Charles Thomas-Stanford.

Sussex in the great Civil War and the interregnum, 1642-1660 online

. (page 4 of 30)
Online LibraryCharles Thomas-StanfordSussex in the great Civil War and the interregnum, 1642-1660 → online text (page 4 of 30)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


named " Thankfull." We are sometimes tempted to sup-
pose that Barebone, the leather seller, who gave his name
to the Parliament of 1653, assumed the Christian name
" Praise-God " to be in the fashion. But the Sussex regis-
ters of a much earlier date exhibit plentiful examples of
such names. A jury list 2 of the period includes the follow-
ing: Be-courteous Cole of Pevensey ; Safety-on-High Snat
of Uckfield; Search-the-Scriptures Moreton of Salehurst;
Increase Weeks of Cuckfield; Kill-sin Pemble of West-
ham; Fly-debate Smart, Fly-fornication Richardson,
Seek-wisdom Wood, Much-mercy Cryer, all of Waldron ;
Fight-the-good-fight-of-faith White of Ewhurst; Small-
hope Biggs of Rye; Earth Adams of Warbleton; The-
peace-of-God Knight of Burwash. But perhaps Sussex has
no name to show equal in strangeness to that of Humilia-
tion Scratcher, which appears in the parish registers of
Ware in Hertfordshire.

The Rev. John Frewen, a man of the highest character,
and a thorough Puritan in heart and conduct, particularly
excited the opposition of the orthodox party. Among the
Rye muniments is a declaration touching one John Snepp,
otherwise unknown to fame, "that he affirmeth it was a
merrier world when ministers might not marry; that now
they ought not to marry, and that their children are ille-
gitimate ; that he absented himself from church at Northiam
for half a year, and was a profaner of the Sabbath in enter-
taining men's servants in playing of cards and dice. That
he threatened to pull Mr. Frewen out of the pulpit and spit

1 Archbishop of York, 1660-64, see post, p. 240.

2 Burrell MSS., quoted by Horsfield, Lewes, i, 202 n. See also
Salzmann, History of Hailsham, 1901, p. 50.



PURITAN SUSSEX 25

in his face and make the said Mr. Frewen come to him on
his knees; and threatened that songs should be made of
him." l

In 1611 some of Mr. Frewen's parishioners preferred a
bill of indictment for nonconformity against him at the
Lewes summer assizes; but the grand jury ignored the
bill. 2 In 1622 Mr. Frewen himself proceeded in the ecclesi-
astical court at Lewes against one of his parishioners, Rob-
ert Creswell, for insulting him on the open highway, " calling
him old Fole, old Asse, old Coxscombe," and irreverently
attacking certain doctrines which he had propounded the
Sunday before. After due citation Creswell was excom-
municated. 3

To the Puritan propaganda of such men as Frewen, the
slackness and inefficiency of many of the church clergy
rendered powerful assistance. Among the interrogatories
addressed to the Chapter of Chichester Cathedral by Bishop
Harsnett in 1616 were the following:

(1) How often hath the Dean preached in the Cathedral
Church, or any other Church of the Diocese, during the six
or seven years last past?

(2) Is an Advowson of the Benefice of Amport passed
or granted unto a layman for money?

(3) Do the Vicars or Singing men duly and diligently
attend the performance of Divine Service in the Cathedral
Church? Within these three years last have not all or most
of them been absent at once at beginning of Divine
Service?

