CHAPTER IX

THE EXTENT OF THE INSURRECTION

The main body of the Pilgrims’ army was at Pontefract on 21 October,

1536; leaving them there for the present, we will now follow the history

of the rising in the northern counties from the outbreak of the

insurrection. It will be convenient to carry this account on beyond the

date which has been reached, up to the truce of 27 October, in order

that the narrative may not be broken a second time.

In tracing the course of the rebellion in the far north, it must be

remembered that Northumberland, Durham, Cumberland, Westmorland and the

towns of Berwick and Newcastle-upon-Tyne were exempted from the

subsidy,—in fact, taking into consideration the remissions which were

granted to them on account of their sufferings at the hands of the

Scots, it may be said that these places were scarcely taxed at all[888].

Consequently the insurgents lacked one of the bonds which united the

subsidy men in Lincolnshire and Yorkshire.

In Cumberland and Westmorland the rising was almost entirely directed

against enclosures and unpopular landlords, and received little support

from the gentlemen or, with a few exceptions, from the clergy. In Durham

and Northumberland, on the other hand, the gentry seem to have been more

deeply involved than the commons, owing to the influence of the

disinherited Percys. In the Yorkshire dales, as in Cumberland and

Westmorland, the movement was chiefly social, and was directed against

the Earl of Cumberland, while the gentlemen, who imitated the Earl on a

small scale, naturally supported him against the rabble.

It would be incorrect to say that after the rising of Howdenshire and

Beverley the rebellion spread northwards, as Hexham and the northern

dales had been astir since the end of September, but these minor

disturbances gained significance from the widespread movement further

south.

The only monastery which offered any determined resistance to the Act

for the Dissolution of the Smaller Monasteries was the priory of

Augustinian canons at Hexham. Their house did not really come within the

scope of the Act, as its yearly value was over £200, but for some reason

or other it was included among those to be suppressed[889]. The house

had suffered in the Scots’ wars, and there is reason to believe that its

condition was not very good, either financially or morally, but it was

of great importance as a centre of hospitality in the barren region

between England and Scotland. On 23 April, 1536, Archbishop Lee wrote to

Cromwell begging that it might be spared because “wise men that know the

Borders think that the lands thereof, although they were ten times as

much, can not countervail the damage that is like to ensue if it be

suppressed; and some way there is never a house between Scotland and the

lordship of Hexham; and men fear if the monastery go down, that in

process all shall be waste much within the land.”[890] It seems probable

that the canons received a royal exemption from the Act, or that the

monastery was immediately refounded, but later in the year they must

have heard that they were again in danger, whereupon the prior, Edward

Jay, went up to London to try to make terms with Cromwell. He was

unsuccessful, however, and returned sadly home by way of York. There he

waited on the Archbishop, who received him in his barge, and in the

presence of his chaplains and servants warned Jay to submit to the

King’s will without attempting any resistance[891].

The date of this interview is uncertain, but it seems to have been at

the end of September, and when the prior returned home he found that the

Archbishop’s advice had come too late. In his absence the sub-prior and

the master of the dependent cell of Ovingham (two separate persons, not

the same man) had laid in weapons for the defence of the monastery and

had roused the people, who were the more easily moved as the hated Sir

Reynold Carnaby had received the grant of its lands[892].

On 28 September, before the prior’s return, the four commissioners for

the dissolution were warned at Dilston that they would be resisted. Two

of them who were local men, Robert Collingwood and Lionel Gray, rode on

with a few servants to reconnoitre. They found the streets of Hexham

full of armed men, the alarm bells ringing, and the gates of the Priory

shut. The commissioners took up their stand outside, and parleyed with

the master of Ovingham, who appeared on the leads of the monastery in

harness, accompanied by servants in arms. His first words were, “We be

twenty brethren in this house, and we shall die all, or that ye shall

have this house.” The commissioners advised him to consult with his

brethren before rejecting the royal commission, and the master withdrew

to do so, commanding the hostile crowd which had gathered about the

commissioners to do them no harm. After a space he returned with the

sub-prior in canon’s robes. They brought the royal confirmation,

delivered to the house under the great seal, showed it to the

commissioners, and gave them their answer; “We think it not the king’s

honour to give forth one seal contrary to another, and afore any either

of our lands, goods or houses be taken from us we shall all die, and

that is our full answer.” Gray and Collingwood returned with this reply

to the other commissioners who were waiting for them at a little

distance. They left behind in Hexham three of their servants, who

rejoined them next day, and reported that as soon as their masters had

withdrawn the monastery gates were thrown open, and the canons, all in

harness, accompanied by some sixty armed men, marched out two by two to

a place called the Green, from which they watched the meeting of the

commissioners and their departure. When they were out of sight the

canons returned to the Priory again. Such was the news that greeted

Prior Jay on his return, and he despatched a canon to report it to

Archbishop Lee[893]. Other messengers were hastening from Hexham with

the same news, one from the commissioners to the King[894], and two from

“old Carnaby” of Halton, who sent to his son Sir Reynold, and to the

Archbishop, asking the latter to order the canons to submit[895]. To

each of the messengers the Archbishop replied by bidding the canons

surrender, and Sir Reynold appealed to the Earl of Northumberland who

wrote to Cromwell on 4 October[896]. After receiving the report of the

commissioners on 5 October the King sent orders that Hexham was to be

taken and dissolved by force if necessary. The letter seems to have been

meant for the Earl of Cumberland[897], but the outbreak of the rebellion

in Yorkshire prevented him from executing the order[898].

The King also wrote to Archbishop Lee, whom he suspected of encouraging

the canons, and Lee replied with one of his long, rambling letters of

excuse[899]; his writing is much faded, and difficult to decipher, but

the letter shows that the Prior of Hexham was with him at York at the

time of the commissioners’ visit, and therefore could not have taken

part in the resistance which was offered to them at Hexham. Meanwhile in

Hexhamshire matters were at a deadlock. No one in the neighbourhood

would help the Carnabys against the canons, and no troops could advance

from the south on account of the insurrection in Yorkshire. One of the

local freebooters, little John Heron of Chipchase[900], who was a

follower of Sir Thomas Percy, determined to make use of this state of

affairs for his own advantage. Accordingly on the morning of Sunday 15

October he appeared at Halton, and suggested to old William Carnaby that

he should act as mediator between the two parties. Carnaby, at his wits’

end, accepted the offer, and Heron then rode over to Hexham, where he

said nothing of his negotiations with the opposite party, but warned the

canons that their only chance of saving their lives was to purchase the

help of himself and his friends by granting them certain fees and then

“he doubted not but by the help of his son-in-law Cuthbert Charleton—and

of one Edward Charleton his uncle—with other such friends as they would

make, but all the whole country of Tynedale would die and live in the

quarrel.” The documents granting the fees were drawn up, but not signed,

for the canons were honourably reluctant to join themselves with

thieves, and begged Heron to carry a message to William Carnaby that

they would deliver up the monastery to the commissioners if Sir Reynold

would intercede for their lives and if “they might there serve God and

remain.” Heron returned to Halton, where he passed the night, but merely

said that he was to receive the canons’ final answer on the morrow.

During the night he secretly summoned the men of Tynedale to assemble

next day. In the morning, 16 October, he went again to Hexham, and told

the canons that Sir Reynold would make no terms,—he was resolved to have

the heads of four canons and of four townsmen to send to the King.

Whereupon the canons declared that it was better to defend their lives

while they could than wilfully to kill themselves, and they definitely

threw in their lot with the Tynedale men[901]. It was a fatal though

natural mistake on their part. The rebels’ cause in Northumberland was

as much injured by the alliance with the thieves of Tynedale and

Reedsdale as the King’s was in Cumberland by the loyalty of the thieves

of the “Black Lands,” the valleys of the Esk and Line. When Tynedale and

Reedsdale “broke” no man of substance in Northumberland cared for either

church or King until order was restored. If any power could prevent the

mosstroopers from spoiling and killing up to the very walls of

Newcastle, that power would be welcome though it came directly from

Satan, and since the government was at present opposed to the canons and

their allies, it followed that all honest men in Northumberland

supported the government.

