Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T05:35:22.148Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Catholic Royalist Activists in the North, 1642–46

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 October 2016

P. R. Newman
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Dr Keith Lindley, in his article in Politics, Religion and The English Civil War (‘The Part Played by the Catholics’), resurrected the thorny issue of Catholic neutralism during the Civil War. Using statistical analyses based upon the records of the Committees for Advance of Money and for Compounding, he argued that for the most part Catholics kept themselves to themselves, avoiding both sides, and enduring the War with resignation. What he most certainly demonstrated, in the areas of the country he selected, was that the records he consulted do indeed convey that impression.

Type
Articles
Information
British Catholic History , Volume 14 , Issue 1 , May 1977 , pp. 26 - 38
Copyright
Copyright © Catholic Record Society 1977

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1 Brian Manning ed., Politics, Religion and the Civil War (1973.)

2 Ibid., p. 131.

3 Nor does Dr Lindley allow for activist fatalities during the War which meant that many Catholics were unable to compound, though occasionally their families tried to do so.

4 Ibid., p. 132.

5 I consulted a private copy, but there is one in the P.R.O. (SP 29/68) and, according to Wing, in the Bodleian.

6 Obviously, this also applies to non-Catholic Royalists as well.

7 York Minster Library, Civil War Tract 42.12.19.

8 My definition of the North covers the counties of Yorkshire and Lancashire, Durham and Northumberland, Cumberland and Westmorland. It is true that this excludes Staffordshire which provided regiments for Newcastle's army, but it covers the counties which provided the substantial bulk of the Northern forces in the years 1642–46.

9 There are several examples, but we can briefly examine Lord Belasyse's regiments. The horse probably went south with the Queen in 1643, and were active around Farnham and Basing House. Returning north with Belasyse in January 1644, they fought at Selby and (possibly) at Marston Moor, and made a last appearance at Sherburn on 15 October 1645. The foot fought at Edgehill, and accompanied the King south. They were in the forefront of the storm of Bristol, and seem to have fought at Selby and at Marston Moor. Thereafter, Belasyse passed the Colonelcy over to Theophilus Gilby.

10 Lindley, op. cit., p. 141.

11 Ibid.; he arrives at a figure of 913 for these.

12 Peter, Young, Edgehill (Kineton, 1970), p. 66.Google Scholar

13 John, Vicars, Parliamentary Chronicles (1644), 2, p. 169.Google Scholar

14 Charles, Firth ed., ‘Sir Hugh Cholmeley's Narrative of the Siege of Scarborough’, English Historical Review, 32 (1917), p. 578.Google Scholar

15 Wood, A. C., Nottinghamshire in the Civil War (Oxford, 1937), p. 100.Google Scholar

16 R.C.H.M., Newark: The Civil War Siegeworks (1964), p. 55. Also, Moone, J., A BriefRelation of the Life and Memoirs of John Lord Belasyse (H.M.C. Ormond MSS., New Series 2 (1903), p. 390.Google Scholar

17 Frederick Sunderland, Marmaduke Lord Longdate (1926), p. 79.

18 Rushworth, 3, part 2, p. 50.

19 Clay, J. W., ‘The Yorkshire Gentry at the time of the Civil War’, Yorkshire Archaeological & Topographical Journal, 23 (1915), p. 356 Google Scholar and William, Dugdale's Visitation of the Counte of York, Surtees Society (1859), 36, p. 137.Google Scholar (William Langley was Lieutenant-Colonel for a time, either before or after Constable held the role).

20 Lancashire Royalist Composition Papers, Record Society of Lancashire and Cheshire, 36, p. 177f.Google Scholar

21 A List of Officers, cols 8 and 97.

22 Lancashire Royalist Composition Papers, 96, p. 407. John, Vicars, op. cit., 3, p. 16.Google Scholar Rushworth, op. cit., p. 746, and also Lancashire Composition Papers, 36, p. 185 and p. 177.

23 Royalist Composition in Durham and Northumberland, Surtees Society, 111 (1905), p. 263.Google Scholar

24 W. L. D. Macray ed., Clarendon, 2, p. 405.

25 Roy, I. ed: Royalist Ordanance Papers, part 1, Oxford Record Society (1964), p. 179.Google Scholar

26 Longstafie, W. H. D. ed., ‘Nathan Drake's Journal of the First and Second Sieges of Pontefract Castle, 1644–1645’, Surtees Society (1861), 37, p. 4.Google Scholar

27 Civil War Tracts of Lancashire, Chetham Society, 2 (1854), p. 20.Google Scholar

28 Broxap, E., The Great Civil War in Lancashire (Manchester, 1910), p. 20.Google Scholar

29 Beamont, W., ed., ‘A Discourse of the Warr in Lancashire’, Chetham Society, 62 (1864), p. 19.Google Scholar

30 C.S.P.D., 1644–45, p. 5.

31 Civil War Tracts of Lancashire, op. cit., p. 68.

32 Lancashire Royalist Composition Papers, op. cit., 24, p. 54f.

33 List, cols 129–30.

34 How early Clavering was attached to Montrose cannot be determined. That he was associated with the Marquis in June and July of 1644 is suggested by the anticipated arrival of Clavering with several thousand men from the far north, which coincided with the appearance of Montrose at Richmond just after Marston Moor had been fought and won. However, the Regiment's activities before Forcer assumed command, remain a mystery.

