military situation in Shropshire often and the permanent garrisons of the kingdom reflected the ebb and flow of the wider war, were small and few in number. But in each until, in accord with the military collapse of county there was kept a reserve arsenal of Charles I's cause across England, the last arms and munitions; and so in many shires, Royalist garrison in Shropshire,6 Ludlow including Shropshire, much of the jockeying Castle, capitulated on 1 June 1646. for local advantage that occurred during the summer of 1642 revolved around efforts to The longevity of the armed confrontation in secure the county magazine and to gain the the county alone makes Shropshire a suitable allegiance and control of the militia. paradigm for the comparative study of war effort in the Civil Wars. There is, In the preface to his book The Great Civil furthermore, additional interest in the stance War in Shropshire, 1642-1649, published in of both sides. The Royalists, with an at least 1926, Farrow stated that ‘Shropshire ostensible hold over most of the county for epitomised in a peculiar way the struggle of the much of the war, drew heavily on local whole English nation. Within the borders of this resources. The Parliamentarians, meanwhile, one county – better perhaps than anywhere else –4 very much as an invading force remained can be seen the great civil war in miniature’. largely dependent on external financial and Farrow was right to suggest that the military support even once they had gained a progression of the First Civil War in foothold in Shropshire. These differing Shropshire was eventful and deserving of approaches, by means of initiatives fuller study. As far as is known, the first undertaken locally and much further afield, vocal, and probably bloodless, encounter therefore provide much fertile ground for an between the local activists of King Charles examination of war effort. In itself the Civil and his Parliamentarian opponents in War in Shropshire is sufficiently complete to Shropshire occurred in early August 1642 at be considered as a separate subject, but one in Shrewsbury, the county town. Accordingly, which wider themes common to the war in reporting this confrontation from across the England are present. The war in Shropshire Welsh border a well-informed correspondent also had a wider bearing on the conflict in wrote on 6 August that 'they are all5 there Wales and its English borderlands, or divided and ... violently bent for war'. Over Marches, and on the fighting in the English the following six weeks the King's supporters Midlands. gained the upper hand in Shropshire, and on 20 September King Charles with a small The writer's research has addressed war effort army entered Shrewsbury. Charles remained in Shropshire in the round in developing a in Shropshire until in mid-October he thesis that will eventually examine the armed marched from the county leading the much forces, military finance, supply, logistics and

Context 32 Issue 1 October 2014

operational aspects. However, this paper financial oversight, appear to have been continues by concentrating on key tasks of delegated to sub-commissions. For example, war effort - the establishment of structures of in early May 1644 a three-man commission leadership, of command and of was appointed to superintend the collection9 administration. of excise duty in Shropshire as a military tax. Meanwhile, separate quorums may have Royalists and Parliamentarians developed overseen the war effort in designated areas of dual layers of control. Groupings of trusted the shire. local activists, drawn from the gentry and including the occasional peer, organised war effort at county level while often serving also as military commanders. Local leaders were overseen and directed by regional generals and their subordinates, who were often professional soldiers. However, notions of social status, personal feuds and distrust between professional outsiders and local amateurs often led to the disputation of powers and authority. For example, Sir John Mennes, a professional Royalist officer based in Shropshire since spring 1643, on 2 February 1644 wrote scathingly of his colleagues in-war, the Royalist commissioners drawn from the ranks of the county gentry:

'But for my part I can do his Majesty no service at all being made useless by these insulting people who now tell us their power and that three of the Arthur Capel, 1st Baron Capel: Portrait by Henry Peart the commissioners of array may question the Elder after unknown artist (circa 1645) © National Portrait Gallery, London best of us, from7 which power good Lord deliver me'. The Parliamentarian equivalent of the In each county King Charles had appointed commission of array was the county to a commission of array prominent men who committee. The commission of array was an were expected to be loyal and reliable. For unfamiliar and antiquated mechanism Charles's medieval forebears the commission reintroduced in the abnormal circumstances of array had been a body periodically called of summer 1642. Parliamentarian county together for the purpose of raising men from committees acted under the authority of a the shires for war. The Royalist similarly novel expedient, an ordinance of commissioners for Shropshire appointed in parliament10 - a statute enacted without royal June and July 1642 had similar ascent. At first the county committee for responsibilities, to secure the militia and the Shropshire consisted only of three of the county magazine,8 and to encourage county's four Parliamentarian MPs. The recruitment. Although the membership of number of leading Parliamentarian activists the 30 or so man commission of array was grew, however, and on 10 April 1643 an changeable, it remained the executive arm of ordinance was passed that formally instituted11 the Royalist war effort in Shropshire an expanded 20-man committee. The throughout the First Civil War. Details of its county committee was the supervisory body organisation remain shadowy, but certain for a further six committees appointed for aspects of the war effort, such as taxation and Shropshire affairs, all concerned with military

Context 33 Issue 1 October 2014

finance, and the eventual number of active defence, but in spring 1643 King Charles committeemen was around 40. However, formalised several regional commands across after mid-1644 the Parliamentarian war England and Wales placed under the effort in Shropshire was effectively directed command of trusted peers of the realm of by a cabal of eight of the most active varying military experience and ability. committeemen who spent most time on the Shropshire was grouped with Cheshire, frontline, and who by then, or in the coming Worcestershire and the six counties of north months, held military rank. The powers of Wales (the historic shires of Anglesey, the Royalist commission of array also appear Caernarvonshire, Flintshire, Denbighshire, to have progressively devolved to a smaller Montgomeryshire and Merionethshire) under number of active men, but it is noticeable the lieutenant-generalship of Arthur, Lord that while the commissioners and Capel, a Hertfordshire peer appointed on 4 committeemen certainly varied in their April 1643 as deputy to Charles Prince of effectiveness and commitment, in Shropshire Wales, who was the titular captain-general of there is very little evidence of defection and the Principality12 and the English counties of side shifting. the Marches. Capel was the first in a series of senior Royalist officers to exercise regional command over Shropshire: John, Lord Byron, who replaced Capel in December 1643; Prince Rupert during 1644, with Byron acting as his deputy; Prince Maurice, Rupert's younger brother in early 1645; and, as the Royalist cause militarily began to fall apart, during the winter 1645-6 the veteran Royalist general Jacob, Lord Astley. For all of them combining field command with administrative oversight was an over- demanding task. Prince Rupert, for example, with characteristic drive and energy reinvigorated the Royalist war effort in Shropshire during spring 1644, but he was often away on campaign elsewhere and spent just eight weeks in the county before

withdrawing13 from the region the following August.

Sir Thomas Myddelton (1586-1666) (Source: National Trust images) After a series of stillborn initiatives to place Shropshire and the other more or less Over and above the county commissions and Royalist-held counties of the region under committees, King and Parliament both some sort of nominal overall command, on attempted to direct the wider war effort by 10 April 1643 Parliament associated organising adjacent counties into regional Shropshire and its county committee with14 commands, known particularly to the those of Staffordshire and Warwickshire. Parliamentarians as associations. Grouping The following June this West Midland counties together in collaboration and mutual Association (to which Royalist-held defence was intended to facilitate effective Worcestershire was added) was placed under military action and allow the pooling of the command of a young Warwickshire peer, warlike resources. Basil Feilding, 2nd Earl of Denbigh. From By early September 1642 the Shropshire the start Denbigh's was a troubled command, Royalists were already attempting to associate for some fellow Parliamentarians were highly themselves with their counterparts in suspicious of his family's Royalist adjacent Welsh shires for mutual civil connections. Furthermore, he became

Context 34 Issue 1 October 2014

embroiled in a vitriolic feud with the county committeemen. Meanwhile, Myddelton and committee of Warwickshire, the most well the county committee for Shropshire also organised political and military15 body in the collaborated with Sir William Brereton, the West Midland Association. The feud commander in chief of Parliamentarian forces served to stymie the Association's in Cheshire. For Brereton's operations in effectiveness, and it was not until May 1644 Cheshire, Shropshire could be either a that Denbigh led an army into the field with vulnerable southern flank or a supportive the objective of relieving the Shropshire southern front. Accordingly, when in early Parliamentarians beleaguered at Wem, at that February 1643 Brereton found his forces in time their sole stronghold in the county. Cheshire threatened by local Royalists and Denbigh conducted a brief but locally useful those in adjacent counties, he had lobbied campaign in Shropshire in latter June and Parliament to hasten the Shropshire early July 1644, whereafter he absented Parliamentarians and Sir Thomas Myddelton himself from his Association and returned to to raise forces and advance into the region

London. He never commanded in the field where, Brereton anticipated,18 enthusiastic again, and months before had lost the recruits would be found. As the war confidence of most of the leading Shropshire progressed Brereton repeatedly supported the Parliamentarians. On 27 March 1644, for Shropshire forces with timely reinforcements example, Humphrey Mackworth - one of the and by the secondment of experienced prominent Shropshire committeemen - in a officers, and after the Earl of Denbigh's letter that verged on outright insubordination departure to some extent assumed the role of had written to the Earl presenting the de facto regional commander in chief. 'bleeding condition of Shropshire', and However, although the Shropshire demanding furthermore 'that your Lordship committeemen relied on Brereton's would plainly declare what you intend to do, reinforcements in order to undertake one of whether you will go on to their [the Wem the key military operations of the county war, garrison's] relief or not'. Without such an the surprise capture of Royalist Shrewsbury assurance Mackworth threatened to advise on 22 February 1645, they determinedly his colleagues to abandon Wem16 and maintained their independence once withdraw from Shropshire altogether. established in the county town as their new headquarters. The Shropshire Parliamentarians had, however, since-mid 1643 benefitted from the Notwithstanding the centrality of the support of Sir Thomas Myddelton, who that commissions of array and the county 12 June was appointed Parliament's titular committees, and the important role of major general of the six 17 Royalist-held regional commanders and associations, in counties of north Wales. Regaining practice the organisation of war effort at Shropshire for Parliament was in county level during the First English Civil Myddelton's vested interest, as the county War was very much dependant on the could provide him with a base to springboard mobilisation of the pre-existing offices of civil a campaign into Wales. Accordingly, administration. Myddelton's resources helped the Shropshire Parliamentarians to implant themselves at Local government in Shropshire before the Wem in September 1643. Thereafter Civil War followed the general pattern found

