BATTLES IN THE VALLEY OF THE RIBBLE, NEAR WHALLEY AND CLITHEROE.
WADA'S DEFEAT BY KING EARDULPH, AT BILLANGAHOH, A.D. 798, AND
CONTEMPORARY PROPHETIC SUPERSTITIONS. THE VICTORY OF THE SCOTS AT
EDISFORD BRIDGE IN 1138. CIVIL WAR INCIDENTS BETWEEN CHARLES I. AND
THE ENGLISH PARLIAMENT.
The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, under the date 798, says--"This year there
was a great fight at Hwelleage (Whalley), in the land of the
Northumbrians, during Lent, on the 4th before the Nones of April, and
there Alric, the son of Herbert, was slain, and many others with him."
Simeon of Durham has the following reference to this battle:--"A.D. 798.
A conspiracy having been organised by the murderers of Ethelred, the
king, Wada, the chief of that conspiracy, commenced a war against
Eardulph, and fought a battle at a place called by the English
Billangahoh, near Walalega, and, after many had fallen on both sides,
Wada and his army were totally routed."
[Illustration: MAP 2.]
The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle informs us that four years previously (794),
"Ethelred, king of the Northumbrians, was slain by his own people, on
the 13th before the Kalends of May." This Ethelred seems to have been a
very unfortunate or a very tyrannical ruler, even for those barbarous
times, for we find, on the same authority, he, in company with Herbert,
"slew three high reves, on the 11th before the Kalends of April," 778,
and that afterwards "Alfwold obtained the kingdom, and drove Ethelred
out of the country; and he (Alfwold) reigned ten years." This same
Alfwold was evidently regarded as a patriot and not as an usurper, for
the Chronicle tells us that he "was slain by Siga, on the 8th before the
Kalends of October; and a heavenly light was frequently seen at the
place where he was slain; and he was buried at Hexham within the
church." He was succeeded by his nephew, Osred, who, the Chronicle says,
afterwards "was betrayed and driven from the kingdom; and Ethelred, the
son of Ethelwald, again obtained the government." Two years later, from
the same authority, we learn that "Osred, who had been king of the
Northhumbrians, having come home from his exile, was seized and slain on
the 18th before the Kalends of October," (792).
These facts throw much light on the social and political state of the
country at the period, and demonstrate that Ethelred's murder was by no
means an exceptional occurrence. Indeed, the slaying of kings by their
own people appears to have been the rule rather than the exception
amongst our ancestors, especially in Northumbria, about this period.
Sharon Turner, in his "History of the Anglo-Saxons," referring to the
internecine conflicts which took place in the North of England for a
lengthened period, and especially about this time, says--"Of all the
Anglo-Saxon Governments the kingdom of Northumbria had been always the
most perturbed. Usurper murdering usurper is the prevailing incident. A
crowd of ghastly monarchs pass swiftly along the page of history as we
gaze, and scarcely was the sword of the assassin sheathed before it was
drawn against its master, and he was carried to the sepulchre which he
had just closed upon another. In this manner, during the last century
and a half, no fewer than seventeen sceptered chiefs hurled each other
from their joyless thrones, and the deaths of the greatest number were
accompanied by hecatombs of their friends."
The public mind, under such circumstances, must of necessity have been
deeply perturbed, and superstition associated the social and political
anarchy which prevailed with the "war of elements," and other attendant
mysterious physical phenomena. The trusty old chronicler, duly impressed
with the solemnity of his theme, informs us that during the year
preceding the murder of Ethelred "dire forewarnings came over the land
of the Northumbrians and miserably terrified the people; these were
excessive whirlwinds and lightnings, and fiery dragons were seen flying
in the air. A great famine soon followed these tokens; and a little
after that, in the same year, on the 6th before the Ides of January, the
ravaging of heathen men lamentably destroyed God's Church at Lindisfarne
through rapine and slaughter."
