| |
Sieges during the
civil war
Introduction
The characteristic military action of the English Civil
Wars was an attack upon a fortified strongpoint. The
first Civil War began with one on Hull (July 1642) and
ended with one on Harlech Castle (March 1647); likewise
the second was concluded with the reduction of
Pontefract (March 1649) and the third with the storming
of Worcester (September 1651).
In its first year the New Model Army fought two major
field actions but conducted a dozen sieges and storms on
strongholds. In 1645 the New Model Army purchased 3,000
spades and 1,900 pickaxes of various sorts. Prince
Rupert, one of the few commanders in history who
consistently sought battle as a first resort, took part
in six field actions during the first Civil War but over
twice as many, which involved assaulting or defending
strong points.
Being from a 17th cent society I often search through
contemporary accounts in the hope that I could
understand what happened some 360 years ago.
|
 |
The Attack
As regards general principles the attack was similar,
in the 17th cent, to modern times. Ward mentions three
essential considerations, only the first might not be
considered now.
The General, he says, should "First consider whether he
can derive any right or true title" to the place he
intends to besiege. The other two points to consider are
as relevant now as then. The General should consider if
his force and the composition of his siege train are
sufficient for the proper conduct of the siege. i.e. Is
he big enough ?
(Extract from 'The diary of the Siege of Colchester by the
Forces under the Command of General Fairfax' )
"Wednesday June 13 1648; engaged Lord Goring's forces
in the field before Colchester and beat them into town.
Summoned them to surrender; they returned with an answer
not becoming a gentleman"
"Thursday June 14; Lord Fairfax perceiving that Lord
Goring would not stand the field resolved to sit down to
a siege being too few to storm."
Fairfax had about 4,500 men and Goring about 6,000 both
forces were expecting reinforcements. Fairfax's
reinforcements, the Essex & Suffolk Militia plus three
more foote regiments, arrived; Goring's (the Scots
defeated at Preston 17 August) did not. The town finally
fell on August 27 1648.
The General should consider whether "The profit he shall
gain" by the capture of the place, will "Countervail the
charge" to which he will put in to undertake in
capturing the place. In other words is she worth it.
Having resolved these points the next step is to get
accurate information regarding the place to be attacked
and its neighbourhood, after which, "Sharpening his
valour upon the grindstone of resolution, let him lead
his army in good order" against the fortress.
The first duty of the Engineer was a reconnaissance,
carried out with a view to select the actual point of
attack. In the absence of a regular engineer an
experienced gunner would carry out this operation . The
experienced gunner would also be expected to superintend
the 'opening of the sappes or trenches'.
Main points of consideration was the selection of the
point of attack, whether to make approaches against a
Bastion (Tower) along its Capital Point (leading edge)
or against a curtain (wall) between two Bastions. A
'Council of War' called for this purpose would decide
this matter. On this matter there appears to be a
difference of opinion the majority of Professional men
inclining towards attacking the Bastion. This point
being settled the actual attack was to commence.
Venn
says, "There are five Acts proper to the siege" which
are, in order: -
1. Circumvallation, 2. Approaches and Batteries 3.
Sappes or cutting through the outer breastworks 4. The
Gallery 5. Breaching of the Bulwark by a mine.
1. Circumvallation here is used to represent lines,
both interior and exterior, required for the protection
of the besiegers against the attacks of both the
defenders and any relief sent to help them. Cruso and
Turner agree with this explanation. Other writers
(mainly foreign) note the use of the terms
Contravallation for an inner line and Circumvallation
for an outer line of siege works. It is probable that
during the Civil war there was never more than one belt
of investing line employed. Only a single one in the
accounts of the attacks at Colchester and only one line
had to be forced by the relievers of Newark Basing House
while to meet the relieving armies at Gloucester 1643;
Nantwich 1644 (both Royalists) and York 1644
(Parliament) lifted their siege and rose to meet the
enemy in the field, with varying successes. The
substitute for an outer line seems to fortify the camps
and villages occupied by the various divisions of the
attacking force. Concerning this "Let them be in two
fold; one inward, built against the besieged to keep
them in; the other outward to keep off any enemy that
should attack the camp from without." 'Varietie of
Works' the describing of such terms used e.g. Redoubts;
Ravelins; Half-Moons; Bulwarks; Double Tonges; Stars;
Square Forts and Redans would take up a whole year and
still cover only a fraction of the subject. The size and
disposition of such terms varied they were based on such
a simple! thing as the distance of "The Musket Shotte".