Myddelton proved to be a reliable ally, and elsewhere19 in the shires of early Stuart when he eventually gained a permanent England. The will of central government, footing in mid Wales in September 1644 the that of the King and his executive Privy Shropshire committeemen felt the loss of his Council, and also the administration of local auxiliary troops. Their military collaboration affairs was exercised by a hierarchical body of was advanced by Myddelton's friendship with mostly part-time and unsalaried officials: the his brother in law Colonel Thomas Mytton, lord lieutenant and his deputies; the high the leading soldier among the Shropshire sheriff; the justices of peace; the office-

Context 35 Issue 1 October 2014

bearers of the corporate towns; the high headboroughs, tithing men (the latter constables of the county hundreds; and the two being titles synonymous as petty numerous parochial officers - the petty constables or their deputies), post masters, constables, churchwardens, the overseers of all other of his majesty’s officers22 ... but the poor and the overseers of the highways. more especially to the constables'. In organising war effort at county level it was to be expected that both sides would seek to Petty constables, who were typically artisans, appropriate and adapt the machinery of local yeomen and better-off husbandmen, government, which in many respects was voluntarily served an elective part-time already geared to taxation and procuring annual tenure in their home parish. military resources. The use of familiar Combining the often-conflicting roles of administrative structures gave the abnormal King's officer and village headman, petty demands of wartime a veneer of legitimacy. It constables had many responsibilities. They also made good sense to engage local officials were charged with upholding law and order (many of whom in any case would have in their district, and administrative tasks such actively supported one side or the other) as ensuring that the local soldiers of the versed in the awkward business of making county militia, or trained bands, attended their communities fulfil financial or material musters and were properly paid and impositions. Several of the most active equipped. Petty constables assessed and Shropshire Royalists, for example, acted in collected most local rates and central taxes. their capacity as deputy lieutenants and Given their wide-ranging remit in peacetime, justices of peace, as well as commissioners of the constables' wartime duties made them array. especially active. During 1644 and 1645 the two petty constables of Stockton, for The responsibilities and duties of the example, performed many assignments for parochial officers had increased considerably the Royalist garrison town of Bridgnorth, five during the years 1629 to 1640, the period of miles south of their parish. Among other

King Charles20 I's personal rule without tasks, they assessed and collected military Parliament. From summer 1642 local taxes, procured local conscripts, and gathered officials found that their workload provisions and provender. Later in 1645 intensified, as the activists for King and Stockton's constables also executed warrants

Parliament sought to engage their services in from the nearby Parliamentarian garr23ison civil war. across the River Severn at Benthall Hall.

Higher civil and military officers usually Many tasks befell to the petty constables, but sought to act with the authority of warrants other local officials were also drawn into the demanding material support for the war war effort. From 1642 to 1644 the effort. In early October 1643, for example, churchwardens of the Shrewsbury parish of the Parliamentarians served warrants from the Holy Cross and St. Giles continued, as their base at Wem ordering petty constables they had before the Civil War, to levy the in northern parts of Shropshire 21 to bring in funds to maintain the parish's two trained horses, arms and provisions. Royalist band soldiers who were then in Royalist soldiers may have had more justification in service. After Shrewsbury fell to the enlisting the support of civilian officials who Parliamentarians, from 1645 the after all held their office in the King's name. churchwardens were in turn engaged in

Accordingly, a Royalist transport officer assessing and24 collecting Parliamentary posted to Shropshire in February 1644 military taxes. Ludlow was the main town carried Prince Rupert's warrant, authorising of south Shropshire and became an important him to enlist the support of: Royalist garrison. There the two bailiffs, as the highest-standing aldermen, acted as the 'all mayors, sheriffs, justices of peace, chief assessors of Royalist taxation whilst bailiffs, high constables, constables, deputising collection to two under-officers,

Context 36 Issue 1 October 2014

the chamberlains25 and high constables of the They accrued substantial arrears, but made town. Meanwhile at Bridgnorth, another sufficient timely payments of cash and Royalist garrison town, the 24 aldermen of provisions to avert Devillier's threats of the town council met periodically throughout punitive action. The perceived indolence of the First Civil War. Under the oversight of the constables of Stockton, a hamlet near to the military governor and his higher Leigh Hall, caused the local high constable to committee, the aldermen addressed matters write to them in exasperation on 23 January 1645 that if they did not settle their account relating to26 the garrison and to the defence of the town. and bring in arrears, he would 'burn all the29 books and make you pay all anew'. Being a local executor of the demands of war Nonetheless, Devillier's account with effort can never have been straightforward for Stockton ran substantial cash arrears into either activists or neutralists. Their often- March at least. onerous duties imposed an intolerable burden on some officials. The troubles of John The patterns and motivations of local Acton, a glover by trade and in 1644 one of allegiance during the English Civil War are the petty constables of Ludlow, illustrate the now difficult to discern, but from the point. Acton was repeatedly committed to example of Shropshire clearly many the provost martial's cell for failing to fulfil communities and individuals often followed adequately the governor's warrants. On one paths of least resistance in order to placate occasion he was arrested and forced out of his both sides. Local office holders were prepared shop by musketeers, 'to my great disgrace in the to trim with the wind for their own or their middle of the market', as Acton indignantly neighbours' benefit, and in so doing perform related. Another time the governor 27 angrily a satisfactory role for either King or struck him and threw a stone at him. Civil Parliament. This appears to have been the officials could be called upon to enforce the case in the hinterland of Shrewsbury into collection of military taxes, a duty they were 1646, when of 27 petty constables serving often ill prepared for and reluctant to do for under the Parliamentarian regime, a fear of retribution. They could, for example, substantial 40 per cent had previously acted be called upon to exercise powers of distraint, for the Royalists30 as parish officers or local tax to seize chattels in lieu of tax arrears from officials. John Lawrence of Bridgnorth was members of their community. Richard Baxter one individual who capably assisted both was a Parliamentarian supporting minister sides. As the Beadle, or general factotum to who left Shropshire before the war, but the town council, Lawrence executed during 1644 his father who remained there numerous warrants for the Royalist was made a Royalist tax collector. According authorities until the town fell to the to Baxter, his father 'justly performed' his role Parliamentarians in April 1646. He remained but fearing retribution, 'he would not forcibly in office into 1647 when, under the direction distrain of them that refused to pay, as not of the Parliamentarian county committee, he organised workmen to demolish the former knowing but28 they might hereafter recover it all from him'. Royalist31 stronghold of Bridgnorth Castle. During the English Civil Wars However, local officials, whether or not they conflicting notions of loyalty, allegiance, and their communities actively supported one obligation and social status often be-devilled side or the other, or instead sought to relations between civilian, para-military or maintain neutrality, developed strategies of military office holders. To prosecute the war tacit cooperation. For example, the constables effort innovative and unwelcome new in west Shropshire who collected taxes in administrative bodies were imposed that cash and kind for the Royalist Colonel subsumed the familiar mechanisms and Devillier's garrisons at Leigh Hall and Caus powers of traditional governance. However, Castle in 1644 and into 1645 appear to have throughout history the echoes of disharmony followed a calculated policy of hindrance. have often left the loudest resonance.

Context 37 Issue 1 October 2014

Historians may be attracted to evidence of discord, but in Civil War Shropshire now 15 unknown acts of compromise, pragmatism or For much on Denbigh's West Midland Association belief in a shared cause enabled both and his quarrel with the Warwickshire committeemen, see Hughes, A. (1987). Politics, Society and Civil War in Cavaliers and Roundheads to create Warwickshire, 1620-1660. Cambridge: Cambridge imperfect but reasonably workable wartime University Press 16 administrations. Warwickshire County Record Office, C2017/C9, f. 72, Earl of Denbigh's letter book. 17 Notes Journal of the House of Lords, Vol. VI (Apr.-Sept. 1643), 90-2. 18 Historical Manuscripts Commission 13th Report,

1 Appendix Part I (London: HMSO, 1891), 94-6 Carlton, C. (2011). This Seat of Mars: War and the 19 For local governance in early seventeenth-century British Isles 1685-1746. New Haven and London: Yale England, see: Fletcher, A. (1986). Reform in the University Press, 150-1 2 Provinces, The Government of Stuart England. New Ward, R. (1642). The Anatomy of Warre, Or Warre Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1986; with the woefull, fruits, and effects thereof, laid out to the Lockyer, R. (1999). The Early Stuarts – A Political life. London, 9 3 History of England, 1603-1642. Harlow: Addison Porter, S. (1994). Destruction In The Civil Wars. Wesley Longman, 1999; and Hill, L. M. (1973). Stroud: Alan Sutton 4 County Government in Caroline England, 1625-1640. Farrow, W. J. (1926). The Great Civil War in In Russell, C. (Ed.), The origins of the English Civil War Shropshire, 1642-1649. Shrewsbury: Wilding & Sons, (66-90). London: Macmillan 20 unfoliated preface 5 For the duties and social status of parish officers at Flintshire Record Office, D/G/3275, f. 84, letter to this time, see Langelüddecke, H. (2007). ‘The pooreste Sir John Trevor from his factor, Samuel Wood 6 and sympleste sorte of people’? The selection of parish For the general history of the Civil War in officers during the personal rule of Charles I. Historical Shropshire, as well as Farrow's Great Civil War, see also Research, 80, 225-60. 21 Bracher, T, & Emmett, R. (2000). Shropshire in the An example of the Parliamentarian warrant was Civil War. Shrewsbury: Shropshire Books, and Barratt, reproduced on 650-1 of the Royalist journal Mercurius J. (2013). Cavalier Stronghold: Ludlow in the English Aulicus for w/e 19 Nov. 1643. Although published with Civil Wars, 1642-1660. Almeley: Logaston Press 7 propagandist intent, there seems little reason to doubt British Library, Additional Ms. 18981, f. 25. the transcript's accuracy. 8 22 Northamptonshire County Record Office, Finch Shropshire Archives (hereafter SA), LB7/2249, Hatton Ms. 133, unfoliated, lists of commissions of Ludlow borough militia records. 23 array appointed across England and Wales 9 SA, P270/B/1/1, ff. 55-8, Stockton parish Bodleian Library, Dugdale Ms. 19, 2nd part, ff. 49, constables' accounts. 24 59 SA, P250/325-8, churchwardens' accounts. 10 25 For a useful appraisal of the commissions of array SA, LB7/1932, warrant to levy taxes. 26 and county committees, set against the background of SA, BB/C/1/1/1, unfoliated, Bridgnorth corporation events in the English East Midlands, see M. Bennett, common hall order book, 1634-1685. 27 ‘Between Scylla and Charybdis, The Creation of Rival SA, LB7/2108, Acton's petition of grievances, dated Administrations at the beginning of The English Civil 20 Jan. 1645. War' in P. Gaunt (Ed.). (2000). The English Civil War: 28 Baxter, R. (1696). Reliquiae Baxterianae: Or Mr. The Essential Readings. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, Richard Baxter's Narrative of The Most Memorable 167-83 11 Passages of His Life and Times. London, 40. Firth, C. H, & Rait, R. S. (1911). Acts and 29 Herefordshire County Record Office, CF61/20, f. Ordinances of the Interregnum, 1642-1660, (3 vols, 567, the Rev. J. T. Webb's transcripts of Colonel London: HMSO, 1911), Vol. I, 124-7 12 Devillier's papers, 1644/5. Bodleian Library, Dugdale Ms. 19, 1st part, ff. 99- 30 Individuals named in: SA, 3365/1267, ff. 91-148, 100 13 passim, parish constables' presentments, 1645/6; SA, The period of Rupert's stay in Shropshire calculated 3365/589, ff. 1-3 and SA, 3365/2711, f. 23, Royalist from Firth, C. H. (1898). The Journal of Prince financial records. Rupert’s Marches, 5 Sept 1642 – 4 July 1646. The 31 SA, BB/D/1/2/1/57, chamberlain’s account roll, English Historical Review, 13, 735-736 14 1647. Firth and Rait. (1911). Acts and Ordinances, I, 124-7