35 Rushworth, op. cit., p. 50. Royalist Composition in Durham and Northumberland, op. cit., p. 208.

36 List, cols 27 and 50. Dugdale, op. cit., p. 145.

37 The Composition records of Northumberland and Durham are replete with numerous Fenwicks and Erringtons and Forsters, which does not make for easy identification with named officers from other sources such as the List. It is when attempting such identification that the limitations of the Composition papers become all too obvious, particularly in terms of the lack of clarity in using words to describe an individual's activities. It is possible that a detailed analysis of fines may reveal distinctions, i.e., that those in arms had to pay a greater fine than those who merely served on military committees, etc., but that remains to be seen.

38 List, col. 50, and Rushworth, p. 50.

39 Forster, A. and Walsh, E., ‘Recusancy of the Brandlings’, Recusant History, 10 (1970), p. 42.Google Scholar

40 Royalist Composition in Durham and Northumberland, pp. 132–5.

41 Calendar of the Proceedings of the Committee for Compounding, p. 1401.

42 Peter, Young (Marston Moor [Kineton, 1971]),Google Scholar prefers to think that Sir Francis Anderson was Heron's successor as Colonel, but the evidence, which is a matter of overlapping names, is as strongly in Brandling's favour.

43 Royalist Composition in Durham and Northumberland, p. 211.

44 Broxap, E., op. cit., p. 136.Google Scholar

45 William, Dugdale, A Visitation of the County Palatine of Lancaster, Chetham Society, 1, p. 86f.Google Scholar

46 Royal Composition in Durham and Northumberland, pp. 11–12.

47 Ibid., p. 175.

48 Rushworth, p. 50, gives them both.

49 Ibid., p. 127.

50 List, col. 44 and Clay, J. W., Yorkshire Royalist Composition Papers, Yorkshire Archaeological Society Record Series (1893), 3, p. 102.Google Scholar

51 Tanner MSS. 62/51.

52 Thomason Tracts, E. 59, f. 9.

53 Ibid., E. 107, 30.

54 Lancashire Royalist Composition Papers, op. cit., 36, p. 131–5.

55 Commissioned 20 June 1642, according to Civil War Tracts of Lancashire, p. 13.

56 There is some information in the Composition papers of the Catholic Captain Christopher Harris of Bolland, in Lancashire Royalist Composition Papers, 29, p. 151–64.Google Scholar

57 Royalist Composition in Durham and Northumberland, pp. xxxiii, 67 and 292–4.

58 Ibid., p. 320 f.n.

59 Rushworth, pp. 28 and 50.

60 C.S.P.D. 1660–61, p. 510.

61 Nicolson and Burne, The History and Antiquities of the Counties of Westmorland and Cumberland (1777), 1, p. 101.Google Scholar

62 Cliffe, J. T., The Yorkshire Gentry from the Reformation to the Civil War (1969), p. 333.Google Scholar

63 Thomason Tracts, E. 107, 30.

64 Peter Young, Marston Moor, p. 59.

65 Rushworth, p. 127.

66 Dugdale's Visitation of York, p, 296.

67 Wheater, W., The History of Sherburn and Cawood (1882), p. 49.Google Scholar

68 List, col. 74.

69 Rushworth, p. 50.

70 Royalist Composition in Durham and Northumberland, p. 385.

71 List, col. 146.

72 Ibid., col. 113. Probably his nearness to London was to facilitate his claim.

73 Lancashire Royalist Composition Papers, 24, pp. 246–7 and 96, p. 407.

74 Rushworth, pp. 49–50.

75 Lancashire Lieutenancy under the Tudors and Stuarts, Chetham Society, 50 (1859), p. 312.Google Scholar

76 Thomason Tracts, E. 86, 27.

77 Long, C. E. ed., Diary of the Marches of the Royal Army... kept by Richard Symonds, Camden Society (1859), p. 80.Google Scholar

78 Ibid., p. 145.

79 Clarendon's judgement.

80 C.S.P.D. 1645–47, p. 59.

81 This relies on a combination of List, col. 113, and Lancashire Royalist Composition Papers, 36, p. 108.

82 Dugdale's Visitation of Lancashire, p. 116.

83 Yorkshire Royalist Composition Papers, 1, p. 65. Dugdale's Visitation of York, p. 56, and Cliffe, J. T., op. cit., p. 209.Google Scholar

84 Dugdale's Visitation of York, 2, p. 352.

85 Rushworth, p. 127.

86 List, col. 128 and Royalist Composition in Durham and Northumberland, p. 261.

87 His composition papers are fragmentary, but Rushworth p. 50 gives him, and Elliot, Warburton, Memoirs of Prince Rupert and his Cavaliers (1849), 3, p. 31,Google Scholar contains a reference to him by Rupert in October of 1644 as a Colonel.

88 John Vicars, 3, p. 334. The command of these regiments is still largely conjectural, but it is a problem that needs to be unravelled, and my explanation seems reasonable at present.