Even when you discount the variety of the different
ordnances in use at the time I have found at least five
differing opinions of the range. The Musket Shotte;
Neade suggested the same range as a well aimed bow
350-400yds: Binning regards it as far as 250 engineering
paces (@ 5 ft) about 420yds: Hexham suggests in one
place as 600ft (200yds) but in another 240yds: a foreign
work stated that a musket could kill a man at 200
engineering paces (330yds) another foreigner supposedly
supporting the former suggested 400yds or so was
distance beyond which the musket could be disregarded.
Add to this confusion there was four principal
divisions or schools of methods of constructing the
works. Principal Divisions as described by Cruso were: -
French, Spanish, Italian (Venetian), Dutch of these he
regards the Dutch as the "Finest". Ward considers the
"Low Countries Manner" the "Most absolutist manner that
can be invented". It was this method that was adopted by
English Engineers and was an influential and important
factor in the sieges in England. The differences were
mainly in the angles used and as above with the regards
to the ranges of the Musket.
2. Approaches and Batteries. Before any movement
towards the enemy could be made the artillery fire from
the fortress had to some degree be mastered. To this end
batteries, in modern terms known as first artillery
position, had to be constructed and armed. These first
positions Venn suggested were to be "At a musquette
shotte from the town"? They were usually elevated, a
parapet 20ft high and about 16ft thick. They had ditches
to their front and sides, with the excavated earth used
for the platforms, Gabions were used to soften the
artillery fire from the enemy. Mantlets (musket proof)
covered the embrasures (openings) of the battery. Some
writers Venn and Norton mention Screens in front of
them. The Guns used are usually Culverins these fired a
ball weighing 20/19lbs dia. 51/4" had a range of 360/420
paces (pace = 21/2ft) point blank, and 3,400 paces/2,100
engineers paces (5ft) maximum. This gives figures of
300/350yds and 2,833/3500yds.
Guarding these batteries were Sconces or Redoubts often
called "Corps de Garde" Hexham would have these made
square with a side of 16 to 24 yds.
These
would be placed near where it was intended to 'Break
Ground' for the Sappes or Trenches. It was considered
prudent to complete this work in one night. If the
sappes were long then further works were placed at
intervals and when they turned to enfilade both lines.
3 Sappes or Trenches. The honour of lifting the first
turf went to the Captain of Pioneers. It had been the
custom to employ civilians to do the digging as the
soldiers objected to it, but the Dutch succeeded in
overcoming this by establishing a system of pay (money
masters all). This custom appears to been followed in
the English Service. We are told by Nehemiah Wharton
that Essex paid his troops 12d a day at the
fortifications of Worcester. Working parties consisted
of 'Commanded' men from each regiment, as many as a
third would be used. It was again a matter of argument
whether the men were placed along the lines of trench
digging along its length or at the head of the sap and
thus digging as they advanced. These trenches were noted
as being 3ft wide and 3ft deep though they became deeper
as they neared the enemy. Parties of armed guards were
located to protect the diggers . These Sappes zigzagged
towards the works to be attacked to prevent enfilading
by the defenders. In some cases where speed was required
the sappes were driven directly at the works and not by
zigzags. 'Blinds' made of Gabions would protect the head
of such sappes. Ward and Norton mention an engine called
a 'Saulcisse' . These were described as made of wood and
iron hoops "in a manner of a Hogshead or Pipe" and
filled with 'Dunge or Sand' this was a Sap Roller. For
this 'Engine' did "wonderful service" when "alwayes
rowled before those that went to intrench themselves".