Context 38 Issue 1 October 2014

‘The sinews of war are infinite money’1 - The Finance of War and the Sequestration of some Shropshire Estates during the Civil Wars and Interregnum by Isobel Jones

My thesis concerns the rule of Shropshire during the Interregnum, a topic that has never been documented in detail before. A vital part of that research is the way in which both the wars were financed by both sides. The sequestration accounts for Shropshire remain generally intact, and sterling work on the composition papers has already been done over a century ago by local antiquarians, who published a series of articles in the Transactions of the Shropshire Archaeological and Natural History Society. I have referred back to their work throughout this piece, and they should receive credit for wading through the minefield of the papers of the Committee of Compounding. My own investigations are at an early stage, so I can only apologise for any errors, which are entirely my own, and for which I hope I can be forgiven.

John Speed's Map of Shropshire (Source: Speed, J. (1616). The Theatre of the Empire of Great Britaine. London: Sudbury & Humble)

Waging war has always been an expensive fact that the cost of the Parliamentary navy business, both in physical and monetary alone was £500,000 per year, whereas the terms; the British Civil Wars were no annual upkeep of each regiment of foot and exception, despite the fact that the ‘enemies’ horse was £15,000 and £30,000 respectively.2 were fellow countrymen. The cost of the Shropshire was a Royalist county for most of conflict has been estimated to be between 5 the war, despite there being pockets of and 10 million pounds at the time, a figure Parliamentarian support within the towns. that would run into billions in today’s The majority of the gentry were loyal to the currency. This is not unsurprising, given the King,3 as evidenced by the declaration made

Context 39 Issue 1 October 2014

the Grand Jury at the Salop Assizes on 7th September 1643 Parliament established the August. 4 In 1643 Parliament gained a Committee of Compounding, which met at foothold in the north of the county with the Goldsmiths Hall in London. Its initial job capture of Wem, the tide only really turned was to secure finance for the Scottish army, in 1645 when Shrewsbury, followed by but began dealing with delinquent’s affairs in Ludlow and Bridgnorth fell to the July 1644. It oversaw the national policy of Parliamentarian army.5 This article does not the confiscation of delinquent’s estates, and concern itself with the dynamics of the war set the fines payable to secure the release of within the county, but considers how the sequestered property. The day-to-day conflict and the aftermath were financed by administration was carried out at a local level, both sides. There will be a general discussion and the Shropshire records are generally about the various taxes and demands imposed intact. Most of them are straightforward, but on the general population of the country by it will be shown that Shropshire, like many both sides, but the real focus of this article is other counties, had its difficulties, not only the local measures that were put in place, with the personnel that were employed, but particularly the sequestration of enemy with the administration of sequestered estates. Sequestration was one of the most estates; begging the question as to whether lucrative means of finance, certainly so far as their actions were purely for financial reasons, Parliament was concerned. It was a measure or was there an element of retribution and /or used by both sides to seize the properties of collusion behind some of their seizures. those deemed to be delinquents, which was usually those seen to be aiding or abetting the At the beginning of the war both sides opposition, but could also include those who initially relied on donations to their respective remained neutral, and in Parliament’s case cause; Shropshire being a Royalist county was also included Catholics. 6 In Shropshire there expected to donate large sums of money to the Crown, some such as Sir Richard Newport did contribute. He donated £6,000 plus other goods, and in return received a knighthood,7 but other donations were not so voluntary. Humphrey Walcott, a very wealthy man who came from a London family of merchant adventurers, was seized by Royalist troops, despite his loyalty to the Crown, and was detained at Ludlow until he ransomed himself out. Charles issued a warrant on 23 September ‘inviting’ Walcott to give a donation of £5,000 for maintenance and support; there is no obvious proof of payment, possibly due to the intervention of his kinsman Lord George Digby, but Walcott handed over both his warhorse and pistols to Prince Rupert.8 When it became apparent that the conflict was not just a flash in the pan, more formalised measures were Prince Rupert of the Rhine required. After Edgehill, it was agreed (Source: Ashdown House, The Craven Collection (acquired between the King and his supporters that a by H.M. Treasury and transferred to The National Trust in 9 1968) , ©NTPL/John Gibbons) county wide voluntary tax be imposed. He visited Shropshire shortly after the battle and, is little surviving evidence of any Royalist in a speech made to the assembled gathering financial measures, so there will be some at Shrewsbury, he urged ‘doe not suffer so good supposition as to the Commission of Array’s a cause to bee lost,’ for want of donations to his ability to boost the Crown’s coffers. In cause as he ‘must onley live on the ayde and

Context 40 Issue 1 October 2014

reliefe of my people’.10 He also supplemented assessment based on the value of this income by the sale of peerages, but also landholdings, put in place to replace the free negotiated with the local Catholics for an quarter provision. There is little remaining advance payment of their Recusancy fines, evidence of it, but Richard Oakley17 in the bringing in an estimated £4,000- £5,000.11 Purslow Hundred was targeted, 18 as was There were numerous Catholic families in Francis Newport’s estate at High Ercall, 19 the county, most of whom were open about both of whom referred to the tax imposed their faith. They naturally gravitated towards upon them during their representations to the the King’s cause, and Sir Basil Brooke of local Committee for Compounding. There is Madeley Court became Queen Henrietta’s no evidence available that any Royalist treasurer. 12 There were other means of sequestrations took place in Shropshire, save financing the war, for example excise duties for one vague comment made in 1650 by the were imposed by both sides on various goods, local Committee that they have ‘lost our and from 1643/44 an income tax was also estates’. 20 Shropshire was one of the few imposed on all but the very poor. This last counties that had the same Commissioners of tax was dubbed the Contribution by Royalists Array administering the county throughout and the Assessment by Parliament. It was a the war; in other counties there was a change lucrative tax, and collected at a local level in the machinery after March 1643, the new extremely effectively, bringing in around Commissioners were established as £35,000 per week for Parliament who had set committees to guard the county, which in their rate at between 10 and 12%.13 effect meant tightening control over the financial aspects of the war in their particular The Royalist’s initial plan for the defence of area. Certainly sequestrations took place in the county was to utilise the horsepower of neighbouring Herefordshire where the rents the local gentry; this met with a lacklustre of the Harley family estate at Brampton response, and so it was agreed that 33 of the Bryan were distrained, bringing in £2,250 in King’s local supporters plus a county wide 1643.21 Several people were marked out as levy would bring in sufficient funds to finance delinquents by the Commissioners of Array 1,000 dragoons. In fact the only donations in Shrewsbury including Humphrey came from the gentry themselves, and then Mackworth, Thomas Hunt and Thomas only enough money was raised to finance 298 Nicolls,22 who were proclaimed as traitors and men. The rest of the county’s populace seditionists by Charles I at Bridgnorth on ignored any demands for either voluntary 14th October 1642.23 Neither Mackworth nor contributions or direct taxation. Local Nicolls appears to have been in the area at the communities raised funds to secure their own time; Mackworth had gone to Coventry, 24 townships.14 It was not until the beginning Nicolls was Sheriff of Montgomeryshire, 25 of 1644, when Prince Rupert took overall but Hunt remained in the area fighting for charge of the Marches, that the issue of Parliament, replacing Francis Newport as funding became more focused, albeit MP for Shrewsbury in 1645, and eventually enforced in Rupert’s usual less that tactful becoming Governor of the town.26 None of manner. He demanded a payment of £9,000 the named delinquents seem to have had from the county, and when realising that their properties formally sequestered, the Church Stretton was behind with its furthest the Royalists seem to have gone was payments, he ordered Thomas Edwards, a to ransack Nicolls’ property at Boycott near local man and Sheriff of Shropshire, to Pontesbury where they ‘burned his writings, collect £500 within 24 hours; when that did spoiled his house, sold his furnace and the iron of not occur he sent 100 of his musketeers to his carts’, but that was at least a week before plunder Edwards’ house, even though he was Charles’ proclamation.27 loyal to the Crown.15 One of the ways in which he gathered in more money for the cause was by way of what Wanklyn calls ‘Prince Rupert’s tax’ 16 ,which was an