(4) How cometh it to pass that the Church officers dwell
without the close, and laymen inhabit within it? That ale-
houses have been lately suffered to be kept within your
close, that laymen have keys to open the gates of the
closes when they list? That boys and hogs do beastly

1 Rye MSS. (Hist. MSS. Com., xiii, 4), p. 133. For the "making
of songs " concerning ministers, cf. post, p. 200.

2 Lower's Worthies of Sussex, p. 48. 3 Ibid.



26 SUSSEX IN THE GREAT CIVIL WAR

defile the walls and yards belonging to the Cathedral
Church, and that no reformation hath been had herein
notwithstanding the often complaints and presentments of
the same? l

If the condition of things here suggested prevailed in the
cathedral city, we may suppose the case of many country
parishes to have been no better. And from the records of
the Archdeaconry Court at Lewes between 1580 and 1640
we have ample evidence of slovenliness and worse. 2 Not
only were the fabrics of many churches kept in ill repair,
the windows unglazed and the roofs leaky, the churchyard
neglected or given over to the parson's cattle; but there
are frequent cases of personal default on the part of the
clergy. At Clayton it was alleged that " we have had no
sermons in our parish church since Christmas now two
years in the default of the parson." The parson was John
Farley, evidently a "dumdog." Thomas Bide, rector of
Crawley, was presented " for not preaching nor reading any
monthly sermon, no, not a sermon in the whole yeare; for
giving himself to base and servile labour; neither is his
apparell grave decent or comely ; hee weareth no surplice
in tyme of divine service or ministering the sacraments; he
catechizeth not at .all ; his houses are in decaye, the chancel
untyled and is much decayed and in tyme will come to
utter ruine."

Numerous complaints in this court against the clergy for
neglect of ceremony and ritual exhibit the spread of Puri-
tanical ideas among them. In 1605 John Batnor, rector of
Westmeston, was presented " for that he doth not say the
letany, nor ten commandments ; neither doth he in bap-
tisme signe with the signe of the Crosse, but with the signe
of the Covenant; neither doth he weare the surplice"; and
the vicar of Cuckfield for similar offences. In 1621 Thomas

1 Hist. MSS. Com., Various Collections, 1901, p. 201.

2 See the article on the Act Books of this Court by Mr. W. C.
Renshaw, K.C., in S. A. C., xlix.



PURITAN SUSSEX 27

Warren, curate of Rye, " for the administering the Sacra-
ment to many sitting and not kneeling." Mr. Warren seems
to have been a very aggressive Puritan, and was several
times before the Court in connection with disorderly scenes
which took place at Rye, and one of his chief supporters,
Joseph Benbrick, gent, was presented " for not bowing at
the name of Jesus when the gospell is reading."

The Court seems to have taken notice of very trivial
charges against the laity, especially in connection with the
observance of Sunday and holy days. Some of these are
interesting as evidence of the petty parochial tyranny
which prevailed at the time. Among them may be noted
the cases of Thomas Binnes of West Hoathly " for work-
ing on St. Luke's day last "; Thomas Ashbee of Maresfield
"for working his oxen on the day of St. Michael"; John
Heaves " for sittinge disorderly in the chancel with a dog
on his knee"; James Payne of Eastbourne "for that he
doth greatly offend the people in drunkenness being a
manifest and vile drunkard, almost every day giving him-
self to that beastly life"; Edmund Hall of Lullington
"for moweing of grasse upon Midsomer day"; William
Bagant, of Alfriston " for that he is reputed to be a usurer ";
William Fox of Hailsham, for being " a notorious breaker
of the Sabbath day, running matches in the tyme of divyne
service "; the wives of Edward Jones, senior, and Edward
Jones, junior, of Rye, each " for a common skold "; John
Naylor of Slaugham " for hunting of conies uppon a Son-
day "; he confessed that " he did hunt conies uppon the
Sonday; but was at both morning and evening prayers the
same day"; Bridget Barret of Wivelsfield "for thrusting
of pinnes in the wife of John Dumbrell in the church in
tyme of divine service, and for other irreverent behaviour ";
she admitted that " she did thrust a pinne into the wife
of John Dumbrell by reason she sate downe in her lap." l