As soon as he had made sure of the canons, on Monday, 16 October, John

Heron rode back to Halton, and sat down cheerfully to dinner, with the

remark that “It is a good sight to see a man eat when he is hungry.” He

knew that he had done a good morning’s work and that in a few hours his

friends of Tynedale would be there, with whose help he proposed to

plunder Halton and carry off Carnaby to Sir Ingram Percy. So far his

plans had been successful, but now his good luck began to leave him, for

dinner was only half done when Archie Robson of Tynedale arrived and

began to talk to John Robson his cousin. Heron guessed what that meant,

and at once drew Carnaby aside and told him that “he could not find them

of Hexham to will to make any stay, but they would do their worst,” and

he therefore advised Carnaby to “defend himself as well as he would for

he knew well they would be at his house straightway, and that Tynedale

was part taken with them.” Carnaby reproached him for giving such short

notice, saying that it was “not like a friend of him done to know such a

purpose, and not to declare it till he had half dined,” but he still

trusted Heron and agreed to ride with him to Chipchase, to avoid the

attack of the Tynedale men, as Heron declared they were in irresistible

force and were resolved to take Carnaby’s life. It was now that Heron’s

luck failed altogether, for it happened that a servant of Sir Reynold

Carnaby’s was riding by St John Ley near Hexham when he saw the men of

Hexhamshire and Tynedale mustering there. By fair words he managed both

to learn their purpose and to escape from their hands, and set off to

carry the news to Halton, taking a short cut in order to arrive before

the host. By chance he saw Heron and Carnaby as they rode towards

Chipchase, and managed to tell Carnaby secretly, “That traitor thief

that rideth with you hath betrayed you, and it will cost you your life

yet; if ye follow counsel I shall warrant you.” Apparently their

pursuers were now in sight, and by his servant’s advice Carnaby begged

Heron to stop and parley with them “because he was of their acquaintance

and allied amongst them,” while he himself rode on to Chipchase. Heron

consented, but sent his son George to watch his victim’s movements.

Carnaby however managed to get rid of George, and as soon as he was out

of sight of the Tynedale men, changed his direction and rode to Langley

Castle. There he was safe, as it was one of Northumberland’s castles,

and apparently held by the Earl’s own men. Meanwhile Heron, seeing that

his prey had escaped, rode back to Halton, which was being plundered by

the Tynedale men. He told Carnaby’s son Thomas that his father commanded

him to leave the house, and persuaded Carnaby’s wife to give him a

casket containing her husband’s money and plate, but at the last moment,

when the casket was actually in Heron’s hands, Arthur Errington, a

kinsman of the Carnabys, seized it from him and galloped off,

accompanied by seven Tynedale men whom he had won to his part. John

Heron pursued them “and put a kerchief as a pensell upon his spear

point” to lead his followers in the chase, but Errington made his

escape. The next day, Tuesday 17 October, Heron returned to Halton, but

found it occupied by Lewis Ogle, brother of Lord Ogle, who was an ally

of the Carnabys. Heron vainly endeavoured to make him desert Halton

“saying he would not tarry there till night, if he knew and perceived as

much as he knew, for ten thousand pounds,” but Ogle was resolute, and at

last Heron “rode home, and never came thither after.”[902]

It is now time to look a little into the matter of dates. The canons had

defied the commissioners on Thursday 28 September, but John Heron did

not make his first move until Sunday 15 October, more than a fortnight

later. On the very day that he rode to Halton the commons of Durham

rose, and at some time during the week Heron’s brother-in-law, John

Lumley, brought him a letter from them containing their articles and

oath[903]. It seems more than likely that he had been in touch with them

from an earlier date, and knew what their movements were to be. The

situation in Northumberland was favourable, as the Earl, who was the

warden of the East Marches, was lying ill at Wressell Castle in

Yorkshire. It is true that Sir Thomas Percy was also in Yorkshire, but

Sir Ingram was at Alnwick[904]. He had been deprived of his office of

vice-warden by the Earl’s command about midsummer, but no new

vice-warden had been appointed[905], and Northumberland had made him

constable of Alnwick Castle in July[906]. In the circumstances it was

natural that he should assume authority and no one seems to have known

what his attitude would be. On hearing of the rising in Tynedale and

Reedsdale he sent out a summons which bore a suspicious resemblance to

the Lincolnshire oath: “It is ordained and appointed that all the

gentlemen of Northumberland shall meet at Alnwick upon Sunday 22 October

at eleven of the clock, for to take an order by all their advices and

consents, what is best for them to do that may be pleasure to Almighty

God and most acceptable service to the King’s highness and for the

common weal of this country and the safeguard of the Marches.”[907] The

gentlemen of Northumberland, knowing nothing of the oath to God, the

King and the Common Weal obeyed the summons readily. Robert Collingwood,

the commissioner who was baffled at Hexham, drew up a list of agenda for

the assembly in amusing contrast to the actual proceedings. It would be

necessary, he wrote, to see that all the gentlemen of Northumberland and

their dependants took one way in the King’s service, and to take

measures against a Scots invasion. As the warden was absent and no

vice-warden had been appointed, two gentlemen must be chosen to act as

lieutenants of the East and Middle Marches, they must be provided with

counsel and support, and all the gentlemen must wait on them as

diligently as if they were each receiving a £20 fee. The two lieutenants

must at once join with the keepers of Tynedale and Reedsdale to take “a

substantial order” to restore peace there, “as ill disposed men rob the

King’s true subjects every night.” Finally everything that was

determined must be written out and signed by all the gentlemen

present[908]. As it turned out Collingwood would have been very much

alarmed if his last suggestion had been enforced.

Sir Ingram Percy in the meanwhile was as politic as the King himself

could have been. He did nothing to alarm the gentlemen before the

meeting, and sent the Abbot of Alnwick and “other friends that he made”

to his brother the Earl of Northumberland at Wressell with a message

that he was true to the King and would repress any disturbances in

Northumberland if he was restored to his office. The Earl believed his

professions and made him sheriff of Northumberland, vice-warden, and

lieutenant of the East Marches “with the fees accustomed.”[909] After

Sir Ingram had sent out the summons to the gentlemen, John Lumley, the

messenger from Durham, arrived at Alnwick, whither he had been sent by

John Heron. He brought the letter of the commons of Durham, signed by

“Captain Poverty,” commanding Sir Ingram to take the oath and to remain

in Northumberland as a protection against the Scots[910]. Sir Ingram

could not put forward the common excuse that he had been forced to take

the oath when it was brought by a single messenger from rebels more than

fifty miles away; in fact, as soon as the gentlemen had assembled on

Sunday 22 October, he attempted no further concealment. Instead of

entering into the business of curbing the mosstroopers, as Collingwood

and the rest expected, he caused the commons’ letter and articles to be

read aloud and then ordered all present to take the oath. A few ventured

to protest, but as they were “enclosed in the said Castle of Alnwick”

with “no remedy but all must swear or else do worse,” they all submitted

and “will they or not, sworn they were.” Having now declared himself,

Sir Ingram did not let the grass grow under his feet. He used all

possible means to induce the gentlemen of Northumberland to join him,

and devoted himself to revenging his own and his brother’s wrongs on the

Carnabys. Accompanied by Sir Humphry Lisle, Robert Swinhoe and John

Roddam with all the forces of Alnwick, he rode to Adderstone by

Bamborough, where he believed that Sir Reynold Carnaby was hiding under

the protection of his wife’s brother Thomas Forster. As a matter of fact

Sir Reynold was at Chillingham Castle with Sir Robert Ellerker and

others of the King’s party, and when Sir Ingram had searched Adderstone

unsuccessfully, he departed swearing “By God’s heart, he would be

revenged of” Sir Reynold Carnaby. Thomas Forster asked what offence Sir

Reynold had done him, and Sir Ingram turned upon him,—“Sir Reynold

Carnaby hath been the destruction of all our blood, for by his means the

king shall be my lord’s heir; and now he thinketh a sport, and to ride

up and down in the country, all we being sworn and he unsworn, and this

I pray you show him, for surely I will be revenged of him.” On the way

back to Alnwick he wished to attack Sir Thomas Grey’s house at Newstead,

but his men dissuaded him. During the same expedition he took possession

of Sir Reynold’s lands at North Charlton, for the use of his brother Sir

Thomas Percy. He afterwards seized all Sir Reynold’s possessions in

Northumberland. Edward Bradford, Sir Reynold’s steward, refused to give

up his master’s rents. Sir Ingram sent out eighteen of his servants who

took him by force “betwixt his parish church and his house,” and carried

him to Alnwick, where he was “laid in the stocks two nights and a day

and kept in hold three days longer,” because Sir Ingram would have him

forswear his master. Bradford probably submitted or his imprisonment

would have been longer.