Context 41 Issue 1 October 2014

Parliament began to pass financial ordinances 1643; 40 the latter allowing for the commencing in June 1642, 28 asking loyal sequestration of the estates of Catholics, 41 citizens to contribute money, plate and horses who had to compound at the rate of 2/3 of on the basis that they would eventually be their personal and real estate. An allowance repaid with interest. The need for a faster of 1/5 was to be granted for the maintenance and regulated source of income resulted in a of wives and children, and after that the further ordinance being passed in November, goods were to be assessed for value and sold ordering former non-contributors to forfeit off. There was also a reward granted to up to 1/20th of their estate.29 In February of informants, who were given 12d for every 20s the following year Shropshire was ordered to made. The local Committee liaised directly pay £375 per week under a new assessment, with the Committee for Compounding based which was imposed to finance the army. 30 at Goldsmith’s Hall. In August 1645 exact No one was exempt from the assessment, rules for compounding were established. The with foreigners and Catholics having to pay estate was valued and calculations made on a double the amount. It was collected at a local figure representing 2 years of the estate’s pre level,31 and then passed on to the Treasurer at – war worth. Once the figure was agreed, the the Guildhall. More financial measures were compounder was granted a certificate of value imposed in May 1643 to increase the amount by the local Committee, and took it to of money in the Treasury coffers; 32 this London; he could only recover his estate once involved the provision that anyone with an the sum ordered by them had been paid. In income of over £10 per year, or an estate general the figure to be paid was 1/10th of the worth more than £100, had to pay 1/5th of estate value, although there were many their annual income to their local committee. exceptions, and as time went on the figures There was no formal Parliamentary did vary according to the date of surrender committee in the county until 10 April and the extent of delinquency. If the fine was 1643,33 so the county’s ability to raise funds not paid the estate was forfeited. The local was severely affected during the early stages Committees were urged to secure payments of the war. It was not until June 1644 that an quickly, particularly as in general the monies ordinance finally formalised the raising of raised went to the local community. Fines monies by establishing a Committee of Safety were imposed upon Committees who did not for Shropshire,34 which was given powers to act with due diligence. enforce all previous enactments both financial and otherwise. Shropshire was fairly successful in gathering in the compounding fines, and in total The local Sequestration Committee was around £56,000 was raised. 42 The established as part of the Committee of sequestration process was however fraught Safety, so that ‘the personall estates of all with difficulties, as there were arguments Papists and Delinquents of that Countie; as have over valuation figures, 43 petitions from been, are, or shall be active in this unnaturall claimants on the estate, restriction of the Warre against the Parliament, shall be seized, powers of the Committee, and poor or sequestred, and secured for the present service of negligent record keeping. 44 This was that Countie’. 35 Its members were, on the common amongst all local committees; in whole, local men apart from Sir William Shropshire one of the officials Edmond Brereton, Sir Thomas Myddleton, and W Kendrick, who was dismissed for theft and Berkeley, who was described as an Alderman fraud, was ‘very unfit for the employment, not of London;36 both Brereton37 and Myddleton being able to write or read’. 45 A further (who was related through marriage to the problem was the advent of the plague in Mytton family) had fought in the county Shrewsbury in 1650, which prevented the during the war.38 The formal ordinances that Commissioners accessing the books. In real allowed for such confiscations and seizures terms it was a difficult task administering throughout the country were already in place, such a rural county on a shoestring budget, having been passed in March39 and August for as the local Committee told their

Context 42 Issue 1 October 2014

superiors in London ‘the charge in carrying on Initially a group of local men, Henry of the work will be very great, as we shall be Bowdler, Thomas Scott, and John Pallett forced to sit at several places in the county a week took over the lands and iron works offering at a time, to examine witnesses, so as to prove the other tenants reduced rents. There were value of estates not compounded for, and to allegations of mismanagement and theft, but employ many officers at our own charge’. 46 the local Committee came under fire from Along with most other counties, the London when they gave the tenancy to Shropshire Committee experienced Edward Cludd of Orleton, a relative of infighting, nepotism, fraud and possible Brooke’s who was suspected of Catholic mismanagement. William Crowne, tendencies and harbouring Royalists. The Humphrey Mackworth’s brother in law, was men of Madeley objected to him as a tenant, appointed as an official after Mackworth particularly as they had been offering to pay a specifically asked Colonel Godfrey Bosville, higher rent than Cludd. Eight local men M.P. for the placement.47 He was dismissed from a variety of minor backgrounds in 1654 after ‘great neglect in the management petitioned the Committee for Compounding of sequestration affairs in county Salop’. 48 in London, who had sympathy with them. Joseph Prowde, his replacement, had The London Committee ordered Shropshire substantial difficulties in obtaining the not to renew Cludd’s lease, if the Madeley necessary paperwork from Crowne, and locals could come up with some sort of informed the London Committee that ‘the late agents have long since received the Lady day rents and arrears, and there is much money in several men's hands, received and not accounted for’. 49 Crowne duly received a threatening missive from the London Committee,50 but even then took another 2 months to deliver the paperwork.51 Edmond Kendrick was not only illiterate, but dishonest as it was alleged that ‘he has detained some rents, under pretence of his fees, and …. also omitted to secure the tithes for augmentations from those ministers who refused to take the oath’.52 He was also found guilty in his absence of ‘seizure of Sir or Col. John Corbett's estate, driving away the cattle, taking part of the stock, and omitting in his account tithes worth 40l. a year’.53 Another official Richard Higgins was alleged to have gone to London with £500 compounding Sir Basil Brooke of Madeley (Source: money he had collected, the implication shropshirehistory.com) being that the journey was not to 54 security. The Shropshire Committee Goldsmith’s Hall. There were also some preferred Cludd, a 'gentleman of worth and complaints of mismanagement by quality', who was also able to provide a compounders and other petitioners. Perhaps £10,000 bond to secure the lease for 7 years; the prime example of that concerned the 55 they accused Bowdler of carrying a personal estate of Sir Basil Brooke at Madeley . vendetta against Cludd, but London ordered them to give the petitioners preference at the Brooke had been imprisoned in the Tower on expiry of the lease, particularly as they were suspicion of treason, 56 and, as a Papist in 57 offering £800 per year rent as opposed to arms, his estate was permanently seized. Cludd’s £500. No security could be found, On 31 Dec 1646 Sir Basil died leaving the however, and the lease was granted to Cludd estate to his son Thomas also a Catholic, so at a rent of £750. 58 Cludd died in September the estate remained under sequestration. 1651, and the year after Thomas Brooke

Context 43 Issue 1 October 2014

forfeited the estate for treason,59where after it and that the actions thereafter taken by was purchased by John Wildman.60 There is Parliament were unlawful. 66 Yet it wasn’t no real evidence to prove dishonesty within until March 1660 that the trustees of his the Shropshire Committee, as to their estates were ordered to stop any sales,67 and preference of tenants. It has been said that his expectation for the immediate return of Cludd was a better landlord, investing heavily his lands upon the coronation of Charles II in the estate, and leaving the iron works more were dashed. At the Restoration he expected profitable than it ever had been under the sales to be declared void, but Charles II Brooke.61 It could have been a question of did not want further disharmony, so it social standing, Cludd being a gentleman transpired that anyone who had not already whereas the Madeley petitioner’s occupations repurchased their forfeited land would either ranged from master collier to labourer. On have to apply to the Lords for a private bill, the face of it, however, the decision does have or engage in court proceedings. 68 Craven to be questionable, as from looking purely at petitioned the Lords, and they initially the figures the tenancy of the Madeley men ordered a ‘Stop and Stay of demolishing or was a better source of income for the county. defacing of, or committing Waste’ on his properties.69 They later agreed that he had Monies coming from Brooke’s estates were not had a fair hearing, and that a decision used to fund the navy under the provisions of had been made by Parliament without any a 1652 ordinance.62 Also caught up in that real proof; this ruling voided any previous legislation was the non-Catholic William, sales, and restored both his real and personal Lord Craven. He took no active part in the estate, along with any rents or profits due.70 Civil War but was close to Elizabeth of Bohemia (the elder sister of the King) and Some compounders argued until the bitter her family, and was a Royalist sympathiser. end over what was owed and generally He was informed upon by a Major Falconer avoided recompensing the Committee for who gave evidence to the Council of State Compounding. Sir Richard Newport and his that Craven had liaised with, and offered his son Francis were prime examples. Sir services to, Charles II at Breda; the Richard was one of the Commissioners of Committee of Compounding heard evidence Array for the county, who had given vast (although not supporting that given by amounts of money to the Royalist cause, and Falconer, who was later tried for perjury) allowed his house at High Ercall to be from other witnesses, 63 and as a result the garrisoned for the Crown. Towards the end local Committee was ordered to seize his of the war he had escaped to France and so it estate, and it was decided to sell it off to fund was his eldest son Francis and wife Rachel the navy. 64 Craven petitioned Parliament who compounded on his behalf.71 Francis constantly for the return of his lands without had been MP for Shrewsbury, until he was any success; in 1653 he argued that his estate replaced by Thomas Hunt, and had fought was only put up for sale on the third for the Crown, being captain of a troop of presentment before Parliament, and only horse, until he was captured at Oswestry. He then by a narrow margin of 3 votes. The was deemed to be a dangerous and active members who had swung the vote towards a person, so was imprisoned at Eccleshall sale had then purchased parts of his estate. Castle. Even after the execution of Charles I He was also the beneficiary of his brother he remained entangled in conspiracies to John’s estates, which were also, forfeit due to overthrow Cromwell, and was imprisoned in delinquency, and campaigned at the same both 1645 and 1655/7 on suspicion of being time for the restoration of his inheritance.65 involved in royalist plots.72 On 18th October In 1654 he had published The Lord Craven's 1645 the Newports were referred for Case Briefly Stated, which was a plea to ‘your delinquency, and it was ordered that any fine Majesty’ Cromwell to intervene in his case, raised be put to the use of the county. The reiterating that he had been ‘convicted’ of initial fine ordered on 10 February 1646 was delinquency purely on the word of a perjurer, £16,687.13s.3d (which at today’s rates would