The "heathen men" here referred to were Danish rovers. These "Northmen,
out of Hæretha-land" (Denmark), had a few years previously (787), in
three ships, "first sought the land of the English nation," and, having
found it and pronounced it good, they ceased not their invasions until
they became masters of the entire kingdom, under Canute the Great. This
conquest of the Northmen mainly resulted from the fact that the English
monarchs of the Heptarchy were continually at war either with the
Britons or amongst themselves. "Domestic treason and fierce civil
strife" added additional strength to the foe, for both regal enemy and
rebellious subject eagerly sought the aid of the pirates, or selected
the occasion of their hostile visits to harass their opponents. Although
we have no record of Danish or other Northmen's ravages in Lancashire in
the reign of Ethelred or his successor, yet we get a very distinct view
of their doings on the eastern coast of Northumbria, and of the
internecine strife which rendered the kingdom a relatively easy prey to
the brave but brutal and remorseless heathen pirates.
The battles described in the previous chapters were more or less
conjectural in some of their aspects; at least the true character of the
presumed Arthurian victories on the Douglas, as well as the site of that
of Penda over St. Oswald, at Maserfield, have not been demonstrated with
such certainty as to obtain universal assent. Such, however, is not the
case with the minor struggle now under consideration. The site assigned
to it has never been doubted. The names recorded by the old chroniclers
are still extant in the locality, with such orthographic or phonetic
changes in their descent from the eighth to the nineteenth century as
philologists would anticipate. The _Hwelleage_ of the Anglo-Saxon
Chronicle, as well as the monk of Durham's mediæval Latin _Walalega_,
are identical with the present Whalley; while _Billangahoh_ is
represented by its descendants Billinge, Billington, and Langho.
Archæological remains have likewise contributed important evidence.
Three large tumuli for centuries have marked the scene of the struggle,
one of which, near to Langho, has been removed, and the remains of a
buried warrior exhumed. According to J. M. Kemble and other Anglo-Saxon
scholars, Billington signifies the homestead or settlement of the sept
or clan of the Billings, as Birmingham is that of the Beormings. This
rule likewise applies to many other localities where the local
nomenclature presents similar features. Consequently, from legitimate
analogy, we learn that Waddington, on the right bank of the Ribble
opposite Clitheroe, is the homestead, town, or settlement of Wadda and
his dependents; and Waddow, in its immediate neighbourhood, the how or
hill of Wadda.
In the fragment of the old Anglo-Saxon poem "The Traveller's Tale,"
mention is made of a Wada as a chief of the Hælsings. Mr. Haigh, in his
"Anglo-Saxon Sagas," regards him as "probably one of the companions of
the first Hencgest." Hence the probability of his being an ancestor of
the chief conspirator against King Eardulph. Mr. Kemble ("Saxons in
England,") says--"Among the heroes of heathen tradition are Wada,
Weland, and Eigil. All three so celebrated in the mythus and epos of
Scandinavia and Germany, have left traces in England. Of Wada, the
"Traveller's Song" declares that he ruled the Hælsings; and even later
times had to tell of Wade's _boat_, in which the exact allusion is
unknown to us: the Scandinavian story makes him wade across the
Groenasund, carrying his son across his shoulder. Perhaps our tradition
gives a different version of this story."
This story may have something to do with the genesis of the legend of
St. Christopher bearing the infant Christ on his shoulders over a broad
stream, a subject of one of the early mediæval pictures discovered some
time ago, on the removal of the whitewash from the walls of Gawsworth
Church, near Macclesfield. The historical anachronism in ascribing such
an action to him may have resulted from the mere transference of it from
the pagan hero to the Christian saint. The original story seems to have
been pretty familiar to the people as late as the fourteenth century.
Mr. Kemble says--"Chaucer once or twice refers to this (Wade's _boat_)
in such a way as to show that the expression was used in an obscene
sense. Old women, he says, 'connen so moche craft in Wade's boat.' Again
of Pandarus:
'He song, he plaied, he told a tale of Wade.'
_Troil. Cressid._
'In this there seems to be some allusion to what anatomists have termed
_fossa navicularis_, though what immediate connection there could be
with the mythical Wade, now escapes us.'"
The "Traveller's Tale" likewise refers to a chieftain named "Billing,"
who "ruled the Wærns," and who, in Mr. Haigh's opinion, was likewise a
"probable associate of Hencgest." Mr. Haigh likewise identifies Whaley
in Cheshire, Whalley in Northumberland, and Whalley in Lancashire, with
a chieftain described in the same poem as "Hwala once the best." Dr.