Sir Ingram now sent to Lionel Gray, porter of Berwick, the other Hexham

commissioner, to Sir Roger Gray and to Sir Robert Ellerker bidding them

come in and take the oath. They all refused, and Lionel Gray was so

closely harried that “the most part of his cattle, by driving and

removing from one place to another for fear of the said Sir Ingram, was

in point of utter loss and destruction.” Hearing that Carnaby, Sir

Robert Ellerker and others had taken refuge in Chillingham Castle, Sir

Ingram was reported to have sent to Berwick for ordnance in order that

he might besiege them, but no actual siege seems ever to have been

attempted[911]. Sir Thomas Clifford, the captain of Berwick[912], was a

friend of Sir Thomas Percy, and although he was the Earl of Cumberland’s

brother, he does not seem to have been so much opposed to the rebels as

the rest of his family. He received messages from the Percys, and when

Lionel Gray begged that his over-driven cattle might be protected in the

fields of Berwick, the captain refused his permission. On St Katharine’s

Day (25 November) Sir Robert Ellerker was told that the Percys were

about to attack Chillingham and sent to Berwick for help. Clifford

turned out the garrison on the alarm, but said that he did not believe

the Percys would attack him, as he was harbouring no fugitives. He asked

Sir Robert Ellerker, “Have ye any of the Carnabys in your house?” Sir

Robert replied, “I believe as well yea as nay, but they or any of the

King’s true subjects shall be welcome to me or to my house.” He then

rode away, hoping that Clifford and his men would follow him, but

instead of this, Clifford ordered the gates to be shut, and only ten men

went with Ellerker[913]. This was in the time of the truce, and the

alarm of an attack on Chillingham came to nothing. Sir Thomas Clifford

was perhaps only anxious to avoid local feuds, because he feared an

attack from Scotland which Berwick was hardly able to resist, as the

walls were out of repair and parts of them had fallen[914].

For the rest of October, until the truce of Doncaster, Sir Ingram in the

exercise of his office as sheriff was busy holding sheriff’s tourns at

Alnwick, where he appointed Sir Humphry Lisle and others as his

officers; as vice-warden he made musters and assemblies “all for the

annoyance of the King’s true subjects that would not be sworn.”[915]

Such was the state of affairs in Northumberland during the first month

of the insurrection; practically the whole country, except a few castles

such as Halton, Chillingham and Langley, were in the Percys’ hands, and

Berwick seems to have been in no position to resist them.

It has already been pointed out that there was probably communication

between the freebooters of Northumberland and the insurgents in Durham

and North Yorkshire. The movement in Mashamshire and Richmond which

spread to Durham began as soon as news reached Ripon of the Lincolnshire

rising; the message came from Archbishop Lee, with orders to his

steward, Lord Latimer, to stay his tenants, but the news had more effect

than the orders[916]. On Thursday 12 October Lord Scrope wrote to the

Earl of Cumberland that the commons of Mashamshire and Nidderdale had

risen the day before (Wednesday 11 October), had occupied Coverham Abbey

and Middleham, and were advancing on Bolton to capture himself; he had

fled into hiding and begged Cumberland to send help to his wife[917].

Lord Latimer and Sir Christopher Danby were taken and sworn by the

commons on the 14th or 15th[918]. John Dakyn, vicar-general of the

diocese of York, had hastened from the city of York to his parish of

Kirkby Ravensworth in Richmond on hearing of the rising at Beverley, but

no sooner had he reached Kirkby Ravensworth than he heard that

Richmondshire had also risen on Friday 13 October. This news made him

fly to a great moor, but he returned to his house and took the oath when

he was told that the commons were about to destroy his goods[919]. His

parishioners then set out to seize Bowes and other gentlemen at Barnard

Castle, and they ordered Dakyn to go to “Galowbaughen” in Richmond to

meet the host of Mashamshire, which was advancing under Lord Latimer and

Sir Christopher Danby. He obeyed their orders for fear of his life, “for

ever the chancellor of Lincoln’s death moved his mind.” All that day he

spent with the Mashamshire men, not daring to say anything displeasing

to them. He believed that Latimer and Danby were equally afraid of their

men[920]. The brothers Robert, George and Richard Bowes and Thomas

Rokeby were the captains in Barnard Castle. They were afterwards accused

of not having the town and castle “in good governance”; at any rate they

surrendered without a stroke on Sunday 15 October, and took over the

command of the rebels[921]. All gentlemen were forced to join, even Sir

Henry Gascoigne, whose mother-in-law had just died and lay unburied, but

the people willingly submitted to Robert Bowes’ authority. He ordered

them to divide into parishes, and to choose four men out of each parish

to command the rest. A letter was despatched to Cleveland, requiring the

people there “with sore comminations” to meet the Richmondshire host at

Oxneyfield by Darlington. Dakyn rejoined the Richmond host on Sunday the

15th, and there in the field one Thomlynson of Bedall, against whom he

had given judgment in a matrimonial case, threatened him with a great

bow, and accused him of being “a maker of the new laws and putter down

of holidays” until with the help of his friends Dakyn quieted him by a

gift of over forty marks[922].

The summons, spread through the countryside, quickly took effect. On the

previous Wednesday, 11 October[923], between two and three hundred men

of Mashamshire and Kirkbyshire assembled in the evening round Jervaux

Abbey and clamoured for the abbot, Adam Sedbarr, to come out to them.

The abbot slipped out by a back door, and took refuge on Witton Fell,

with no companions but his own father and a young boy. He remained in

hiding for four days, only venturing back to the abbey at night, when

the commons had dispersed to their homes. But when Robert Bowes’ summons

was received on Sunday 15 October, the rebels returned to Jervaux and

declared that they would burn it down if the abbot were not delivered up

to them for forbidding his tenants to join them. The terrified monks

sent a messenger to the fell, who found the abbot “in a great crag” and

told him of the commons’ threats, saying that all the brethren cried

“Wo” by him. This message caused him to return, though the risk was

great, and his friends had difficulty in saving him from the commons,

who nearly tore him in pieces, crying “Down with the traitor”! and

“Whoreson traitor, where hast thou been?” “Get a block to strike off his

head upon.” No gentlemen were with them; they had leaders chosen from

among themselves, of whom the abbot names Stavely, Middleton, Leonard

Burgh and Aslaby. They forced the abbot to take the oath, and carried

him off with them, mounted on a barebacked horse, to the meeting at

Oxneyfield on Monday 16 October[924]. Assembled there were Bowes with

the Richmondshire men, Lord Latimer and Sir Christopher Danby with

Mashamshire, and the men of Jervaux with the abbot. Bowes was, as usual,

obliged to “stay old grudges” among his followers, in order to induce

them to act together. They intended to compel all priests who were

“young and able” to join them, and the priests themselves were quite

willing in many cases[925]. The chantry priest of Lartington and the

parish priest of Romaldkirk were particularly active[926]. Dakyn,

however, persuaded Bowes to excuse them all in consideration of their

vows, and afterwards ventured to rebuke the cantarist, when he came to

his house to demand money, saying that his was not the office of a

priest[927].

From Oxneyfield the host advanced to Bishop Auckland on Tuesday 17

October with the object of capturing the Bishop of Durham there. But the

bishop had been warned and had fled at midnight[928]. He made his way to

his own castle of Norham[929], but even there he seems to have found

some difficulty in gaining admittance, for William Franklin, Archdeacon

of Durham, was afterwards praised for his “service in taking Norham

Castle.” Perhaps this means that at the outbreak of the insurrection he

had occupied the castle and prepared to defend it. Franklin afterwards

endeavoured to go south, but was stopped by Darcy[930]. Thomas Parry,

one of the commissioners[931] for suppressing monasteries was more

fortunate. He fled to Norfolk and kept up communications with Franklin,

urging him to try to capture Aske[932]. In the end Franklin escaped and

went to the King[933]. The Bishop of Durham remained at Norham for

several months[934]. For his desertion the commons spoiled his palace at

Bishop Auckland “contrary to their own proclamation.”[935] The

plundering perhaps took place when Bowes had gone to Brancepeth to take

the Earl of Westmorland[936]. Westmorland did not join the rebels

himself, but he took the oath and sent them a friendly answer[937]. What

seems nowadays more extraordinary is that he allowed his son, a boy not

much over 13 years, to ride with the rebels[938]. There is nothing to

indicate that young Lord Neville was captured or that his presence in

the Pilgrim host caused any alarm to his parents.

Sir Thomas Hilton, the sheriff of Durham, was probably at Bishop

Auckland with the bishop. On Monday, after the bishop’s flight, he sent

news of the rising to his cousin John Lord Lumley, who was hunting the

hare at his manor of the Isle[939]. On receiving the warning that “as he

regarded his honour and safeguard of his substance that he should remove

and get him to some sure place for fear of the commons lest he should be

taken of them,” he packed up his plate and jewels and set out to deposit

them in the Maison Dieu at Newcastle-upon-Tyne, which was the strongest

house he knew. Arriving at Lumley Castle that night, he stopped to rest

there, but sent on his son George with the valuables to place them in

safety at Newcastle without delay. On Tuesday 17 October Lord Lumley

joined his son at Newcastle, and on Wednesday the 18th Sir Thomas Hilton

arrived there and persuaded him to leave the town by telling him that

the townsfolk would rise if the commons came that way. Hilton and Lumley

went to Hilton Castle, and George Lumley returned to the Isle[940],

which shows that he was not at heart opposed to the rebels, as they were

in possession of all that district, and mustered that day at

Spennymoor[941], some five or six miles away. No sooner had George

Lumley arrived than “certain soldiers out of Richmondshire” came to

summon him to Lord Latimer’s muster, under pain of burning the house. He

accompanied them back to Auckland, when he found, in addition to Lord

Latimer and his men, Sir James Strangways with a thousand men, young

Bowes with a thousand more, Sir Ralph Bulmer and another knight (Sir

Christopher Danby?) each with a company. Lord Latimer administered the

oath to him and asked him where his father was. Lumley replied

“feignedly” that he was in Northumberland, whereupon Latimer bade him

send word that if Lord Lumley did not “come in” the rebels would spoil

his house. They allowed him to return to the Isle, where he received a

message from his wife that his own house at Thweng was in danger. Next

day, Thursday 19 October, he set out for Yorkshire, remained two days at

Thweng, and then led his tenants to York[942].