Context 44 Issue 1 October 2014

have been between 1.25 and 1.4 million but presumably small sum of money,78 and pounds). Francis Newport, however, Richard Mason who had simply been Lord petitioned the Committee over the level of Percy’s servant and had resided for a while in the fine, stating that he had deserted the King’s quarters before going to France.79 Parliament and had only gone to the King at Presumably Mason’s master was Henry, Lord Oxford, whilst neglecting to mention his Percy of Alnwick, but that is pure military ventures. He also disputed the supposition on my part. Henry Percy did go valuation of his estates, despite there being to France and joined Queen Henrietta’s evidence to the contrary from his own Bailiffs Court, dying there in 1659. 80 There is no and his servants. He argued that there had evidence of his assets being sequestered by been overestimates on the part of the the Northumberland Committee; this could Committee, particularly on the High Ercall have been because he had left for France in in property; his retainers had heard him put a 1645/6 and never returned, but could have value of £5,000 on the estate, but he claimed had something to do with the fact that his that he had no idea of the true value of the elder brother, the Earl of Northumberland, land; he was simply going off the assessment had been an active Parliamentarian until the previously given by Prince Rupert which was execution of the King, and thereafter a value of £212. 73 He later petitioned for a remained loyal to Parliament despite revision of the fine, and on 22nd March 1647 suspicions otherwise.81 There were also those a reduced sum of £10,000 was accepted. 74 who had taken a more prominent part such as There seems to be no available evidence that Humphrey Walcott and Richard Oakley who this was paid, but the Newports were restored had been assessed and ordered to pay money to their estates, in 1660 Francis was made by both sides. Walcott’s fine was assessed at High Sheriff of Shropshire and later became £500 by the Committee82 and he had already the First Earl of Bradford.75 The Newport suffered the ignominy of being captured by fine was the highest in the county by far, and, his own side. Oakley had also fallen under although it is fair to say that they were big Prince Rupert’s tax, and had to compound in backers of the King, there were others, such the sum of £460. 83 Oakley had been a as Francis Ottley (fined £1,200) and Sir Royalist Commissioner responsible for the Vincent Corbet (fined £1,588) who were just raising of money in the county, and had paid as much involved.76 So was there an element for a dragoon, but he also claimed that the of retribution about the level of the fines King’s troops had ransacked his estate.84 imposed against father and son, or were they true figures given their large landholdings. It is fairly early days in the research of the Coulton in her article about Thomas Hunt Committee of Compounding papers, and the states that there had been bad blood between next task is to try and identify whether or not the former and Francis Newport, even before there was a mass land grab of sequestered the conflict had begun, when Hunt had been estates by both those loyal to Parliament or drilling his trained bands outside the by general profiteers. So far that does not Shrewsbury walls in spite of an agreement seem to have been the case in the county; that no one wear either side’s colours,77 but it generally those who had supported the is doubtful whether this spilled in to the Crown had their estates restored to them sequestration proceedings, and the Newports upon payment of the assessed fines. As to were probably simply seen as a good source of whether all the local Committee’s actions income for the county. were totally above board, from the surviving evidence there is nothing to point to the In general, most compounders paid their contrary, although there were obvious cases fines in time and without argument, even of mismanagement. In general, the members though some had actually done very little to of the Committee seem to have acted to the help the King’s cause. For example Thomas best of their abilities, with the odd exception. Chaloner, a schoolmaster with a wife and 8 They do not seem to have abused their children, had lent the King an unspecified, positions by the mass purchase of forfeited

Context 45 Issue 1 October 2014

estates; but that is not to say they were adverse to feathering their own nests on occasion, and furthering their own family’s Volume XII, 1900, 21-22. See also Green, M.A.E. interests, as has always been the way of the (1890). Calendar of the Committee for Compounding, Part 2, 914-941 and Journal of the House of Commons: volume world. 5: 1646-1648 (1802), 508-510 20 Green, M.A.E. (1889). Calendar of the Committee for Notes Compounding, Part 1, 302-322 21 Hutton, R. (1982), 86-92 22 Phillips, W. (Ed.) (1895). The Ottley Papers 1 Marcus Tullius Cicero, Philippics V. ii. 5 Relating To The Civil War. Transactions Of The 2 nd Gaunt, P. (2003). The English Civil Wars 1642-1651. Shropshire Archaeological And Natural History Society, 2 Oxford: Osprey Publishing Ltd, 66 Series, Volume VII, 251. Other names on the list were 3 Thomas Mytton, Thomas Gardiner, Abraham Clark, Farrow, W.J. (1926). The Great Civil War In John Baker, John Bromley, George Williams, Frank Shropshire 1642-1649. Shrewsbury, 15-23 4 Jones, the daughter (unnamed) of Andrew Studley ibid, 17-18. Also Journal of the House of Commons: deceased, John Prowde, William Rowley, John Loyde, volume 2: 1640-1643 (1802), 737-739. Also Snow, V.F. John Jeffreys, Owen George, John Atcherley, Adam and Young, A.S. (Eds.) (1990). The Private journals of Webb, John Lowe, Thomas Clarke, William Buttrey, the Long Parliament. 2 June to 17 September 1642, Richard Cheshire, John Hopton and John Mackworth. Volume 3. New Haven Mass: Yale University Press, 318 The majority of these were tradesmen, a lot were 5 ibid, 76-78 and 91-95 drapers, but some were of a higher status and Frank 6 Gaunt, P. (2003), 68 Jones was an Alderman in London with property in the 7 area. See also Bracher, T. and Emmett, R. (2000), 21 Hutton, R. (1982). The Royalist War Effort 1642- 23 1646. London: Longman Group, 30 Kenyon, R.L.L. (1894). Committee For The 8 Burton, J.R. (1905). The Sequestration Papers of Sequestration Of The Estates Of Shropshire Delinquents. Transactions Of The Shropshire Humphrey Walcott. Transactions Of The Shropshire Archaeological And Natural History Society, 2nd Series, Archaeological And Natural History Society, 3rd Series, Volume VI, 20-21 Volume V, 314-315. See also Farrow, W.J. (1926), 29 24 9 Farrow, W.J. (1926), 122 Hutton, R. (1982), 36 25 10 Lloyd, W.V. (1893). The Sheriffs of His Majesties Speech at Shrewsbury, on Michaelmas Eve Montgomeryshire. Collections Historical and last, to the Gentry and Commons of the County of Salop, Archaeological Relating To Montgomeryshire and Its there assembled (London, 1642). Also Early English Borders, Volume XXVII. London, 156-159 Books Online: eebo.chadwyck.com. See also, 26 Rushworth, J. (1721). Historical Collections of Private Coulton, B. (1999). Thomas Hunt of Shrewsbury Passages of State: Volume 5: 1642-45, 1-25 and Boreatton. Transactions of the Shropshire 11 Farrow, W.J. (1926), 28 Archaeological and Natural History Society, Volume 12 LXXIV (1999), 33-42 Bracher, T. and Emmett, R. (2000). Shropshire in the 27 Lloyd, W.V. (1893), 157 Civil War. Shropshire: Shropshire Books, 3 28 13 Gaunt, P. (2003), 68. Firth, C.H. and Rait, R.S. (1911). Acts and 14 Hutton, R. (1982), 37 Ordinances of the Interregnum 1642-1660. London: 15 HMSO, 6-9: Ordinance of both Houses, for bringing Farrow, W.J. (1926), 116-117 16 in Plate, Money, and Horses 29 Wanklyn, M. (1976). Landed Society and Allegiance In Firth, C.H. and Rait, R.S. (1911), 38-40: An Cheshire And Shropshire In The First Civil War. Ordinance for the assessing of all such as have not Unpublished thesis, University of Manchester, 251 17 contributed upon the Propositions of both Houses of Fletcher, W.G.D. (1928). The Sequestration Papers Parliament, for the raising of Money, Plate, Horse, of Richard Oakley. Transactions of the Shropshire Horsemen, and Armes, for defence of the King, Archaeological and Natural History Society, 4th Series, Kingdom and Parliament, or have not contributed Volume 11, 193. See also Journal of the House of proportionably to their Estates. 30 Commons: volume 4: 1644-1646 (1802), 645-648, and Firth, C.H. and Rait, R.S. (1911), 85-100: An Green, M.A.E. (1890). Calendar of the Committee for Ordinance for the speedy raising and levying of Money Compounding, Part 2, 1099-1161 18 for the maintenance of the Army Raised by the Wanklyn, M. (1976). Landed Society and Allegiance, Parliament, And other great Affaires of the 291. As well as the Oakley properties, he refers to the Commonwealth, by a Weekly Assessement upon the holdings of Walter Waring, Mrs Blunden, Humphrey Cities of London and Westminster, and every County Walcot and Christopher Clough. and City of the Kingdome of England, and Dominion 19 Phillips, W. (Ed.) (1900). The Sequestration Papers of Wales. 31 of Sir Richard First Baron Newport and Sir Francis In Shropshire those on the committee where: Sir Newport his Son. Transactions Of The Shropshire John Corbet, Knight; William Pierpoint, Richard nd Archaeological And Natural History Society, 2 Series, Mare, Thomas Mytton, Walter Barker, Tho. Nicholls,