4 The Gallery. From the end of the Sappes galleries
were driven forward to attach the miners to the face of
the Bastion or curtain Wall. This simple phrase covered
one of the most perilous tasks in the sequence. The mine
would be driven into the earthworks, through the
'Counterscarp' (the inner supporting wall of the ditch),
bringing the miners into the ditch. If it was filled
with water it was known as a Moat if dry then it was
referred to as a Graffe. The height at which the gallery
came into the ditch would depend on such as the water
level and the height intended to breach the wall. Now a
covered way was taken across the gap of the ditch to the
base of the wall. Fascines bundles of Faggots and
Brushwood filled the ditch, sacks of earth and sand
stabilised this 'Causeway' or Dam. Fascines were called
'Kids' in contemporary accounts.
On this 'Causeway' was built a further gallery across
the ditch. This gallery was provided, on its exposed
areas, with a shot proof wall and roof of timber
uprights and a double casing of planks filled with earth
the roof being 3ft thick. While this gallery was being
constructed fire from the defenders was kept to a
minimum by musketry and guns from the lodgements and
other works of the besiegers. Venn commented, "In the
universal affair of the siege there is nothing more
dangerous than this enterprise". By working at night
under protection and shelter of blinds and Mantlets of
fascines called Candlesticks the danger might be
minimized.
5 Breaching of the Bulwark by Mine On reaching the
opposite side of the ditch a mine gallery was driven for
the purposes of lodging a mine for the demolition of the
wall or Bastion. This mining operation has similarities
to that other Great War of our present century, where
miners tried to outwit each other underground. Barrels
of Gunpowder were place in the Mine Gallery which was
about 4ft high by 3ft wide, Turner wrote that it was "no
place for a fat corpulent man", and as long as was
required. The mine was stopped with planks and excavated
earth, leaving a hole for the powder trail. Then light
it and run like ****! That is if you could be safe
running along a sappe 3ft deep.
 At
this point those at 'The Front' would be wishing that
the Generals had chosen the other option of breaching
the wall using guns. The heavier 'Cannon' were used for
this at ranges as close as possible to shatter and shake
the walls loosening the joints in the masonry. Then the
lighter Culverins 'Cut Out' and brought away the
disjointed pieces.
For a breach to be made in 12 hours of firing, Turner
proposes eight Cannon and six Culverins, add to this six
Demi-Culverins meanwhile destroying the parapets on the
flanks to silence the defenders. An estimate of powder
required using guns alone was 25,000 lbs. About 2,500
lbs would be needed to blow a mine. Some comparison. The
besieged are of course trying to counter all this at the
same time.
'Cannon' this term itself refers to a size of gun.
Cannon have sub types such as Royal, Serpentine, and
French while the Demi-Cannon are divided into Eldest,
Ordinary and Smaller. The Eldest fires a ball weighing
47 lbs. 370 paces (308yds) point blank and 1,800
engineering paces (3000yds) maximum range. A complete
list of statistics can be seen in 'The Complete Gunner'
1672 reprinted in 1971. Artillery is in fact a term that
covers guns from Muskets to larger Ordinance (read
Bariffes 'Military Discipline or The Young Artillery
Man' in it he only mentions pike and musket) such as
Cannons and the bigger Cannon Royal.
The Breaches being made then comes the Storm or
Assault. Joshua Sprigge gives a minutely detailed
account of Fairfax's storming of Bristol recounted in
Anglia Rediviva (or England's Recovery). The word Storm
used here refers to the hail of lead used by both sides.
|
|
The Defence
The Joke - After Israel's raid on Entebbe Airport, in
1976, Idi Amin, the former Ugandan despot, was asked
about holes in defence, he said "de man with de nails
would be round in de morning to fix dem".