George Lumley did not see his father again until they met “on the heath

before Doncaster,” and he denied most emphatically that he had received

any message from him or knew anything of his movements in the interval.

His reticence is highly honourable in a son, but very exasperating to an

historian, for very little is known of the rising in the Bishopric until

on Friday 20 October the Lords Neville, Latimer and Lumley rode into

York at the head of 10,000 men, bearing before them the banner of St

Cuthbert. It seems probable that as soon as they were satisfied as to

the disposition of the citizens of Newcastle, Lumley and Hilton set out

and raised Durham without even going through the formality of being

taken by the commons. It would be extremely interesting to know how they

obtained possession of St Cuthbert’s banner, which was in the charge of

the feretrar of Durham Cathedral. The monks seem to have given it up

willingly, as they paid sixteen pence to Thomas Merlay the standard

bearer, but somehow or other it was injured and five shillings were

spent on its repairs[943]. The bishop’s chancery in Durham was spoiled

by the commons[944]. Sir Francis Bigod endeavoured to escape from

Mulgrave to London by sea, but his ship was driven back up the coast of

Durham and he landed at Hartlepool. He was passing the night at the

house of a former mayor of the town when he was warned that the commons

were coming to take him and fled back to his ship. Keeping now the

waters and now the woods he returned to Mulgrave and was captured by the

commons, who took him to York[945].

The date of these events is uncertain, but Hilton and Lumley must have

joined Latimer not later than Thursday 19 October. Meanwhile at

Spennymoor on Wednesday 18 October the host had been divided into two

parts, the one to advance to York, the other to Skipton. Dakyn and two

other aged gentlemen were sent to Jervaux to despatch the posts with

letters from host to host[946], and the Abbot of Jervaux was permitted

to return home with them. His attitude towards the rising seems to have

altered a good deal now that he had discovered it was not a mere riot

among the peasants of his own neighbourhood. At Auckland he was attended

by his chaplain with a bow and sheaf of arrows, and was heard to say

“The King doth cry eighteen pence a day. And I trust we shall have as

many men for eight pence a day.”[947]

The great fortress of Newcastle could play a decisive part in the

success or failure of any northern rising. As has been seen, Lumley and

Hilton endeavoured to make sure of it before setting out for York. The

mayor and corporation were loyal to the King, and had begun to provision

the town and to lay guns on the walls, but they represented only a

narrow oligarchy of wealthy merchants who earlier in Henry’s reign had

won a victory in the Court of Star Chamber over the artisan gilds of the

town[948]. The defeated party naturally inclined to the insurgents. Sir

Thomas Hilton sent two servants about the town to discover the attitude

of the common people, and their report was that no resistance would be

made to the rebels. When the guns were laid on the walls the people said

“that they might lay the guns where they would but they would turn them

when the commons came whither they would.”[949] Thus reassured the rebel

leaders set out on their march, but Robert Brandling the mayor was a

politic man, who set himself to conciliate the commons. His exertions

were encouraged by the arrival of William Blytheman, one of Cromwell’s

commissioners for the suppression of monasteries, who had fled from York

to Newcastle. On his way through Richmondshire he had been helped by

Dakyn, much to the indignation of the commons[950]. When he reached

Newcastle safely he sent in an enthusiastic report of Brandling’s

proceedings[951]. Sadler wrote in a subsequent letter that the mayor

“did so fully reconcile them (the commons) and so handle them that, in

fine, they were determined to live and die with the mayor and his

brethren in the defence and keeping of the town to the King’s use

against all his enemies and rebels.”[952] One of the mayor’s measures of

conciliation was to punish the only heretic in the town, Roger

Dachant[953], who had been obliged to abjure his opinions before the

Bishop of Durham on 24 November 1531[954]. Among other heresies he held

that every priest might be and ought to be married and that monasteries

ought to be pulled down. This view had commended him to the royal

visitors, and he was Blytheman’s friend, so that probably his punishment

was not very severe.

To sum up, the whole of the county of Durham, including the fortresses

of Barnard Castle, Brancepeth, and Durham itself, was in the hands of

the commons, but Newcastle, after wavering, had returned to its loyalty.

It is now time to follow out the history of the siege of Skipton Castle,

to which half the Durham host were despatched on 19 October. The dales

of Yorkshire had never been really settled since the Craven riots of

1535[955]. Dent, Sedbergh and Wensleydale were the regions where hatred

of the government was strongest. About the middle of September William

Breyar the sanctuary man arrived at Dent wearing the livery of the

Queen’s sumpter men. A smith, seeing his coat, said “Thy master is a

thief, for he pulleth down all our churches in the country.” The

bystanders objected to the smith’s disloyalty and said: “It is not the

King’s deed, but the deed of Cromwell, and if we had him here we would

crum him and crum him that he was never so crummed, and if thy master

were here we would new crown him.” Breyar fled for his life, and

complained to the magistrates of Kirkby Lonsdale, who replied “Alas,

man! what didst thou there? for they of Dent and of three other parishes

thereabouts were sworn on Monday last past;” but they did not say to

whom they were sworn, nor what the oath was. About a week later Breyar

heard that the insurrection in Lincolnshire had just broken out[956].

Darcy wrote from Templehurst on Friday 6 October to warn the King and

the Earl of Cumberland of stirrings in the dales[957], but Cumberland

did not take the matter seriously. He was at Skipton Castle preparing to

advance against Hexham Priory[958], and was sending his son Lord

Clifford to join Shrewsbury on his march to Lincoln. He therefore

contented himself by writing on the 8th to Sir James Metcalf and other

local gentlemen to keep order in the dales[959]. On the evening of

Tuesday 10 October Christopher Aske brought him the news of the Beverley

rising[960], and on the 12th came Scrope’s letter about the rising of

Masham and Nidderdale[961]. On the same day the Earl wrote to Henry to

explain his delay in setting out for Hexham[962]. The King sent another

peremptory command that he should go to Northumberland in spite of the

unsettled state of Yorkshire[963], and on Monday 16 October he set out

for Carlisle on his way northward[964]. He had scarcely started when he

was forced to retreat into Skipton Castle again, for on Tuesday the 17th

Darcy wrote from Pontefract to the King that “My lord of Cumberland on

his way to Hexham returned for safety to Skipton Castle.” He added that

Lord Scrope was with the Earl[965], but this was a mistake. On the same

day Sir Brian Hastings told Shrewsbury that Scrope had been taken, and

that next day the rebels would muster at Barnsdale and Barnsley[966].

Up to this point the rising had shown all the features of an

agricultural riot such as had occurred in Craven the year before. The

commons wandered about the county in aimless bands, returning home at

night. They had no particular respect for the church, as their treatment

of the Abbot of Jervaux showed, and they directed their operations

against unpopular landlords. When the abbot was in the Tower he told

Cromwell, “My Lord, ye be greatly deceived thinking that the monks and

canons were the chief doers of this insurrection, for there were other

of more reputation.” He believed that one of the chief grievances was

the lordship of Middleham, for the commons of Piercebridge said they

would make new lords of Middleham and restore divers who were put from

their offices by wrong, and the commons of Masham used similar

language[967]. He had also heard a serving-man say that the commons had

offered to put his master in possession of Sheriffhutton Castle. The

abbot, however, did not know the names of either the master or the man.

He believed that if he told all he knew the King might pardon him, but

yet it would cost him his life if it were known that he had spoken.

Cromwell promised that his revelations should be concealed, and

commanded that he should write down what he knew[968], but nothing more

remains about his secrets. In this district therefore the rising

appeared to men of property as a peasant revolt which threatened their

lives and lands, and must be put down as quickly as possible.

The names of the leaders at the siege of Skipton Castle show the

character of the movement,—they were “Merlione,” evidently a peasant who

took the name from the prophecies, and John Norton of Norton Conyers,

with his two sons Richard and Thomas[969], who were captains in the

Rising of the North thirty-three years later[970]. John Norton took up

arms not only in defence of his religious principles, but also to avenge

the private wrongs that he had suffered at the hands of the Earl of

Cumberland in the feud which has already been described[971]. When the

Earl of Cumberland retreated to Skipton Castle on Tuesday 17 October,

the forces which he had collected dispersed to save their houses, and

only about eighty men remained with him. From these Christopher Aske

“tried out” forty young men, who were sufficient to defend the whole

castle except the barmkyn[972].