Context 46 Issue 1 October 2014

45 Robert Corbet of Stannerden, Humphrey Mackworth, ibid, 263-285 Andrew Floyd of Aston, and Lancelot Lee, Esquires. 46 32 ibid, 302-348 Firth, C.H. and Rait, R.S. (1911), 145-155: An 47 ibid, 179-192 Ordinance for the speedy raising and levying of money 48 ibid, 698-704 thorowout the whole Kingdome of England, and 49 dominion of Wales for the relief of the Common- ibid, 704-707 50 wealth, by taxing such as have not at all contributed or ibid, 711-715 51 lent, or not according to their Estates and Abilities. ibid, 718 33 52 ibid, 124-127: An Ordinance for raising Forces for ibid, 302-322 the defence of the County of Warwick, the Cities and 53 ibid, 323-348 County of Coventry, the County of Stafford, the City 54 and County of Litchfield, and parts adjacent to the said ibid, 263-275 55 Counties O'Riordan, C. (1985). ‘Sequestration and Social 34 ibid, 446-450: The Ordinance for raising of Moneys Upheaval: Madeley, Shropshire and the English Revolution’, West Midlands Studies, Vol 18, 21-31 for the maintenance of such Forces, as are, and shall be 56 raised in the County of Salop, for the service of the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography entry by Parliament. Martyn Bennett. 35 57 ibid, 446-450: The Ordinance for raising of Moneys Gardiner, S.R. (1906). Constitutional Documents of the rd for the maintenance of such Forces, as are, and shall be Puritan Revolution 1625-1660, 3 Edition. Oxford: raised in the County of Salop, for the service of the Clarendon Press, 299 58 Parliament. Green, M.A.E. (1891). Calendar of the Committee for 36 Beaven, A.R. (1913). The Aldermen of the City of Compounding, Part 3, 2204-2236 59 London. Temp Henry II – 1912, Volume II. London: Firth, C.H. and Rait, R.S. (1911), 591-598: An Act Eden Fisher & Company Limited, 66. Berkeley was a for several Lands and Estates forfeited to the master haberdasher who represented the Vintry ward Commonwealth for Treason, appointed to be sold for between 1643 and 1645. He was also a Commissioner the use of the Navy. 60 of customs at that time. There are no obvious links to O'Riordan, C. (1985). Sequestration and Social Shropshire. Upheaval: Madeley, Shropshire and the English 37 Phillips, J.R. (1874). Memoirs Of The Civil War In Revolution. West Midlands Studies, Vol 18, 21-31 61 Wales And The Marches 1642-1649 Volume 1. London: Baugh, G.C. (Ed.) (1985). A History of the County of Longmans, Green & Co., 172-173 Shropshire: Volume 11. Telford, 40-56 38 62 ibid, 162-164, and 172. See also the Oxford Oxford Dictionary of National Biography entry by R. Dictionary of National Biography entry for Thomas Malcolm Smuts Mytton by Stephen K Roberts. 63 39 Journal of the House of Commons, Volume 6, 1648- ibid, 106-117: An Ordinance for sequestring 1651 (1802), 545-546 notorious Delinquents Estates. 64 40 Journal of the House of Commons, Volume 7, 1651- ibid, 254-260: An Ordinance for Explanation of a 1660 (1802), 160-161 65 former Ordinance for Sequestration of Delinquents Green, M.A.E. (1890), 1578-1635 Estates with some Enlargements was put in place. 66 41 The Lord Craven's Case Briefly Stated. London, 1654. Certain provisos were put in place, for example they Also Early English Books Online: eebo.chadwyck.com. had to have been convicted for Recusancy, have 67 harboured Catholic priests or Jesuits since 29th Journal of the House of Commons, Volume 7, 1651- 1660 (1802), 876-879 November 1642, attend Mass from at least the end of 68 March 1642, bringing their children or wards up as Thirsk, J. (1954). The Restoration Land Settlement. Catholics, and being over 21 refusing to take a The Journal Of Modern History, Vol.26, No.4, 315-328 69 proscribed oath denouncing their faith. Journal of the House of Lords, Volume 11, 1660- 42 Farrow, W.J. (1926), 119. See also, Roberts, A. 1666 (1767-1830), 21-23 70 (1881). The Shropshire Compounders. Transactions of ibid, 38-39 and 54-55 71 the Shropshire Archaeological Society 1st series, Volume IV, Phillips, W. (Ed.) (1900). The Sequestration Papers 156-158. See also Acton, F.S. (1867). The Garrisons of of Sir Richard First Baron Newport and Sir Francis Shropshire during the Civil War 1642-1648. Newport his Son. Transactions Of The Shropshire Shrewsbury: Leake and Evans, 19-20 nd 43 Archaeological And Natural History Society , 2 Series, Green, M.A.E. (1890), 1040-1069. One example Volume XII, 1-6 72 was the case of Lawrence Benthall and James Lacon Phillips, W. (Ed.) (1900), 8-13. See also where the compounders complained that not only had Underdown, D. (1960). Royalist Conspiracy In England the local Committee seized their coalmines, but that 1649-1660. New Haven; Yale University Press, 163- they had overvalued them. 44 164 73 Green, M.A.E. (1889), V-XXIV Green, M.A.E. (1890), 914-94. See also Phillips, W.

Context 47 Issue 1 October 2014

79 (Ed.) (1900), 21-25 ibid, 1578-1635 74 80 Journal of the House of Commons, Volume 5, 1646- Brenan, G. (1902). A History of the House of Percy. 1648 (1802), 508-510 London: Freemantle & Co., 282-285, and 289-290 75 81 Oxford Dictionary of National Biography entry by Oxford Dictionary of National Biography: See entry by Victor Slater. George A. Drake. 76 82 Roberts, A. (1881) Green, M.A.E. (1890), 1040-1069 77 83 Coulton, B. (1999), 36. See also Farrow, W.J. ibid, 1099-1161 84 (1926), 20. Also Journal of the House of Commons, Fletcher, W.G.D. (1928), 196-198 Volume 2, 1640-1643 (1802), 737-739 78 Green, M.A.E. (1890), 1089-1098

Context 48 Issue 1 October 2014

Conflicting Bodies, Conflicting Identities: Creating Cyborgian Bodies in the Mesolithic by Ben Wills-Eve

The term 'cyborg' was first coined in 1960 and is now synonymous with Schwarzenegger's Terminator, but are cyborgs more widespread than thought; are we all, as some would argue, cyborgs by definition? This paper discusses the notions of cyborgs and broadens them to consider all kinds of 'cyborgian' (cyborg-like) bodies, including humans with mobile phones and humans wearing mollusc-shell jewellery. These themes are extended to examine cyborgian bodies and their interactions, particularly in terms of conflict, in the Mesolithic. The cyborgian bodies of the Mesolithic were sites of individual and societal conflict, as well as conflict between species, much of which is suggested through the material evidence found in burials and in settlement sites. Many facets of cyborgian conflict are examined, from cyborgian bodies being created via conflict to those made to protect themselves from it; Mesolithic conflict from a cyborgian perspective highlights the complexities of human nature and archaeology.

This paper explores the nature of the human body and of its interactions with the surrounding world with the aim of opening up new avenues of archaeological thought, interpretation and understanding. Such ends will be sought through discussion of cyborgs and what aspects of humans and nature may be considered to be like a cyborg (or 'cyborgian'), along with the multitude of conflicts that such an interpretation highlights. This discussion will be carried out theoretically and archaeologically, largely in the Mesolithic, where their presence would seem alien to modern minds full of popular connotations. By examining the role of conflict in a cyborgian Mesolithic world, archaeology can explore both the distant past and present day in novel ways that greatly expand the perceived nature of interactions and bodily relationships across vast spans of time.

Cyborg concepts and what it means to be us, even those like Geertsema who maintain a 'cyborgian' distinct individuality for humans separate from animals or machines still discuss the To most of us the word 'cyborg' conjures up 'cyborgian' nature of our interactions with the visions of half-metal half-human supermen, surrounding world2. Separating this idea of like Schwarzenegger's 'Terminator', whose being like a cyborg from physically being a unnatural abilities are at home in the science cyborg is largely subjective, but there are fiction novels and movies which they concepts and features that can be applied to frequent. The idea of combining man and both. machine to give the man novel and advantageous abilities is central to the In 1998, Professor Kevin Warwick of concept of a cyborg, but this is not a clear Reading University took the bold step of definition. Such matters become far more becoming a cyborg by implanting a radio- vague when aspects of man and machine are chip into his arm which could wirelessly combined in ways that are not so explicitly communicate with the computer network in physical. In her 'Manifesto for Cyborgs', his department, allowing it to track him and Donna Harraway argued that the divisions carry out automatic functions, like opening between man and machine were so fluid as to doors, as he approached them; when the chip be negligible, therefore humans had become was removed he felt an emotional loss, as if a cyborgs; but she unwittingly extended the part of himself was missing. His later idea of a cyborg in her assertion that humans experiment of 2002 took the cyborg concept and animals were no different either, further, involving the implanting of a sensor suddenly we became indivisible mixtures of which allowed perception of ultrasound animal, vegetable and mineral1. These ideas signals; this arrangement was then 'plugged sparked a wave of theoretical discussions, in' to the internet allowing him to remotely which have brought out the cyborg in all of control a robotic hand, also connected to the

Context 49 Issue 1 October 2014

internet, via thoughts alone. Reflecting on machine and thus their affiliated identities these experiences, Warwick says that: ‘when should be considered as cyborgs, the linked with technology inside my body, it (robotic arguments posed against this view by Clark hand) is no longer a separate piece of technology’;3 and Geertsema might finally decide what this brings an emotional, almost belief-based 'cyborgian' means. Geertsema finds element into the discussion of what Harraway's position to be too extreme, 'cyborgian' means. Interestingly, he regards a suggesting that humans maintain a degree of cyborg as someone who is altered by individuality and freedom that machines technology, which connects with them at a within a cyborgian interaction or network are neural level, having an effect upon their simply incapable of enjoying. Clark disputes brain4. the lack of difference in nature between humans and other animals; whilst he sees Following Warwick's argument that the humans as cyborgs he also crowns them as essence of the cyborg body lies in the physical the only organisms capable of being cyborgs, link between human body and other entity, as other animals do not, in his view, have whether animal, vegetable or mineral, the sufficient neural plasticity. Personally, I am question arises: was he only a cyborg for the inclined to agree more with Harraway for the time that he was 'plugged in', via thousands of following two reasons. Although I am able miles of cables and radio waves, to the robotic to vaguely understand the ideas behind the arm? Accepting that view leads to the neural-net machine-learning algorithm at conclusion that every time a human picks up work in my phone, as a user who interacts a pen, they become a cyborg; although with it on a daily basis my input into Warwick would disagree with this on the determining their outcomes is merely indirect grounds that the pen is not directly connected thanks to its ability to self-regulate and to the nervous system, Andy Clark argues 'organically' learn. Similarly, I challenge that the simple matter of holding a pen, let anyone to find me a human artist who would alone writing it, alters the brain and therefore claim that Bowerbirds do not have an affinity is cyborgian. In his 'Natural-born Cyborgs', with the variety of natural and man-made Clark goes much further than this in stating materials, which they use to meticulously, that all humans are cyborgs thanks to their and beautifully construct their elaborate nests ability to ‘enter into deep and complex and decorate their bodies. Within this relationships with non-biological constructs’ and reasoning, it seems fair to take Harraway's to merge their ‘mental activities with the lack of distinction even further and conclude operations of pen, paper and electronics’5. In that a cyborgian interaction or identity that exploring the ways that humans interact with does not involve a human is perfectly the natural environment, Ryan also possible. recognises the creation of cyborgian bodies through outdoor clothing, giving as an As is evident, definitions of cyborg are example a branded running jacket, which was inherently subjective, but is it the physical advertised as a ‘new more useful skin’6. These nature of an interaction that is crucial to its organic interactions between humans and cyborgian nature? Could it still be realised in objects are situation dependent and rely upon the realm of belief, or in a purely mental an alteration, if only temporary, of the human fashion? In the cosmology of native body occurring which is beneficial in that Amazonians objects are important given position, not necessarily permanently; components of people and all other living as Clark states a pen and paper expand the beings, the Urarina Amazonians make possibilities of human memory, but also hammocks out of 'strong' materials so that slowly make human memory more dependent these may pass on their 'strong qualities' to upon them7. the babies that sleep in them so that they might grow up fit and healthy; hence Miller Returning to Harraway's conviction that the suggests that a native Amazonian theory of modern human is no different from animal or objects must be a theory of person8. Such an