Seventeenth Century fortifications suffered from this
sort of problem and were a joke in themselves. After
years of neglect and a military revolution from the
early sixteenth century in siege craft. The crucial
development came about in Italy about 1540 with the
enclosure of strong points within thick low earthen
walls studded with polygon bastions, which provided
flanking fire along the external ditches. Such
fortresses became impervious to all but the heaviest
bombardment, and turned sieges into protracted affairs
requiring considerable technical expertise.
Why Oh Why?- Why did the protagonists spend so much
resources on garrisons?
1) Towns were of course centres of wealth in their own
right and needed to be safeguarded to control the
trading systems, which depended upon them.
2) The possession of fortified positions would secure
the produce from those areas for the party holding them.
3) To help subdue areas of uncertain loyalty.
4) Protect lines of communication.
5) Securing ports gave control of exterior lines of
communication.
6) The propaganda factor, fortitude shown by a garrison
demonstrated the fervour with which a cause was
supported. A successful resistance, like a battle won,
served as proof of divine favour and political
commitment.
Reasons given for fortifying London by dykes, earthen
walls and bulwarks: -
1st. That it will best secure the City and defend it
from any furious and grand assault by day, but
especially by night, when bulwarks unless united by
dykes and earthen wall will not suffice.
2nd That it will be a very great advantage and profit
to the city. It will not only discourage the enemies of
the city from warlike and violent approaches, but will
encourage our friends to frequent her, and come with
their estates to inhabit in her by multitudes, whereby
she will grow mighty, famous and rich even in time of
war, instance the Low Countries, besides the aid of
strangers by weekly contributions and the increase of
trade.
|
|
The Defence
How?
Pre-Civil War fortifications had suffered during Tudor
and Stuart Monarchs from lack of resources and pressing
dangers, as a result new fortifications had appeared at
six places all on the North Sea and Channel coast. They
consisted of a chain of small castles with thick, squat
stone walls with rounded bastions erected by Henry VIII.
Thus by 1640 the most modern category of fortification
was over a hundred years old. Where old defences existed
they had to be strengthened and improved. As Venn put it
"An ancient Rampar," if it be strong and surrounded with
a wall and towers, must not be demolished, therefore you
must enclose it with a new fortification which must be
Regular, if possible, or as near a Regular as might be.
Betwixt the new fortification and the old ditch there
must be left a "large Pomoerium fit for military uses."
He goes on to say; "many French and Dutch cities were
fortified with Ravelins, Half-moons, Hornworms and other
sorts of works tis to supply the place of Bulwarks and
ought to be stronger than usual." He goes on to list
such as Faus-bray, Breastworks, Ditches and Stakados to
add to the fortifications. The practical result of these
arrangements was to provide a new and continuous
encircling ring of fortifications in advance of the
older ones. This was the intention but was only carried
out fully in limited situations. A commoner plan in
England seems to be to occupy important points beyond
the inner walls with advanced and detached works, in
some cases linked by a continuous line. In others by a
series of disconnected works.
With the advent of the war towns hastily constructed
crude earthen works, dug where the attacks were expected
and at a height which protected men's bodies while they
defended them. Such basic breastworks quickly scraped
out by inexperienced troops at Birmingham, in April
1643, repelled an attack by Prince Rupert's crack
cavalry regiments; the latter only won the day by
outflanking them.
To make these defences more formidable still, the size
of the bank could be increased and a parapet built. A
flooded moat could replace the ditch add a stockade of
sharpened stakes, Storm poles, palisadoes, hedges of
posts three or four foot long with sharp iron tips to
increase its strength. Even an old stone wall could be
made rendered invulnerable from cannon by packing earth
behind it. According to Henry Townshend under siege in
royalist Worcester, a big gun could still breach a wall
lined with up to eight feet of soil or dung; but a
lining twenty feet thick to the top would be impossible.
In Civil war terms, where there was muck there was
safety.
Who?