Meanwhile the commons at Skipton established communications with the

main body at York, and on the church doors of Swaledale, Wensleydale and

elsewhere was posted Aske’s summons to those who would rescue the

commonwealth from the heresies into which it was falling[973]. The

summons contained no expressions of hostility to the King, and it was

now that some of the gentlemen began to join the commons. Sir Stephen

Hamerton was told that there was such a bill on Giggleswick church door,

probably on Wednesday 18 October. On Thursday he went to see it, but the

commons had taken it down and gone to a muster at Neales Yng. Sir

Stephen was warned by some wives as he returned from hunting that the

commons were searching for him, and he was presently surrounded by three

hundred men “who said he had ruled them, but now they would rule him.”

Their leaders, Jakes and Fawcett, administered the oath to him, and he

was sent with eight others to Skipton Castle to request Cumberland to

join them. The Earl asked them why they rose, and they replied that it

was for fear of Bishopdale, Wensleydale and the other wild regions. He

promised to see them recompensed if they were robbed, but they answered,

“Nay, my lord, but this will not serve us.” The Earl however was firm,

and sent back the message: “I defy you, and do your worst, for I will

not meddle with you.”

On Saturday 21 October Hammerton and his companions returned to

Monubent, the appointed rendezvous, where they were kept waiting, as the

commons had gone to take Nicholas Tempest, the brother of Sir Richard

Tempest[974]. His home was at Bashall in Bolland and he himself had gone

into hiding, but the commons plundered his goods and seized his son

John, a child. They threatened to strike off the boy’s head if his

father would not join them, whereupon Tempest returned and took the

oath[975]; after this he was always earnest for the commons’ cause[976].

On hearing Cumberland’s answer the commons were very angry, “and swore

they would have my lord of Cumberland or die,” but they received letters

from Sawley Abbey asking for help against the Earl of Derby, and in

consequence set out thither on Sunday, 22 October, taking no further

part in the attack on Skipton[977]. Nevertheless the besiegers at this

time were reinforced by half the forces of Richmond and Durham[978].

After two or three days’ siege, finding the castle impregnable without

ordnance, the commons resolved to capture Elinor Lady Clifford, the

daughter of the Duke of Suffolk and of the King’s sister Mary, together

with Lady Clifford’s young son and the Earl’s two daughters, who were

all staying at Bolton Priory. The besiegers threatened to lead them

before the host at the assault next day, and if it was unsuccessful, “to

violate and enforce them with knaves unto my Lord’s great discomfort.”

But before the commons could secure the ladies, Christopher Aske, with

the help only of the vicar of Skipton, a groom and a boy, contrived to

bring them by night over the moors from Bolton and right through the

rebel host into the castle without being detected[979]. Fearing for

their safety, he then wrote Robert Aske “an unkind letter,” telling him

that the Earl would never yield while he lived, and that if Robert

assaulted the castle it “should be a double death, once to see the said

Earl his master slain, and the ladies then being within the castle,

which should be death also to them.” Robert replied in a “like letter of

unkindness,” saying that he would not himself assault the castle but

that the Earl’s enemies would certainly take it if he did not yield. He

was led to believe this by a letter from the Duke of Suffolk to the Earl

which he had intercepted, but he found out afterwards that this letter

referred to Carlisle and not to Skipton[980]. The siege lasted for about

ten days, but the castle was not taken. While it was in progress the

commons robbed the Earl’s parks, and pulled down his houses at Bardon

and Carleton, “which were so strong as to take three days in

breaking.”[981]

Communications were maintained between the besiegers and the other

bodies of the rebels by Dakyn and the elderly gentlemen who had been

placed for that purpose at Jervaux Abbey. The postmasters received some

unsigned letters from Sir Christopher Danby, which they requested him to

sign, and others from William Conyers, and on one occasion Dakyn wrote

to the Abbot of Fountains for post-horses. Copies were taken of all the

letters which passed through their hands, but the copies were left at

the abbey and probably destroyed. One of the gentlemen, Mr Siggiswick,

being aged and sick, returned home, and his place was taken by another

aged man, Mr Catherick[982]. When the two hosts joined at Pontefract,

Dakyn and the others returned home[983], but the siege of Skipton lasted

until Norton was summoned to take part in the first conference at

Doncaster[984]. As soon as the truce was proclaimed Aske wrote to the

commons forbidding them to molest the Earl until the King’s answer was

received, and to the Earl begging him to observe the truce. His orders

were obeyed, although the commons maintained a very hostile

attitude[985].

The only other stronghold in Yorkshire which held out for the King was

Scarborough Castle. It was a royal castle, and the constable was Sir

Ralph Evers[986] the younger, afterwards Ralph first lord Evers. After a

career of some distinction on the border he was killed at the battle of

Ancrum Moor 1545, where it was said that Annan, the general of the

Scots, on seeing his body, burst into tears exclaiming, “God have mercy

on him, for he was a fell cruel man, and over cruel. And welaway that

ever such slaughter and bloodshed should be among Christian men.”[987]

Evers has even his modest niche in literature, for the moody Baron of

Smailholm

“... came not from where Ancrum Moor,

Ran red with English blood;

Where the Douglas true and the bold Buccleuch,

’Gainst keen Lord Evers stood.”[988]

Like most keepers of royal castles, he made his profit out of his

charge. He was accused of having taken the lead roofs off the towers and

turrets to make into brewing vessels for himself, and to exchange for

French wines[989]. But in spite of these peccadillos he was true to his

post, and on 17 October Darcy reported that Scarborough was besieged by

the commons[990]. Some of Archbishop Lee’s servants, flying thither from

York, were captured by the besiegers, but rescued and brought into the

castle by Sir Ralph[991]. The commons had seized the town[992], and it

was only the castle which held out.

Very little is known about this early stage of the siege, but it seems

to have been closely maintained. There was afterwards a story that Sir

Ralph and his company had “no sustenance but bread and water for the

space of twenty days,”[993] and his appeals for help to the royal

generals show that he was hard pressed[994]. The rebels had some

ordnance, which they had probably taken from ships in the harbour, and

they knew how to use it, for Sir Ralph reported “of late part of the

wall and the ground of Scarborough Castle is shot down in the outer ward

betwixt the gatehouse and the castle.”[995] Nevertheless the rebels were

baffled and failed to take the castle.

The sieges of Skipton and Scarborough occupied the men of the northern

dales so completely that their contingent had not reached Pontefract on

21 October. Aske reckoned that they would be twelve thousand men, armed

and mounted, under the leadership of Lord Scrope, Sir Christopher Danby,

Sir William Mallory, the Nortons, the Markenfields and others[996].

In contrast to the rising in the Dales, the insurrection in Lancashire

seems to have been caused chiefly by discontent at the royal supremacy

and the suppression of the monasteries.

The principal leader was one Atkinson, probably the same John Atkinson

alias Brotton who had escaped after preventing the vicar of Gisburn from

reading the Act of Supremacy in the parish church on 11 July 1535[997].

The centre of the insurrection was St Mary’s Abbey, Sawley[998], a

monastery which was beloved by the commons, “being the charitable relief

of those parts, and standing in a mountain country and amongst three

forests.”[999] It contained an abbot and twenty-one monks and, as one of

the lesser monasteries, had been dissolved by the commissioners; but on

Thursday 12 October the commons reinstated the brethren[1000], who

naturally threw themselves heart and soul into the pilgrims’ cause. One

of them probably composed the famous song of the Pilgrimage:

“Christ Crucified,

For thy wounds wide,

Us commons guide,

That pilgrims be.”[1001]

Among their papers are notes for a sermon maintaining that it is lawful

for a man to fight for the Faith and to resent injuries done to God and

his neighbours[1002].