1 S. A. C., xlix, 49-65.



28 SUSSEX IN THE GREAT CIVIL WAR

On Laud's elevation to the archbishopric in 1633 he
strove to check the growing flood of nonconformity by the
curious policy of establishing absolute uniformity within
the Church, without allowing for the diversity of the ele-
ments which formed it. He reported to the King in 1634:
" the bishop of Chichester certifies all well in his diocese
save only in the east part, which is far from him, he finds
some Puritan Justices of the Peace have awed some of the
clergy into like opinion with themselves, which yet of late
have not broken out into any public nonconformity." 1 In
1635 Sir Nathaniel Brent, his vicar-general, held a metro-
politan visitation of the diocese. His report is written in a
humorous vein uncommon in such documents:

Chichester, 27th June. It having been ordered that all
should remove their hats during divine service, and that
there should be no walking about or talking at that time,
" Mr. Speed of St. Pancras confessed his error in being
too popular in the pulpit; the mayor and his brethren
are puritanically addicted, which caused me to admonish
one of the aldermen for putting his hat on during the
service."

Arundel, ist July. " Mr. Nye, rector of Clapham, Mr.
Salisbury, curate of Warningcamp, Mr. Hill, vicar of
Felpham,are so vehemently suspected to be nonconformit-
ants that although nothing was proved against them I
thought fit to inhibit them to preach until I could be better
satisfied of them. . . . Mr. Hill in the pulpit spake unto
four of his neighbours who sat before him in one seat that
he was certain three of them should be damned. The
fourth was his friend, and therefore he saved him,

"John Alberry churchwarden of Arundel having heard
my charge in the morning, at night before he went to bed
made a violent extemporary prayer, and pronounced it so
loud that divers in the street did hear him; the effect

1 Laud, Autobiog., 534; Viet. Hist. Sussex, ii, 32.



PURITAN SUSSEX 29

was, to be delivered from the persecution that was now
coming upon them."

Lewes, 3rd July. " Mr. Bunyard, Maynard, Russell and
Gyles refused to bow at the blessed name of Jesus. After
long conference, and late at night, they all submitted, con-
fessing that they were convinced in their opinions and would
hereafter observe the law of the Church.

" I inhibited one Mr. Jennings to preach any more for
particularising in the pulpit. He called one of his parish-
ioners ' arch-knave,' and being questioned by me answered
that it was but a lively application. The man abused did
think he had been called ' notched knave ' and fell out with
his barber who had lately trimmed him." 1

The activity of Laud stimulated the energies of the
Bishop of Chichester. In January 1637 he wrote to the
curate of Rye with reference to a report that had reached
him from Mr. Norton, one of the churchwardens, that
against God's service, honour and reverence due to holy and
consecrated places, and contrary to the laws, statutes and
canons of the Church, the chancel of the church was used
as an arsenal, a prison, and a place of execution of punish-
ment. Mr. Mark Thomas, the Deputy Mayor, replied that
no one remembered when this first began, but the south
aisle of the chancel had long been used as a place to keep
artillery sent from the Tower of London for the defence of
the town, and the property of his Majesty; and he could
not conceive that this use had commenced without the
order of the Bishop of Chichester of the time. Bishop
Andrews (1605-9), when he visited Rye, saw the use to
which part of the chancel was put, and showed no dislike of
it. This was all the profanation of the place, except that
some " unruly servant " had been in times passed whipped
there by the Mayor's orders. As for the complaint made
against the curate for omitting to read the Church Ser-

1 Cal. S. P. Dom., Chas. I, 1635, pref. xliii; Viet. Hist. Sussex
> 33-



30 SUSSEX IN THE GREAT CIVIL WAR

vice, and for preaching sometimes two hours, the Bishop
was informed that "though often times he doth read the
Litany and ten commandments, yet sometimes he doth
omit the reading thereof, through weakness of body, as he
saith, and we truly believe; and for the accusation of
preaching two hours long, we do assure your Lordship that
the accusation is altogether false; for the mostly he keepeth
himself to his hour, and sometimes preacheth less than an
hour." 1

An hour appears to have been the regulation length of a
sermon. Mr. Large of Rotherfield was in the habit of "join-
ing both his sermons for the day together, and seldom or
never preached for less than two hours." 2 We may feel some
sympathy for Thomas Brett of Cuckfield, presented to the
Archdeaconry Court, for that "he usethe commonly to
slepe in the sermon tyme." 3 Perhaps even " dumdogs " did
not lack admirers.