When an enemy exposed a town to direct attack its
inhabitants, of all ages and both sexes, worked
feverishly and without pay to perfect its defences. This
was because of the risk of loosing their possessions
following a successful storm. Civilians, even including
'the ordinary sort of women' worked on the defences of
Worcester. Fishwives of Billingsgate worked alongside
Gentlewomen to throw up the vast defences of London in
1642. Otherwise a military governor or town council paid
for labour services or else arranged a regular system of
conscription for them. Oxford imposed a fine of 1s a day
for defaulters.
One cause of discontent was the clearing of suburbs to
give a clear field of fire. Most old towns had
outstripped their town walls and spread outwards. These
houses added to the risk of fire and gave cover to the
enemy. The destruction of these suburbs gave rise to
discontent, loss of property, trade and land led to
protests and claims for compensation.
A Royalist expert on fortifications, Sir Richard Cave,
reckoned that twenty men could cast up 40ft of
breastworks in 12 hours. Certainly a force of a few
hundred determined men, with picks, spades and axes
could fortify a small town within a week. The "chains
and mud walls at the towns ends" put up hurriedly at
Manchester in September 1642, under the direction of a
German engineer Roseworm, repelled the assaults of a
larger royalist force under the earl of Derby.
|
|
The Defence
As seen above an outer circle of fortifications were
built to 'defend' the old inner walls. These had strong
points built at strategic positions. One style of these
was the 'Royal Fort.' These appeared at many places in
England at Worcester, London, the King and Queen Sconces
at Newark, Bristol and Reading. Venn describes three
types of "Forts Royal".
As well as walled towns outworks were built around
strong mansions. Lathom House and Basing House are two
of the best known, however others such as Wingfield
Manor in Derbyshire and Rushall Hall in Staffordshire
had their own problems. Wingfield lay in a steep sided
valley the open side being plugged with earthworks 15ft
high and 10ft thick. Although this withstood the
bombardment of a Parliament Demi-cannon in August 1644,
the concussive effect proved too much for the defenders,
at one stage drowning out their drums beating up for a
parley. Rushall was attacked by Parliament under the
earl of Denbigh, he arrived in late 1644 with a single
'big gun' and in half a day made a breach wide enough to
permit 8 men to pass abreast the royalists gave up.
It is often said that the best form of defence is
attack. Sallying Out was a great threat to the besiegers
and caused them great concern. The defenders could
choose their own time and place, sometimes it was to
capture enemy positions or equipment other times to
allow defenders to send out excess troops to safety, Sir
Thomas Fairfax sent out unwanted cavalry at Hull and the
Earl of Essex's cavalry fought their way out of
Lostwithial in 1643. Although cavalry were sent out of
towns where it was impossible to feed them some were
kept as they were ideal in attacks upon the besiegers,
Colchester 1648, failing that you could eat them, the
horses only of course. Another way was to send a
relieving force to lift the siege e.g. Gloucester 1643
and York 1644. This method could be used to bring in
fresh supplies and troops or clear away the besiegers.
|
|
Weapons
It is often thought that the defenders used different
types of weapons to that of the attackers but they used
very similar weapons apart from a very few notable
instances, e.g. Wem where the 'the wild women of Wem',
are reputed to have used iron skillets. Caltrops,
described by Ward thus "the Calthrop is an Instrument
very offensive to the Enemies Horse and by the use of
them a few soldiers may make an able resistance either
in the streetes of a towne or upon any passage."
Barricades were a very practical way of obstructing the
movement after the attackers had broken through any
breach. Chevaux de frise is a well known type, although
in English contemporary accounts they were know as
turnpikes, another version was called a Bome or
barricado this obstacle was used at points liable to
incursions by cavalry, the Dutch called these obstacles
'Frize Ruyter' (from the germanic rieter or rider a
cavalryman).
The militias would use the weapons they were trained
for although in any close combat anything goes, whether
in towns or open field. I have read several accounts
that mention 'brown-bills' anyone know what these are?