In several other places the commissioners for the suppression of the

monasteries encountered opposition. The Priory of Conishead had been

threatened in 1525 when Wolsey dissolved a few of the smaller

monasteries, but it was spared at the intercession of the Duke of

Suffolk, who reported it to be “a great help to the people.”[1003] On

Monday 16 October 1536, the prior wrote to William Collins, bailiff of

Kendal, begging him to make proclamation that help should be sent to the

priory, or else all they had would be taken from them[1004]. About this

time or a little earlier, in an undated letter, news was sent to Darcy

that “this week past Manchester College should have been pulled down,

and there would have been a rising, but the commissioners

recoiled.”[1005]

In the neighbouring county of Cheshire the commissioners were actively

resisted. The Abbot of Norton had been deposed and imprisoned,

apparently on a charge of treason[1006]. A servant of Cromwell was put

in his place to effect the surrender of the monastery, which took place

at the beginning of October 1536. On Sunday 8 October when the

commissioners had packed up the jewels and movable property, and were

ready to leave, they were attacked by the former abbot, who had escaped

from prison, and was now at the head of two or three hundred country

people. The commissioners fled, and took refuge in a tower, but they

contrived to send a message to the sheriff, who set out at once, and

came upon the abbot and his followers at 2 o’clock in the morning,

feasting on an ox and other victuals by the light of great fires which

were burning within and without the monastery. They were taken by

surprise and could make no effective resistance. The abbot and three of

his canons were captured, but most of his followers fled under cover of

the darkness. The sheriff reported that the abbot was expecting

reinforcements and “it was thought if it had not been quickly handled

the matter would have grown to further inconvenience.” As it was, the

King’s farmer was restored, and the abbot and canons were imprisoned in

Halton Castle. The King sent orders for their execution, but they were

not carried out at once, and on 30 November the abbot was still living.

His fate is uncertain, but he was taken to Chester Castle for safer

keeping during the insurrection, and it is unlikely that he

escaped[1007].

The commons of Lancashire expressed sympathy with the Lincolnshire

rebels, and there was a widespread belief that the young Earl of Derby

inclined to the same side. His servants were so bitter against Cromwell

that a spy in the household wrote “or your lordship (Cromwell) should be

there as they would have you to be I had liefer to be in Jerusalem to

come home upon my bare feet.”[1008]

Thomas Stanley, a priest who was related to Derby, corresponded with

Lord Darcy, and used all his influence to persuade the Earl to join the

rebels[1009]. For a time it was believed that he had been successful.

Aske showed Bigod a letter from the Earl, and said that he would be with

them in time of need. Afterwards a servant of Bigod’s who was sent with

a letter to Derby, told him that in the rebel host he was “cried

traitor.” The Earl replied that “there was no man in England save the

King who should say such a thing of him but he would lay his sword on

his face,” and he trusted the King would let him “boulte out” the

occasion of this slander[1010]. Perhaps his indignation was so great

because there were some grounds for the rebels’ confidence in his

sympathy. Nicholas Tempest had heard that Derby “had written such a

letter to the lord Darcy that he knew the said lord of Derby would do

little in the matter [on behalf of the King] when it should come to the

point.” He believed that the gentlemen who trusted to Derby to protect

them against the rebels would find themselves deceived in him[1011]. It

was said that Aske called him “false flattering boy” who ran away from

the commons[1012], for when it came to the point he chose to serve the

King.

On Tuesday 10 October Derby received a summons to prepare his men in

case the rebellion should spread from Lincolnshire into those

parts[1013]. The monks of Sawley were restored on the 12th, and on the

19th, Thursday, news of this having reached the King, further orders

were sent to Derby, that instead of joining Shrewsbury on his advance

northwards, as had been intended, he must suppress the rising in

Lancashire, send up the ringleaders and hang the brethren in their

monks’ apparel. A commission under the Privy Seal was sent to him to

authorise his proceedings[1014]. He was given authority over all

Lancashire, Cheshire, North Wales and Staffordshire, excepting the parts

already committed to Shrewsbury. This liberal commission delighted Derby

so much that his previous inclination was overcome and he resolved to

oppose the rebels. He showed the commission to Thomas Stanley, saying

that no ancestor of his had ever had the like, to which Stanley retorted

that “no more should he neither have had” if it had not been to support

Cromwell. A heated argument followed, but Derby was now quite determined

on his course[1015]. The King’s judicious display of confidence had made

an ally of a man who might have been a most dangerous enemy. Derby might

have avenged his ancestor Sir William Stanley by overmatching Henry VIII

if he had thrown his powerful influence into the scale against the King.

But on the other hand, the Earl’s love of ruling and his commanding

position as by far the most important man among the Pilgrims would have

made it necessary for them to acknowledge him their leader, if he had

joined them, and as he was not very wise it may be doubted whether he

had sufficient tact and ability for the position. He would have been but

a doubtful acquisition if he had introduced fresh divisions into their

council. This, however, is only speculation, as Derby prepared to fight

for the King. Nevertheless the commons of Lancashire were wholly in

favour of the rebels, and Stanley believed that if one quarter rose the

rest would. He reported to Darcy that Derby and Lord Monteagle his

cousin would not be able to set out before the following Wednesday, 25

October[1016], and meanwhile the commons were rising in response to a

summons from “Mr Captain” (Aske or Atkinson?). An example of this

summons is preserved in an unsigned letter to “Cousin Townley.” Its date

seems to be Saturday 14 October. The writer had received a letter from

“Mr Captain in this our Pilgrimage of Grace,” containing the order “that

on sight thereof ye fail not with all your company to be on (blank)

Thewseday (Tuesday 17th?) next by (blank) of the clock in all your best

array, as ye will avoid displeasure of the contrary doing.” The writer

was sure that his cousin would be glad to hear this. He had sent orders

to the commons of Lancaster side to take the gentlemen who were

favourable to the Pilgrimage, and was sorry that “Cousin Townley’s”

brother had not taken the oath, as he was inclined to it at one

time[1017]. Sir John Townley and his brother, who was also called John,

are afterwards mentioned as being active on behalf of the commons[1018].

Such a summons was brought by George Willen and William Gaunt from Dent

to Kendal on Saturday 14 October. The men from Dent had come, as they

said, to ask Sir James Leyborne what they should do about the summons,

which they had received from Richmondshire. All the advice they received

from Leyborne the steward and William Collins the bailiff was “not to

meddle.” Next day (Sunday 15 October) the commons under the leadership

of Tom Dockwray and Brian Jobson assembled at daybreak in the North

Street of Kendal, and took all the chief men of the town, rousing them

from their beds and making them swear to be true to God, the King and

their ancient laudable customs. “Mr Leyborne” had fled, but his friends

promised that he would do as the other gentlemen did, and his brother

Nicholas “sealed to a book which was read concerning their customs” in

his name. The complaint that their ancient customs were being violated

was the characteristic grievance of Cumberland and Westmorland, and will

be discussed more fully hereafter. Beyond visiting Mr Leyborne’s house

again on Friday 20 October the commons of Kendal did not do much until

on Saturday 21 October they received a summons from the men of Dent to

muster with them on Monday 23 October at ten o’clock on Ennesmore. Here

a local quarrel broke out, for the Kendal men answered that they “would

have nought to do” with Dent. The reply of the latter was that if Kendal

did not attend the muster, the town should be spoiled by ten thousand

men. For a moment the citizens of Kendal thought of resistance, but in

the end some five hundred of them went to Ennesmore. There they found

that the captains were Atkinson, James Cowper, John Middleton, John

Hebyllthwayte of Sedbergh, James Bushell of Middleton and the vicar of

Clapham, who “was the common swearer and counsellor in all that business

and persuaded the people that they should go to heaven if they died in

that quarrel.” The men of Kendal told the captains that they were sworn,

but that their gentlemen would not come in, to which the others

answered, “If ye cannot rule them, we shall rule them.” A muster was

appointed at Kendal next day at 8 a.m., when they would have spoiled Mr

Leyborne’s house but for the bad weather. On Friday 27 October Leyborne

and the other gentlemen at last came in and were sworn at Kendal

Tollbooth, and on Saturday 28 October they mustered on Kelet Moor and

marched to Lancaster[1019].

It was this rising which prevented Derby from marching on Sawley when he

received the King’s first orders, dated 19 October[1020]. The delay

annoyed Henry so much that on the 28th he wrote repeating his

instructions[1021], but Derby was doing his best. He occupied Preston in

order to lie within striking distance of both the rebel hosts, the one

lying near Kendal, which was said to number five or six thousand men,

but was probably under three thousand, and the other defending Sawley

Abbey. His attitude alarmed the monks of Sawley, who sent into Yorkshire

for help on Saturday 21 October[1022], but his attention was at first

occupied by the Kendal rising. Many fugitives hurried to his protection,

among the first being the abbot and deputy steward of Furness, who came

by water to Lathom before the Earl occupied Preston[1023]. From Lathom

the abbot wrote to his monastery that he had taken a way to be sure both

from King and commons[1024], and while he remained with Derby the monks

levied men for the rebels and sent them money, telling their recruits

“Now must they stick to it or else never, for if they sit down both you

and Holy Church is undone; and if they lack company we will go with them

and live and die with them to defend their most godly pilgrimage.” They

gave out that the King was not right heir to the crown because his

father came in by the sword, and they maintained the papal authority so

earnestly that some of their tenants were willing to wager that the new

laws would be annulled in three years. Four of the monks of Sawley had

been sent to Furness, and three of them, who had capacities[1025],

returned to Sawley when the commons restored it[1026].