Context 50 Issue 1 October 2014

openly cyborgian view on the world is also goes on to state, such material finds allow seen in other belief systems, including that of archaeology to attempt interpretations of the Yukaghir of Siberia who live out a possible ‘lived behavioural identity’10 that may seemingly cyborgian human-elk existence 9 . not otherwise have been considered; although However, both of these cosmological views of the modern concept of cyborgs would not humans, objects and animals as cyborgs are have been around in the Mesolithic there is still rooted in their very physical aspects, the nothing, as the Löwenmensch suggests, to materials and physical attributes of the body say that similar ideas of hybrid beings and are at the heart of each. Whilst these interactions were not in existence. examples do highlight discussions

Tomb at Teviec showing shell necklace (Source: ‘Sépulture de Teviec (2)’ by Didier Descouens, 9 October 2010. Under licence Creative Commons Attribution- Share Alike 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons) surrounding personhood, identity and The late Mesolithic European burial sites materiality when it comes to cyborgian (around 5500 BC) of Teviéc and Hoëdic in bodies, discussions, which will be elaborated Brittany are two of the richest examples of upon later, they also show that a cyborg is a elaborate shell midden burial sites with a living being of various aspects, which are very wide variety of grave goods, including physically connected and related. As such, to mammalian and fish bones, red deer antlers, be cyborgian is to be tangible and alive. flint and bone tools, mollusc shells etc., adorning numerous burials 11 . Within the Ancient cyborgs: cyborgian bodies in the graves two species of mollusc shell were Mesolithic prevalent: cowrie (T europea) and periwinkle (L obtusata); this is significant because both In his investigation of the Aurignacian species are too small to be considered of real 'Löwenmensch' figurine from the nutritional value and the shells were often Hohlenstein-Stadel cave site in south found in arrangements suggesting that they Germany, John Piprani explored the human- were necklaces, bracelets or headwear for the animal relationship embodied by the deceased12. The ornamental significance of anthropomorphic lion-man form, suggesting these shells is intensified by the fact that male that the humans who created it became bodies sported objects largely composed of cyborgian human-lion hunters by using bone cowrie shells, whereas such objects mostly points shaped like lion's teeth. As Piprani consisted of periwinkle shells when found on

Context 51 Issue 1 October 2014

female bodies 13 . Clothing, jewellery and small 'tents' over each grave; 'stylets' or 'pins' fashion have often been viewed as extensions were also found across both sites with nearly of the physical body, whether in the practical all the Teviéc examples being made of wild terms described by Ryan, or the social and boar fibulae and virtually all those from cultural aspects of dress as embodiment Hoëdic being crafted from red deer antler, proposed by Entwistle14. although both types are decorated very similarly17. However, possible interpretations With this in mind, the wearing of these shell of functional use, symbolic or cultural value ornaments constitutes the creation of a or even just the interactions that these cyborgian body whose gendered nature was structures and pins might have been involved enhanced by its physical man-cowrie-shell or in are extremely vague; perhaps a visit to the woman-periwinkle-shell nature, even if this English early Mesolithic site of Star Carr hybridisation did not extend to the molluscs might provide some clues. Star Carr has a themselves. Although the practical argument rich assemblage of red deer antler frontlets that such fashion was merely just that, and barbed antler points, an assemblage ornamentation based on aesthetic or which is brought to life in animistic and 'traditional' grounds, is a perfectly reasonable cyborgian terms by Chantal Conneller in one, it does not deny the existence of the 'Becoming Deer'18. In arguing that the antler cyborgian body or interaction whose frontlets are not merely a mask or disguise formation does not have to be consciously which a hunter may use to stalk deer but sought. At the Mesolithic site of Vlasac, in rather are a physical medium for temporarily the Danube Gorges of the central Balkans, a taking on the animal qualities of the deer, plentiful archaeological assemblage of Conneller shows that cyborgian interactions perforated carp teeth and C neritea (dog through the physical joining of human and whelk) shells is associated with two human deer create a human-deer perception of the burials. Analyses of the carp teeth and shells world and not just a more 'deer-like' or less showed that they were likely ‘embroidered onto human one. In extending this to the cyborg some kind of leather-made clothing’ 15 using body created by human hand and deer antler ‘Threads made from animal tissues’16. When barbed point or tool, it can be argued, as looking at all the burials on the site, although Piprani does for the Löwenmensch and those of females and infants (n=15) associated bone points, that the cyborg predominantly contained the shell and tooth encapsulates the physical connection not only ornaments, with only four of the male burials between human hand and deer antler but also doing so and in lesser quantities, it is difficult between human and deer. Whether the bone to assign any great significance to this and antler stylets at Teviéc and Hoëdic were distribution, except perhaps that the infant used similarly is unclear, but an interpretation burials contained the most ornaments. If, as which sees them used as tools or clothing the authors suggest, that they were parts of pins ultimately must include them as cloaks then the possibility postulated that the contributing to wider cyborgian bodies. ornaments may be seen as having a protective quality, similar to that described by Miller in Archaeological evidence of similarly her ethnographic study of native cyborgian interactions involving humans and Amazonians, and that a more complex animals occurring in the Mesolithic is cyborgian body has been constructed which plentiful. Firstly, the later Mesolithic burial unifies the physical natures of human, leather site of Vedbaek in Denmark is home to a and shell/tooth ornaments into a warmer and remarkable burial, Grave 8, which contained safer single being. ‘the skeletons of a richly adorned female and a new-born child, thought to have been placed on Returning to Teviéc and Hoëdic, six graves the wing of a whooper swan’19. Whilst some across the two sites are notably interpretations have focussed upon the distinguishable due to red deer antler potentially spiritual aspects of the wing structures that may have originally formed placement with the swan seen to be carrying

Context 52 Issue 1 October 2014

the new-born on to an afterlife, Overton and groups around Northern Europe made and Hamilakis, arguing that a reinterpretation of used different tools in different ways 22 . the Grave allows for the possibility that the Within the framework of cyborgian infant was placed on the wing tip and not the interactions it is possible to view these wing body, tentatively pose an interpretation slightly different cultures as overarching which focuses more on a potential cyborg entities, which evolve over time into relationship between the individual swan and slightly different cyborgs with slightly the humans involved 20 . Whichever is different bodies. Such small and large-scale favoured, both infer that a cyborgian body cyborgian interactions draw upon notions of has been created in death, even if it may have materiality in which human-object not existed in life, and that fact alone interaction is a two-way process, with object demonstrates that swan-human interactions affecting human just as much as human and relationships existed even if the reasons affects object; this human-tool cyborg, behind these are still subjects of open-ended incorporating animal, mineral and often interpretation. vegetable, is perhaps the easiest of the Mesolithic cyborgian bodies to understand Back at Teviéc and Hoëdic, the other types from a modern perspective. As is evident, the of artefact found, often along with the stylets, Mesolithic was inhabited by its fair share of in many burials were flint blades and flint cyborgs, many of which were engaged in tools; again, although some vague patterns some kind of conflict, often between can be seen, any relationships between flint themselves and the bodies they created. objects and wider cultural constructs, if they exist, are highly complex. But this does not Conflict in the cyborgian Mesolithic change the fact that, when in use during life, flint tools were crucial components of As illustrated above, the Mesolithic was evolving cyborg bodies, both physical and bound together by complex networks of cultural. Just as Clark sees the modern sophisticated interactions that manifested mobile phone as an extension of the human themselves in the creation of cyborgian hand that simultaneously alters the physical bodies; however these relationships were not nature of the cyborg brain, giving the ability as simple as those of mutually beneficial to be in more mental places at once, so commensalism. These cyborgian bodies lived Conneller and Piprani see projectile points in continuous flux, their constituent parts and tools as conjunctions of animal and differentially finding themselves on the human bodies which give the cyborg body an opposite or same sides in bodily conflicts, enhanced ability to exploit and experience its many of which may have raged natural world. 'Blubber lamps' found at unconsciously. Take the ingenious 'blubber Mesolithic sites on the Baltic coast further lamps' from the Baltic, the cyborgian body is demonstrate the complex cyborgian one which can warm itself and light its path, interaction possible between animal and but it is also now capable of burning itself or mineral to create a greater cyborgian body, unwittingly destroying its surroundings to its one that contained fire21. detriment. From a psychological perspective, just as these fire-wielding cyborgian bodies The microliths of the Mesolithic similarly may feel empowered to explore further in the embodied cyborgian interactions between dark and the shell-cloaked cyborgian bodies man and mineral, the chipped flints of Vlasac feel protected in the cold, so might providing cutting blades to act as extensions their ambitions outstretch their cyborgian of the human ability whilst the process of abilities; as the human brain adapts to be part their creation also expanded the ability of the of an enhanced cyborgian construct it brain to understand the stone, a process simultaneously deludes itself into facing new which could be different between individuals perils that were previously impossible to and larger cultural groups. Perdaen encounter. Over time, such conflicts become demonstrates that different Mesolithic so culturally entrenched that they are