The growing passion for preaching, combined with im-
patience of the set services of the Church, led to the
appointment of lecturers, who were apparently maintained
by the voluntary contributions of their flocks. This prac-
tice sometimes produced a good deal of friction, especially
as regards the use of the pulpit. In 1623 the Mayor and
Jurats of Rye wrote to the Bishop of Chichester, stating
that under leave from the Archbishop of Canterbury they
had, six years before, set up a lecture in their town, which
had continued since; that of late Mr. Whitacre, curate to
their vicar, Mr. Twine, had opposed it of his own authority,
and would not suffer Mr. Warren, the lecturer, to go into
the church, "of which thing we have thought good to
certify your Lordship, humbly beseeching that so worthy a
work, so much conducing to the honour and glory of God,
may not be suppressed, but by your Lordship's leave and
approbation, may still continue. Yet we dislike not Mr.

1 Rye MSS. (Hist. MSS. Com., xiii, 4), pp. 201-2.

2 See post, p. 145. 3 S. A. C., xlix, 51.



PURITAN SUSSEX 31

Whitacre for our curate, but desire his continuance here,
for we hold him a sufficient preacher; who, being your
Lordship's chaplain, you can a great deal better judge of
his learning than we." J The last sentence seems a very
pretty piece of studied impertinence. An unseemly dis-
turbance took place in the church, and the matter found its
way to the Archdeaconry Court. 2

After the outbreak of war these lecturers sometimes
obtained the benefices of ejected ministers. 3

The Laudian revival came too late, and proceeded by
wrong methods. It was a hopeless task to dragoon into
conformity within narrow limits the seething elements of
religious enthusiasms arising out of the new found study of
the Bible. The movement was confined to no particular
class. If our information as to the feelings of the labouring
class, which did not seriously count in practical affairs, is
small, we know that the yeomen and farmers of the county,
the burgesses and tradesfolk of the towns, were ripe for a
religious revolt. Apart from a few old Catholic families,
whose sufferings had but confirmed their faith, the county
gentry were Calvinist almost to a man ; 4 the Elizabethan
struggle with Spain had made Protestantism a patriotic
virtue. In East Sussex the Puritan feeling of the Justices
of the Peace was so strong that the moderately disposed
were not able to withstand it. At the Michaelmas Quarter
Sessions of 1639 Mr. Stapley, supported by Messrs. Rivers,
Baker, and Hayes, delivered himself in his charge of the
opinion that the altering of the Communion table altar-
wise was an innovation detracting from God's glory. Mr.
White, a justice, asked Mr. Stapley after the charge was
done what he meant by meddling there with that business,
which the bench had nothing to do with; to which Mr.

1 Rye MSS. (Hist. MSS. Com., xiii, 4), pp. 162, 170.

3 S. A. C., xlix, 60.

3 See the case of Mr. Chatfield at Horsham, post, p. 137.

4 Gardiner, Civil War, xlvi.



32 SUSSEX IN THE GREAT CIVIL WAR

Stapley answered that he was so pressed by other men to
do it that he could not deny them. " The town of Lewes,"
wrote Dr. Edward Burton from Westham to Dr. Bray,
chaplain to the Archbishop, " as well as the Sessions house,
is tainted with him, for at this present, notwithstanding the
Earl of Dorset's and Lord Goring's letter and intimations
for their creatures to be parliament men, yet Mr. Stapley
and Mr. Rivers have a strong party in the town, and it is
much feared that they will be chosen burgesses for the
town of Lewes. Lord forbid the greater part of a parlia-
ment should be of their stamp, if so Lord have mercy upon
our Church. God, who knows my heart, knows it is not
them I except against but their condition." l