Whitaker, Mr. Baines, and others, however, derive Whalley from
_Walalega_, "Field of Wells."
Mr. Jno. R. Green ("Making of England,") says--"In the star-strown track
of the Milky Way, our fathers saw a road by which the hero-sons of
Waetla marched across the sky, and poetry only hardened into prose when
they transferred the name of Watling Street to the great trackway which
passed athwart the island they had won, from London to Chester. The
stones of Weyland's Smithy still recall the days when the new settlers
told one another, on the conquered ground, the wondrous tale they had
brought with them from their German home, the tale of the godlike smith
Weland, who forged the arms that none could blunt or break; just as they
told around Wadanbury and Wadanhlæw the strange tale of Wade and his
boats. When men christened mere and tree with Scyld's name, at
Scyldsmere and Styldstreow, they must have been familiar with the story
of the godlike child who came over the waters to found the royal line of
the Gwissas. So a name like Hnaef's-scylf was then a living part of
English mythology; and a name like Aylesbury may preserve the last trace
of the legend told of Weland's brother, the sun-archer Egil."
Although we possess but little information respecting the details of the
fight, or of the political complications out of which it arose, we are,
at least, perfectly certain of the locality of the struggle. In
addition, the magnificent scenery by which it is surrounded, in which
grandeur and beauty are seen in the most harmonious combination, the
interesting archæological remains, and the numerous other historic
associations of the neighbourhood, including those connected with
Whalley Abbey, Clitheroe Castle, Mytton, and Stonyhurst, give an
interest to the locality which is denied to the sites of many
battle-fields, the names of which have become "household words," not
merely with one nation or people, but with all the so-called civilised
section of mankind.
One of the tumuli to which I have referred was partially opened by Dr.
T. D. Whitaker, the historian of Whalley. But, as in his day Anglo-Saxon
antiquities were very little sought after and, consequently, very
imperfectly understood, his labours were productive of nothing but
negative results. Canon Raines, however, in a note to his edition of the
"Notitia Cestriensis," published by the Chetham Society, says--"In the
year 1836, as Thomas Hubbertsty, the farmer at Brockhall, was removing a
large mound of earth in Brockhall Eases, about five hundred yards from
the bank of the Ribble, on the left of the road leading from the house,
he discovered a Kist-vaen, formed of rude stones, containing some human
bones and the rusty remains of some spear-heads of iron. The whole
crumbled to dust on exposure to the air. Tradition has uniformly
recorded that a battle was fought about Langho, Elker and Buckfoot,
near the Ribble; and a tumulus was opened within two hundred yards of a
ford of the Ribble (now called Bullasey-ford), one of the very few
points for miles where that river could be crossed. The late Dr.
Whitaker repeatedly, but in vain, searched for remains of this battle,
as he appears to have erroneously concluded that the scene of it was
higher up the river, near Hacking Hall, at the junction of the Calder
and the Ribble."
Dr. Whitaker does not appear to have noticed all the tumuli in the
neighbourhood. In his "History of Whalley" he says--"Of this great
battle there are no remains, unless _a large tumulus_ near Hacking Hall,
and in the immediate vicinity of Langho, be supposed to cover the
remains of Alric, or some other chieftain among the slain." The site of
the tumulus, on the left bank, or south-east side of the Ribble, is
marked on the Ordnance map. It is scarcely three quarters of a mile from
Hacking Hall, and rather more than a mile from Langho chapel. No other
tumulus is noticed by the Ordnance surveyors on the south-east side of
the river.
Canon Raines states that the "large mound" removed by Thomas Hubbertsty,
in 1836, was situated "about five hundred yards from the bank of the
Ribble," and that the tumulus that had been previously opened was only
two hundred yards distant from that stream. The "large mound" of Canon
Raines, removed in 1836, in which remains were found, seems to have been
a smaller affair than the other tumuli. This is affirmed by Mr. Abram,
in a very able paper on the history of the township of Billington, in
the Lancashire and Cheshire Historical Society's Transactions, otherwise
he says, "the farmer would hardly have undertaken to level it." The
tumuli on the right bank or north-west side of the river are named
"lowes" on the six-inch Ordnance map, and "mounds" on the smaller one.