Context 53 Issue 1 October 2014

subconsciously accepted as 'facts of life', the gendered nature, something that we would number of humans killed in road accidents nowadays attribute to human tastes in describes this effect in a modern example. 'fashion'. But the cyborgian body, at its simplest level human and shell, exhibits a Perhaps the most easily visualised form of much wider range of potential conflicts. conflict as regards cyborgian bodies, in the From the cultural perspective, the type, size, Mesolithic and today, is that which occurs shape, colour, etc. of the mollusc shells that during their creation. Whether cyborgian were worn and thus used to create a bodies contain mollusc shells, deer antlers, cyborgian body may have become imbued bone pins, plant materials, flints or whale with specific meanings within the group blubber, the transformation that has occurred setting; although cowrie and periwinkle shells in the removal or reconfiguration of these were commonly found across graves in both materials from one body to another not only sites, only few graves contained them in large brings various cyborgian bodies into direct quantities suggesting that, whilst the group of conflict with each other, it also perturbs the cyborgian bodies were similar in constitution, tangled webs of cyborgian interactions a few were exceedingly enhanced to a point between them. At Starr Carr, where red deer where even their cyborgian identity differed, antler points were used as weapons to hunt perhaps in spite of intra-societal conflict or in other red deer, layers of conflict existed at the deference to it. cyborgian level. Apart from the fact that deer had to be killed in order to obtain the antler, The transformed nature of conflict between the act of removing the antler from the rest of the constituents of cyborgian bodies also ties the deer, or indeed just treating it differently, in here, with this snapshot of Mesolithic breaks up any cyborgian interactions that Brittany demonstrating the potential for might have remained after death and, via the cyborgian interactions to change the nature of re-use of the antler, employs differing conflict. For instance, cowrie shells once interactions to transform them into a new belonging to molluscs competing for cyborgian body that excelled in hunting more nutrients and habitats found themselves deer. Such cycles of cyborgian conflict go embroiled in conflicts with cyborgian humans beyond economic views of humanity set on eating them; those that became a meal managing natural resources, instead they surrendered their 'mollusc' identity as it was highlight the fact that such interpretations subsumed within a larger cyborgian one are too simplistic; the cyborgian nature of the dominated by the human. The mollusc, as interaction ensures that, unconsciously, the food, became incorporated into the body, its seemingly downtrodden deer also play their shell, as adornment, became part of a wider part in managing the lives of humans through cyborgian body involved in new cultural the adaptation of their cognitive abilities struggles in a cyborgian world distant from achieved via cyborgian creations, creations the sea; the personhood of the mollusc may whose human element depends more on its have been all but eradicated, but that of its deer element than vice versa. shell, itself a significant part of its identity, had merely been transformed. Thus it is Other conflict hinges more upon the tangled important to recognise that questions of societal interactions that are created, identity and personhood not only extend enhanced and complicated by the increasingly beyond humans, in cyborgian bodies they are cyborgian nature of their constituents; merely indicators of transformation, changes whether in the Mesolithic or today, no longer to the interacting world which are frequently can debate, argument and conflict between mediated through various conflicts, whether individuals or groups be restricted to the long-standing, fresh, nuanced or raw. human, in reality they extend to the cyborgian body. In Mesolithic terms, this is Finally, just as cyborgian fashions may have illustrated by the shell jewellery found at played a role in cultural orders that sought to Teviéc and Hoëdic with its seemingly avoid conflict within groups, the protective

Context 54 Issue 1 October 2014

qualities of the shell cloaks from Vlasac show that 'cyborgs' can be thought of as far more the creation of cyborgian bodies with than the popular denizens of science fiction enhanced abilities to avoid, deter or defend movies. Indeed, conflict within cyborgian themselves against possible conflict. worlds has been shown to be something far However, even in this example where an more complex than anything found in a entity is brought together seemingly to dispel Terminator film, as the complex cyborgian conflict, the parts of the whole harmonious interactions of the Mesolithic demonstrate. shield have been assembled from various A cyborgian archaeology which examined the plants and animals whose useful and cyborgian nature of human bodies and the embodied properties may live on in the cyborgian bodies they create through study of greater cyborgian body, but much of their the vast array of interactions present at any bodies has been lost to support the human at point in time might provide a starting point the centre of the cyborg. Such are the for the unification of theoretical debates and paradoxes of cyborgian bodies and their practical investigation to thoroughly interpret archaeology, the bodies in a conflicting flux the complex lives of past cyborgs. Conflict is similar to that of their interpretations, no little part of this complexity and viewing judgements always presuming their lives from the possibilities of conflict from a cyborgian their arrangements in or after death. The perspective brings to our attention the example given earlier of the Mesolithic interacting flux of the world around us, a whooper swan burial in Vedbaek Grave 8 conflicting nature which was at work illustrates how cyborgian bodies can be thousands of years ago and is still acting on created in death as well as life. Here issues of us today. interpreting cyborgian existences and interactions in death really come to the fore, Notes after all is there any meaningful relationship between swan and human, was the body 1 cyborgian in life or does it just appear so in Harraway, D. (1985). A Manifesto for Cyborgs: death? Is it simply, and quite possibly, a Science, Technology and Socialist Feminism in the 1980s. Socialist Review, Vol 80, 65-108. weird one-off? There are any number of 2 Geertsema, H. (2006). Cyborg: Myth or Reality? potential conflicts which can be concocted Zygon, 41, 289-328 from this cyborgian grave assemblage, that 3 Warwick, K. (2003). Cyborg Morals, Cyborg Values, between the humans and the swan, between Cyborg Ethics. Ethics and Information Technology, Vol 5, 134 mother and child, between the mourners and 4 ibid, 132 the dead etc. Such questions only remind 5 Clark, A. (2003). Natural-Born Cyborgs: Minds, archaeologists of the incredible complexity of Technologies and the Future of Human Intelligence. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 229 the past, a complexity which is both 6 intensified and untangled by a cyborgian view Ryan, S. (2010). Cyborgs in the Woods. Leisure Studies, Vol 21, 270 of the world, by using considerations of the 7 Clark, A. (2003). Natural-Born Cyborgs: Minds, interactions between constructed cyborg Technologies and the Future of Human Intelligence. entities to reveal all manner of conflict Oxford: Oxford University Press, 230 8 present within the Mesolithic. Using such a Miller, J. Things as Persons: Body Ornaments and Alterity among the Mamainde (Nambikwara), in F. framework 'cyborgian archaeology' could Santos-Granero (Ed.). The Occult Life of Things: Native similarly investigate the intricacies of other Amazonian Theories of Materiality and Personhood. periods in the past. Arizona: University of Arizona Press 9 Willerslev, R. (2004). Not Animal, Not Not-Animal: Conclusion Hunting, Imitation and Empathetic Knowledge among the Siberian Yukaghirs. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, Vol 10, 629-52 In summary, the theoretical discussion of 10 Piprani, J. (2011). Material Culture, Behavior, and cyborgian modernity and the archaeological Identity: The Human Body as Experiential Nexus. investigation of the cyborgian Mesolithic Time and Mind: The Journal of Archaeology, Consciousness and Culture, Vol 4, 332 point to the constant nature of cyborgian 11 Schutling, R. (1996). Antlers, Bone Pins and Flint bodies throughout time, along with the fact Blades: The Mesolithic Cemeteries of Teviéc and

Context 55 Issue 1 October 2014

Hoëdic, Brittany. Antiquity, 70, 335-50 18 Conneller, C. (2004). Becoming Deer. Corporeal 12 Taborin, Y. (1974). La Parure En Coquillage. Gallia Transformations at Star Carr. Archaeological Dialogues, Préhistoire, Vol 17, 101-79 Vol 11, 37-56 13 ibid, 174-177 19 Overton, N, Hamilakis, Y. (2013). A Manifesto for a 14 Entwistle, J. (2000). Fashion and the Fleshy Body: Social Zooarchaeology. Swans and Other Beings in the Dress as Embodied Practice. The Journal of Dress, Body Mesolithic. Archaeological Dialogues, Vol 20, 132 & Culture, Vol 4, 323-47 20 ibid, 133 15 Crisitani, E, Boric, D. (2012). 8500-Year-Old Late 21 Heron, C. (2013). Illuminating the Late Mesolithic: Mesolithic Garment Embroidery from Vlasac (Serbia): Residue Analysis of 'Blubber' Lamps from Northern Technological, Use-Wear and Residue Analyses. Europe. Antiquity, Vol 87, 178-88 Journal of Archaeological Science, Vol 39, 3460 22 Perdaen, Y, Crombé, P, Sergant, J. (2008). Lithic 16 ibid, 3461 Technology and the Cultural Identity of Early 17 Schutling, R. (1996). Antlers, Bone Pins and Flint Mesolithic Groups, Current Anthropology, Vol 49, 317- Blades: The Mesolithic Cemeteries of Teviéc and 27 Hoëdic, Brittany. Antiquity, Vol 70, 345

Context 56 Issue 1 October 2014

About our contributors

Rachael Abbiss was awarded a first-class honours degree in History with Archaeology in 2008, going on to earn a distinction from the University of Chester’s Military History MA in 2011. She is currently working on a PhD thesis focusing on the role of the military within the imperial security policy of the British Isles during the reign of James VII & II. Her research aims to reveal the significance of the military in protecting British Isles’ interests and containing the threat of French power on the North American continent.

Sam Chadwick started his academic career with a BA in Archaeology with Forensic Biology at Chester College. The focus for his dissertation was the damage Chester received during siege, in the first Civil War. He completed an MA in Military History, at the University of Chester, with a dissertation focusing on medieval recruitment. He is currently studying towards an MPhil/PhD, researching the area of ¹The Significance of Artillery in Sieges during the English Civil Wars¹. He has spoken at this event in the last two years, speaking on the military manuals and mathematics behind sieges in the conference¹s first year and the sieges at Chester and Beeston in the second year.

Chris Green graduated with distinction in 2006 from the University of Chester 'Landscape, Heritage and Society' MA course, 30 years after completing his first degree, in Geography, at the University of Sheffield. Having recently taken redundancy after a long career in the IT industry, he is now taking the opportunity to immerse himself fully in the academic environment, looking specifically at how we perceive history through literature.

After 20 years in law, Isabel Jones decided on a complete change of emphasis in 2008, and started an undergraduate degree in History at the University of Chester. She graduated with first class honours, and then progressed on to a Masters in Research, looking at the trials for High Treason during the Interregnum. She is now about to complete her first year of a Doctorate looking at the rule of Shropshire, her home county, during the Interregnum. She also volunteers at the Shropshire Archives cataloguing their inventory, as well as being involved in the Flax Mill project at Shrewsbury, a joint council/ English Heritage venture. She is also about to start with the Shropshire Place Name Survey, which is an AHRC project begun by the late Dr Margaret Gelling.

Ben Wills-Eve studied Physiology at the University of Liverpool for his undergraduate degree and so started out this year as a complete newcomer to archaeology, knowing a fair bit about bodies and bones and having volunteered on a local dig in Bromborough with Big Heritage. He has always had a keen interest in history, ancient and modern, which drew him towards archaeology out of interest after finding that a career in science was not for him. His current interests are still understandably broad, however anything that can link the deeper issues of the past with similar ones found in the present tends to appeal strongly.

Jonathan Worton embarked on the Master’s degree course in Military History at the University of Chester in 2009. He graduated with distinction in 2010 and in early 2011 began Doctoral research on the war effort of both sides in and around Shropshire during the First and Second English Civil Wars of 1642-48. He is married, has one daughter and lives near Shrewsbury.

Context 57 Issue 1 October 2014

! ! ! ! !

The Department of History & Archaeology at the University of Chester is committed to high-quality research in the fields of history, archaeology and heritage. The Department’s researchers explore diverse themes and evidence. Our archaeologists investigate British and European prehistory and history while the historians’ research interests range across the medieval, early modern and modern periods, and over local, British, European and American history.

For further details and contact information visit the departmental website at:

http://www.chester.ac.uk/departments/history- archaeology/research