What the Laudian revival failed to do, the Long Parlia-
ment in some measure effected. " It singled out the
Royalist gentlemen and the anti-Calvinist clergyman for
special penalties, with the result that every Royalist gentle-
man became not only a sworn foe to Puritanism, but a
reverent admirer of doctrines and practices which ten
years before he had pronounced to be detestable. Com-
munity of suffering draws friends more closely together
than community of enjoyment." 2

England was now to reap in pain and tribulation the
crop sown by the unwisdom of her rulers, temporal and
spiritual. The part to be taken by Sussex in the harvesting
was determined mainly by the direction in which for two
or three generations the religious opinions of an ever
increasing number of the inhabitants had been tending.
From the sacrifice of many lives, from the ruin of many
homes, was to spring some germ of that tolerance of hostile
opinion which was inconceivable to both parties at the
opening of the struggle, but is essential to the idea of
citizenship in our less self-confident age.

1 Cal. S. P. Dom., Chas. I, ccccxlii, 137.
3 Gardiner, loc, cit.



CHAPTER III

PORTSMOUTH AND CHICHESTER

ON the 22nd of August 1642, in cloud and storm, King
Charles raised the Royal Standard at Nottingham
and formally opened the Civil War. The full significance
of this step was perhaps not generally understood. It was
almost universally supposed that the issue of a single field
would decide the contest. The gallant gentlemen with the
King believed that they had only to ride over the trained
bands to bring His Majesty back in triumph to London;
the parliamentarians thought they had only to show their
mettle to reduce him to submission on the constitutional
points at issue. Yet there were old soldiers among the
leaders on both sides who had seen service with the Swedes
and the Dutch, and who knew that once a shot is fired in
anger, differences are less easily composed than before;
knew, too, that open war was not a child's play, but a stern
and serious business. In such a spirit did the veteran Sir
Jacob Astley pray before Edgehill : " O Lord, Thou know
how busy I must be this day. If I forget Thee, do not
Thou forget me. March on, boys! " l

Before battle is joined, a word as to the constitution of
the forces shortly to be engaged may not be out of place.
Since the close of the Hundred Years' War with France,
the nation had become very unmilitary. Each county
possessed " trained bands " drawn from those liable to serve
in the old militia, but they were only drilled one day a

1 Warwick's Memoirs, p. 229.
D



34 SUSSEX IN THE GREAT CIVIL WAR

month ; they could not be compelled to serve beyond the
boundaries of their own counties, and could seldom be
induced to do so, except for some temporary purpose. The
only trained bands which possessed any efficiency were
those of the City of London, consisting chiefly of appren-
tices, from whose close-shorn heads the nickname of
" Roundheads " took its rise. 1 These bands speedily be-
came the best infantry that either side possessed, though
the King's foot, derived from the mountainous parts of the
kingdom Wales, Cornwall, and the north were remark-
able for strength and endurance. The trained bands as
units being unsuited for general campaigning, enlistment
and impressment were speedily resorted to. The ordinary
pay of 8</. a day (about $s. ^d. in present value) was
slightly higher than the current rate of agricultural wages ;
but it was subject to deductions for food, and was con-
stantly in arrear.

The infantry were divided into two classes, the pikemen
and the musketeers. They stood in ranks six deep; the
musketeers of each rank having fired their pieces (with
barrels four feet long and so heavy that they had to be
fired from a crutch), fell back to reload. They wore no
armour, and when charged retired behind the pikemen, who
were protected by a half cuirass of steel and a steel cap
over a leather bonnet. Both classes were very heavily
laden, and thirteen miles a day was considered the limit of
their marching powers. This was exceeded on occasion, as
during Waller's march to Arundel in 1643.