The Prior of Cartmell, who had been restored against his will, fled to

the Earl at Preston, where he was joined by Lord Monteagle and Sir

Marmaduke Tunstall, whose houses lay between Lancashire and Westmorland

in the district where the rising took place[1027]. Sir Robert

Bellingham, Aske’s brother-in-law, and other gentlemen were taken and

sworn by the commons but afterwards escaped to Preston. It must have

been for this desertion that the commons threatened to spoil the house

of Aske’s sister Margaret, Sir Robert’s wife, but Aske prevented them

from doing so[1028].

Atkinson entered Lancaster at the head of the host from Dent and Kendal

on Saturday 28 October[1029]. He administered the oath to the mayor and

all the burgesses, but the mayor escaped to his master the Earl of

Derby. The commons threatened to plunder his house if he did not return,

and Derby sent two of his servants to Atkinson to explain that he was

detaining the mayor, and to order the commons to depart in the King’s

name. Atkinson declared that as the mayor would not come, his friends,

who had been his sureties “were forfeitures,” and he gave the servants a

list of their names. As for the rest of the message, the commons had a

pilgrimage for the commonwealth to do, which they would accomplish or

die. The servants replied that if twelve of their chiefs would sign a

promise to fight on Bentham Moor, the Earl would undertake to meet them

there and determine the quarrel by battle. Atkinson answered that they

would not fight unless the Earl hindered their pilgrimage, or attempted

to join the Lord Lieutenant. If they had agreed to fight, Derby had

resolved to wait for help from Cheshire, as he could not trust his

men[1030]. It was probably the report of these messengers which

convinced him that the rebels at Lancaster were not very formidable, and

he therefore turned his attention to Sawley. It was known in Lancaster

on the 28th that the reinforcements from Yorkshire had arrived

there[1031].

After the resolution at Monubent on Saturday 21 October Sir Stephen

Hamerton had gone to Colne and Burnley, marching down one bank of the

Ribble, and Nicholas Tempest had gone to Whalley, marching down the

other bank. The latter reached Whalley on Monday 23 October. For more

than two hours the monks refused to admit him and his three or four

hundred men, but at last they opened their doors for fear of burning.

Tempest administered the oath to the abbot and eight of the brethren.

Sir Stephen Hamerton and his men arrived the same night and the two

leaders recounted their experiences to each other[1032].

Hearing that Derby was doing his best to raise forces against them, they

sent to Walter Strickland to come to their aid, but received no

reply[1033]. Then definite news was brought that Derby intended to set

out from Preston on Monday 30 October and would spend that night with

his forces at Whalley Abbey, which was some four miles from Sawley. The

rebels at once occupied a hill by the abbey, prepared to fall on Derby,

who did not know of their movements[1034]. An encounter between the

rebels and Derby’s forces seemed inevitable, and the situation was on

the whole in favour of the former. It is true that Derby had levied over

eight thousand men, but their loyalty was doubtful[1035]; the Pilgrims

at Sawley, unknown to Derby, had occupied a strong position, and those

at Lancaster were preparing to take him in the rear[1036]. Derby himself

admitted that the roads were very difficult and that there would have

been a great fray “though no doubt the traitors would have been

overthrown.”[1037] Just at this critical moment, at nine o’clock in the

morning on Monday 30 October, Berwick Herald-at-Arms rode into Preston

and delivered to the Earl a letter from Shrewsbury and the other lords,

informing him of the first appointment at Doncaster, and directing him

to “sparple his force and do no hurt.”[1038] After a formal consultation

with the gentlemen present, he disbanded his men and returned to Lathom,

probably with a very thankful heart[1039]. The same news had reached

Whalley in a letter from Aske, forbidding the Pilgrims to meddle with

Derby even if he attacked them, and directing them to withdraw into the

mountains, unless he (Derby) “raised fire,” in which case they must send

by post to Aske. Hearing that the Earl had withdrawn, they also broke up

their forces, and “kept every man his own house, ready to be up and come

together at an hour’s warning.”[1040]

From Lancashire[1041] we turn to Cumberland and Westmorland, where there

had been considerably more enclosing of common land by the landlords

than in the other counties. This was the principal grievance of the

commons in those parts. On 17 August 1536 Sir Thomas Wharton reported to

Cromwell that there had been divers riots in Cumberland, probably

against the enclosures, although one riot was traced to the Bishop of

Carlisle[1042], and was most likely a private feud.

On Sunday 15 October the curate of Kirkby Stephen did not “bid St Luke’s

day (Wednesday 18 October) as a holyday,” which exasperated his

parishioners so much that they threatened to kill him; to pacify them he

was forced to announce the holiday as usual[1043]. Probably it was on

the same day that Robert Thompson, vicar of Brough-under-Stainmore,

received a letter from the commons of Richmondshire which he read aloud

to his parishioners, perhaps in the parish church. The contents of the

letter ran: “Wellbeloved brethren in God, we greet you well, signifying

unto you that we your brethren in Christ have assembled us together and

put us in readiness for the maintenance of the faith of God, His laws

and His Church, and where abbeys was suppressed we have restored them

again and put the religious men into their houses: wherefore we exhort

you to do the same.”[1044] This letter seems to have been signed

“Captain Poverty,” as was the one sent to Sir Ingram Percy[1045].

Next day the men of Kirkby Stephen held a muster on Sandforth Moor in

response to the summons from Richmond, and chose as their captains

Robert Pullen, Nicholas Musgrave, Christopher Blenkinsop and Robert

Hilton. Vicar Thompson went to Penrith that night, to escape from the

commons as he said, but it seems more likely that his object was to

spread the news of the rising. He rejoined the muster next day, Tuesday

17 October, when the commons went to take Sir Thomas Wharton. As he had

fled, they captured his eldest son instead. On Wednesday 18 October they

went to Lamerside Hall, believing that Sir Thomas and other gentlemen

had taken refuge there, but they found only servants. Pullen then issued

an order that the gentlemen should come in by a certain day or their

houses would be plundered, and appointed men bound by oath to collect

the goods which the captains declared forfeit. The leaders agreed that

next day, Thursday 19 October, Pullen and his men should march down one

side of the Eden and Musgrave with his down the other. Pullen’s company

set out and arrived at Penrith the same day, but Musgrave’s band spent

the night at Lowther, where they had in vain hoped to take Sir John

Lowther. Penrith had already risen in response to the summons from

Richmondshire, which had probably been brought by Thompson. Four

captains had been chosen, Anthony Hutton, John Beck, Gilbert Whelpdale

or Whelton, and Thomas Burbeck, who took the names of Charity, Faith,

Poverty and Pity. Gilbert Whelpdale, Captain Poverty, was Robert

Thompson’s brother-in-law, and appointed him his chaplain and secretary.

Pullen’s company spent Thursday night in Penrith and on Friday 20

October set out again. Thompson accompanied them as far as Eamont

Bridge, where the oath was administered to Dudley and other gentlemen,

but he turned back to Penrith at the request of the commons there, in

order that he might help them with his counsel. On the same day they

held a muster on Penrith Fell, where Thompson and the captains organised

their forces as well as they could. “Sir” Edward Perith, who must have

been a priest, was appointed the crossbearer, to carry the cross before

the host. George Corney, another priest, wrote letters to the

neighbouring gentlemen at the dictation of the captains, and Thompson

taught Thomas Berwick, the town-crier, a proclamation to be uttered

before every meeting “to the effect that, as the rulers did not defend

them from thieves and Scots, they had chosen the four captains, who

commanded all to live in peace and to say five _aves_, five _paters_ and

a creed.” The letters were sent to Sir Edward Musgrave, who came in and

took the oath with all the parish of Edenhall and the country round

Penrith. Another muster was held on Saturday 21 October, when the

commons beyond Eden were sworn, and a meeting was appointed on Monday 23

October at Cartlogan Thorns. On Monday the commons of Caldbeck,

Greystoke, Hutton, Shewlton and Sowerby rose and came to Cartlogan

Thorns, bringing with them Bernard Towneley, the chancellor of the

diocese, Richard Bewley, Richard Vachell and other gentlemen. Sir John

Lowther also came to the meeting, “to summon certain men of Sowerby to

keep the day of march,” i.e. the day appointed for a meeting with the

Scots warden. Sir John’s attitude is doubtful; he does not seem to have

been brought in by force, and the commons looked upon him as their

friend[1046].

The next muster was appointed to be held on Wednesday 25 October at

Kilwatling How[1047]. A new actor now comes on the scene—Abbot Carter of

Holm Cultram. The Priory of Carlisle and the Abbey of Holm Cultram were

the only two monasteries in Cumberland wealthy enough to escape the Act

of Suppression. There had been several scandals in connection with Holm

Cultram in recent years, and the abbot seems to have realised from the

first that without a revolution his house was doomed[1048]. Consequently

when the news of the rising reached him he sent orders to all his

tenants to attend the muster at Kilwatling How under pain of

hanging[1049].