Artillery was just as important to the defenders as the
attackers. Colonel Nathaniel Fiennes had some 94 iron
pieces, sakers and others, besides 2 small brass
two-pounders and 2 four-pounders. In the castle there
was a long brass murderer (murthering shotte was used to
'murther and spoyle' the enemy being approached neere
hand) i.e. in streets and passages. Diverse small iron
pieces mounted on carts, for quick deployment, with a
bore of double rabbinetts or double hacques had been
made by a local country smith would have been loaded
with a pound or more of musket balls or iron ball.
Fiennes had about 300 horse and 1500 foot plus townsfolk
to man his defences.
|
|
Actual
Accounts
Siege of Bristol July 1643. An eyewitness account of
the assault by a royalist gives an insight to the style
of defence and its ferocity. "A heap of our troops newly
gotten over the line and being charged by the enemies
horse before they could rank themselves into order, made
up altogether with much good speed into a lane towards
the town, the enemy retreating still before them.
Unknown to us the enemy had a strong work (Essex Work)
and they suspecting our men's running haste to be
encouraged of such as they pursued the victory and were
resolved to carry all before them, with as much haste
ran out of it onto us."
Basing House 17 June 1644; The enemy (royalists) horse
sallying out and seized two teams of ours, fetching
provisions towards Sherfield, and three horses grazing
in the Park. At night the enemy, fortifying the church,
shot two of our men. Our numbers being few we divided
into three parts keeping two thirds on duty and one
third at rest. There are some great accounts of sallying
out in the descriptions of the Siege of Basing Castle
kept by Lord Marquise of Winchester.
Lyme April 1644. Prince Maurice attempted several
assaults trying to catch the defenders off guard. Lyme
had a strong line of ditches reinforced by no less than
seven bastioned forts, which commanded the ground above
the port. This coupled with the 1,100 soldiers in the
garrison made Lyme an impossible target. Twice Maurice's
Demi-Cannon made a breach in the line only to find the
defenders retreated to a next line, poured fire on to
the soldiers bursting through the breach until they
retreated then the hole was filled up.
Basing House August 19 1644; "This day getting their
Demy-Cannon to the works they batter us with 48 shot,
and the following two days with eight score more, killed
two men and mischieved two more, break our best iron gun
and make a breach in one of our square towers. Because
of this our men and officers putting hand to spade
repaired it making it cannon proof before dark."
Colchester July 15 1648; "The enemy (parliament) set
fire to our rooves and thatch in 6 or 7 places, we set
to and with the industry of our soldiers supported by
the people of Colchester we prevented the consuming of
the towne."
|
|
Summary
The more I find out about sieges the less I realise I
know and want to delve further into this fascinating
subject. Much more appears to be written on open field
battles than sieges but there are extensive accounts
written about the subject. Being in fixed situations it
is much easier to see where the action would have been.
|
|
Bibliography
THOMAS BINNING 'A Light to the Art of Gunnery' 1676 and
1689
JOHN CRUSO Wrote many works on military matters, 'The
Art of War' 1639;
'The Complete Captain' 1640; 'Castramellation' 1642;
Most of his works are translations of foreign treatises.
HENRY HEXHAM Translated Marollois work on
Fortifications. He was Lord Goring's Quartermaster in
the Netherlands.
NEADE 'A DOUBLE ARMED MAN 1625;
ROBERT NORTON 'One of his Majesties Gunners and
Engineers' wrote two editions of 'The Gunner' in 1628
and 1643.
JOSHUA SPRIGGE 'Anglia Rediviva' or England's Recovery being
the History of the Motions, Actions and Successes of the
Army under the
Immediate Conduct of His Excellency Sir Thomas Fairfax.
SIR JAMES TURNER 'Pallas Armata' essays written in 1670
and published 1683;
THOMAS VENN 'Military and Maritime Discipline' 1672 A very
complete work;
ROBERT WARD 'Gentleman and Commander' wrote a very complete
and profusely, if quaintly, illustrated treatise on the
whole Art Militaire, 'The Animadversions of War' in
1639.
Return to
the top of this page...
Back to main history menu
|
|