But the issue of the war was to depend on cavalry. At
the outset strenuous efforts were made by the gentlemen
on both sides to raise troops of horse, in Sussex notably by
Sir Edward Ford for the King, and by Colonel Herbert
Morley for the Parliament; some, such as Sir William
Springate, spent their whole fortune in this service. The

1 See however a recent discussion in Notes and Queries, nth S.
i, 187, etc.



PORTSMOUTH AND CHICHESTER 35

proportion of cavalry to infantry in the armies of the
seventeenth century was far greater than in modern times ;
in 1646 it was laid down by an expert that there should be
one horseman for every two footmen. At the outset the
Royalists were far stronger in cavalry than the Parlia-
mentarians; Essex in July 1643 complained that "the
enemy's chief strength being in horse, and this army neither
recruited with horses nor arms nor saddles, it is impossible
to keep the country from being plundered; nor to fight
with them but when and where they list; we being forced,
when we move, to march with the whole army, which can
be but by slow marches; so that the country suffers much
wrong, and the cries of the poor people are infinite." ' Per-
haps the evil reputation for plundering which the Royalist
cavalry, especially under Rupert, soon obtained, was due
in part to their superior numbers.

In the Civil War the cavalry consisted chiefly of two
classes, harquebusiers and dragoons. The heavily armed
cuirassier was becoming obsolete, owing to the difficulty of
finding both men and horses equal to the weight of his
cumbrous armour, and the light horseman wearing a coat
of mail and armed with a spear had disappeared. The
harquebusier originally a foot soldier armed with a cross-
bow had become a horseman armed with a carbine. The
dragoons were simply mounted infantry. 2

Artillery was considered indispensable for sieges, but of
no great use in battles. The Parliament enjoyed a great
advantage in the possession of the forges of Sussex and
Kent, especially those of the Brownes at Brede and Horse-
monden, on which they relied almost entirely for guns both
for the army and the navy. 3 Artillery for the Royalist
armies was chiefly imported from France and Holland.

1 Old Parliamentary History, xii, 328.

* For a full account of this subject see Cromwell's Army, by Pro-
fessor Firth, London, 1902.
3 See fast, p. 176.



36 SUSSEX IN THE GREAT CIVIL WAR

Four or five different kinds of field guns were employed.
The heaviest piece commonly used was the culverin, dis-
charging a ball of from sixteen to twenty pounds in weight,
which carried point blank about 400 paces, and had an
extreme range of about 2,000 paces. The demi-culverin,
more frequently employed, fired a ball of nine to twelve
pounds, and had a somewhat lower range. The lighter
pieces were called sakers, minions, and drakes. The saker
fired a ball of about five pounds, the minion one of three
and a half pounds, the drake was a three-pounder or less.

The opening proceedings of the war were attempts by
both sides to secure control of the existing militia organiza-
tion. The King issued his Commissions of Array, the Par-
liament its Militia Ordinance, to the leaders of the trained
bands, and throughout England both parties endeavoured
to secure possession of the county magazines in which the
arms and ammunition of the trained bands were stored. 1
The struggle at Chichester, about to be related, was a
typical instance of these efforts. The indecisive result of
the first years of warfare was chiefly due to the insufficiency
for the purposes of a campaign of the trained bands, which
continually refused to fight far from their homes. When it
came to the creation of professional armies, the resources
and intelligence of the Parliamentary leaders prevailed
the New Model represented the evolution of an efficient
army out of the pre-existent chaos.

In June the King had issued from his head-quarters at
York a proclamation prohibiting the execution of the Par-
liamentary Militia Ordinance; and this proclamation had
even been publicly read in the City of London by order of
the Lord Mayor. It was also read at Chichester by order
of the Mayor, Robert Exton ; 2 who, on being summoned
by Parliament to give an account of the matter, fled to join



Online LibraryCharles Thomas-StanfordSussex in the great Civil War and the interregnum, 1642-1660 → online text (page 4 of 30)