There on Wednesday 25 October the gentlemen and commons of the

neighbourhood were sworn, and four clergymen, the parson of Melmerby, Dr

Towneley, the vicar of Sowerby and the vicar of Edenhall, were appointed

Chaplains of Poverty to instruct the commons in the Faith, a lesson

which was much needed, as those who attended the muster announced that

if the other clergymen of the district did not come in they would strike

off the heads of those already in their hands, and set Towneley’s head

on the highest tree of the diocese[1050].

On Wednesday and Thursday a picturesque ceremony took place in Penrith

chapel, when the four captains followed Thompson in procession round the

building with their swords drawn. They then put up their swords and the

vicar said mass, and expounded the Ten Commandments, showing how all the

present troubles had arisen from breaking them. This was called the

captains’ mass. A priest objected that swords should not be drawn in

church, and the ceremony was given up[1051].

The chief problem now before the rebels was the attitude of Carlisle.

This was determined almost by accident. On Monday 16 October the Earl of

Cumberland intended to send his son Henry Lord Clifford to join

Shrewsbury[1052]. Finding that he could not go directly southwards by

land without a considerable risk of falling into the rebels’ hands, Lord

Clifford conceived the ingenious idea of travelling north to his uncle

Sir Thomas Clifford at Berwick and taking ship to Lincolnshire[1053].

The general rising, however, forced him to seek refuge in Carlisle

Castle, and there he lay four days in hiding. Meanwhile on Friday 27

October the citizens of Carlisle sent messengers to the commons of

Penrith under safe conduct. The commons were mustered on Sanderdale

Hill, and the messengers reported that the burgesses of Carlisle would

take no oath, but otherwise would be with them. All the people who lived

in that neighbourhood thought that they would be ruined if Carlisle were

not secured, for the mosstroopers of the Black Quarters, the valleys of

Esk and Line, had already begun to plunder them. By Thompson’s advice

they proclaimed that no one should take provisions into the town, hoping

that it might be reduced by starvation, as Hull had been[1054]. The

threat would have been sufficient for the townspeople, as they had

neither ordnance nor powder and the walls were in ruins, but Lord

Clifford came out of his hiding-place, and said that as his father’s

deputy he would be their captain and jeopardy his life with them. They

were so far encouraged that they promised not to give over the

town[1055], especially as the commons had withdrawn for the moment to

Cockermouth, where they passed the night of Friday 27 October. The Abbot

of Holm Cultram joined them in person at Cockermouth on Saturday 28

October, and the rebels’ council ordered Sir John Lowther, “who was at

Carlisle,” the abbot, Towneley, Richard Blenkhow and Thomas Dalston to

go to Carlisle with orders to the mayor to meet the commons and take the

oath for himself and his brethren on the following Monday at Burford

(Brunfelde) Oak. The priests were very unwilling to go and one Percy

Simpson exclaimed that “they would never be well till they had stricken

off all the priests’ heads, saying they would but deceive them.” The

appointed messengers went no further than Dalston, but they sent “Sir”

William Robin to Carlisle and he brought back word “there was a

proclamation that no man should make any unlawful assembly,” which was

evidently news of the first truce of Doncaster. The abbot and Towneley

told Thompson of this, but he and the other captains believed that it

was only a trick to gain time and mustered next day. Towneley and other

messengers were again sent to Carlisle, where they were shown the

proclamation of the truce, and sent it back to the host at once. They do

not seem to have believed that it would pacify the commons, and

delivered their message to the mayor, who asked for a day’s respite.

When Towneley and the others returned to Burford Oak, however, they

found that the commons had agreed to disperse until Friday 3 November,

when they were to assemble again. Thompson went back to Penrith and took

no further part in the proceedings[1056].

All this time Lord Dacre had been lying quiet at Naworth Castle. By

reason of his feud with the Cliffords and his late trial for treason it

had been hoped that he would join the commons, but his recent experience

had been enough for him, and Sir Ingram Percy called him “first a

traitor to the king and after to the commons” for remaining loyal[1057].

He was in occasional communication with Shrewsbury[1058], and on 30

October he sent to Lord Clifford, offering to come to his aid if the

commons besieged Carlisle, and asking Clifford to come to him if they

besieged Naworth. Clifford willingly agreed[1059]. When the commons

mustered at Burford Oak on Friday 3 November Sir Christopher Dacre came

to them from Carlisle under safe conduct[1060], and with the help of

Towneley and the gentlemen and priests who were with them he persuaded

them to accept the truce and to disperse[1061]. It was agreed that they

should bring their wares to market as before, and that Lord Clifford

should prevent his soldiers from “riding on the commons.”[1062] After

this Lord Dacre went secretly up to London[1063], thinking that he would

be less liable to misrepresentation if he were actually under the King’s

eye.

The movement in Cumberland and Westmorland was essentially a rising of

the poor against the rich. The rebels wanted to abolish rents, tithes

and enclosures[1064]. In spite of the exhortations of the enthusiast,

Robert Thompson, and the Abbot of Holm Cultram, the commons showed no

particular zeal for the Church and treated the clergy with little

respect. In consequence the gentlemen and clergy stood aloof, and the

mass of eager but undisciplined commons were as great an anxiety to the

leaders of the rebellion as they could be to their opponents.

From this brief sketch of the state of the northern counties up to the

first truce of Doncaster two points stand out. In the first place the

discontent was very strong and very widespread. The gentlemen who were

usually equal to keeping order were reduced to a few isolated

fortresses, Chillingham, Scarborough and Skipton; even the large towns,

such as Carlisle, Newcastle and Berwick, were wavering. The progress of

the insurrection may be described in the words which a German historian

uses with regard to the Peasants’ War of 1525: “the peasant revolts

were, in general, less of the nature of campaigns, or even of an

uninterrupted series of minor military operations, than of a slow

process of mobilisation interrupted and accompanied by continual

negociations with the lords and princes—a mobilisation which was

rendered possible by the standing right of assembly and of carrying arms

possessed by the peasants.”[1065] The widespread character of the

rebellion was in its favour, but the second point is against it. In

consequence of the great extent of the district affected it was

inevitable that there should be many conflicting interests, which only

genius could unite in a common cause. In one place the course of the

rising was determined by local feuds, in another by religious

enthusiasm, in another by agricultural grievances.

Though such a mass of discontent was very dangerous to the King, it was

almost equally dangerous to those who were attempting to control and

guide it to a definite object. It will be noticed that there were two

distinct sets of agitators, whose aims were sometimes almost

antagonistic. First, there was the religious movement which usually

centred in some monastery—Hexham, Sawley, Furness or Holm Cultram. Its

motives and object have already been described, and it was the cause

with which the gentlemen sympathised. Second there was the social

movement directed chiefly against raised rents and enclosures. Its

centre seems to have been Richmondshire, and it was this cause which was

most influential in Cumberland and Westmorland. The leaders had adopted

the name of Captain Poverty as a symbol of their intention. The commons,

they meant, were led by Poverty. There was, of course, no one definite

Captain Poverty, though individual leaders might assume the name, as at

Penrith, but wherever that name is used the rising was directed

primarily against the gentlemen, and no particular devotion was shown to

the Church as an institution. It was this second movement which

resembled in many particulars the Peasants’ Revolt in Germany in 1525.

There, as in England, the first demands of the peasants were social, not

religious[1066]. In Germany they soon became combined with a reforming

campaign against the Church, while in England the religious movement was

reactionary, but the ideals of the peasants had something in common with

both tendencies, for while on the one hand they wanted reform of abuses,

on the other their social programme was reactionary, looking back to the

primitive form of the village community[1067]. This may be observed in

the English as well as in the German movement. The leaders of the

religious insurrection in England, Aske and Darcy and the friars, seem

originally to have had little or nothing to do with the social movement,

and though they tried to direct it to their own ends they were rather

alarmed by it.

NOTES TO CHAPTER IX

Note A. The Isle was not Holy Island in Northumberland, as stated in

the Index of the “Letters and Papers.” It was the name of a country

house in the parish of Sedgefield, Durham, which was built on an

island formed by the river Skerne and its tributaries.

Note B. An attempt was made in 1535 to involve the Abbot of Norton in

a charge of issuing counterfeit coin[1068].

Note C. Kendal is now in Westmorland, but in early times it was

included in Lancashire, and even in Henry VIII’s reign the boundary

between the two counties was still unsettled[1069].

Note D. The summary of Nicholas Tempest’s confession which is given in

the “Letters and Papers,” XII (1), no. 1014 is so brief that it gives

no idea of the contents of the document. The subsequent references are

therefore given to the “Yorkshire Archaeological Journal,” vol. XI,

where the confession is printed in full.