The former name is evidently the Anglo-Saxon _hlœw_, a conical hill or a
sepulchral mound, or tumulus, in the latter sense a synonym of _beorh_
or _bearw_, a barrow. Although these large tumuli are on the north-west
side of the river, the nearest is scarcely half a mile distant from the
site of the removed one near Bullasey-ford on the south-east.
There is some confusion in the various descriptions of these mounds. Mr.
Abram says, referring to the large tumulus called the "Lowe" on the
north-west side of the Ribble--"Into this mound Whitaker had some
excavation made about the year 1815, but he found the work heavy and
gave it up without reaching the centre of the tumulus, where the relics
of sepulture might be expected to be found." As Dr. Whitaker expressly
says, he saw no remains of the battle except "a large tumulus near
Hacking Hall," he must not only have been ignorant of the character of
its immediate neighbour, as well as of the one on the Langho side of the
river, near Bullasey-ford, if this "lowe" was the mound he but partially
disturbed. This can scarcely be the tumulus referred to by Canon Raines
if the distance (two hundred yards) from the river be correct. Neither
can the five hundred yards distance of Mr. Hubbertsty's mound
be reconciled with the site of the tumulus at Brockhall, near
Bullasey-ford. Perhaps his figures have been accidently transposed. I
had previously laboured under an impression that Hubbertsty had merely
completely cleared away the mound but imperfectly excavated by Dr.
Whitaker.
Being anxious to arrive at some more definite knowledge respecting these
"lowes" or "mounds," on the ninth of Nov., 1876, I visited the locality,
and by the aid of Mr. Parkinson, the present tenant of Brockhall, I was
enabled to make a far more detailed inspection of the battle-field than
on a hurried visit about twenty years previously. Mr. Parkinson pointed
out the site of the tumulus removed by Mr. Hubbertsty in 1836. Nothing
of it, of course, now remains. He said that it was the only mound of the
kind he had ever heard of on the Langho side of the Ribble. He, however,
pointed out a curious circular agger, about five or six feet broad and a
couple of feet high, which enclosed a level area some sixteen or
seventeen yards in diameter. It is evidently an artificial work, but
without additional evidence it is impossible to say, with any reasonable
degree of probability, by whom it was constructed, or to what use it was
originally applied. On the steep promontory called "Brockhole Wood-end,"
Mr. Parkinson called my attention to curious masses of cemented sand and
pebble stones, which some persons regarded as artificial grout, that had
originally formed part of the massive masonry of an ancient building,
the foundations of which had been undermined by the falling in of the
earth in consequence of the erosive action of the flood water of
the Ribble at the base of the cliff. This, however, I found, on
examination, to be erroneous. The "grout" in question is a geological
phenomenon, a kind of conglomerate or breccia, formed by the percolation
of rain water, charged with carbonic acid and lime, through the mass of
glacial or boulder "till" and its sandy and pebbly contents. The "till"
contains limestones brought by ice from both the Ribble and the Hodder
valleys. The phenomenon is a common one to geologists, and the
"concrete" at "Brockhole Wood-end" is an excellent example of it. On
gazing across the river at the larger "lowe" of the six-inch Ordnance
map, Mr. Parkinson remarked that it appeared to him to be what is termed
by geologists an outlier of the boulder deposits on each side of the
valley, and therefore, not an artificial mound. He pointed out that the
flood waters of the Ribble, Hodder, and Calder met in the plain, and
when the "till" was excavated by a kind of circular motion of the
combined waters, which the present appearance of the valley indicates,
the land situated in the centre or vortex would the longer resist the
abrading action, and eventually, as the passage of the currents became
enlarged, remain a surviving outlier of the general mass of glacial
deposit. On passing the river in the ferry-boat, and, by the aid of a
pickaxe, exposing the material of which this mound is formed, I
confessed that I could detect no difference in its character or
structure from that of the neighbouring geological deposits. Still, as
the mound, if artificial, must have been constructed from the boulder
clay and its unstratified contents, this is not surprising. It is,
however, impossible to solve this problem without a much more searching
investigation. Even if a mound existed at the time the battle was
fought, nothing is more probable than that it would be utilised by the
victors in the interment of their honoured dead. The second and
smaller mound seems very like an artificial one; but this cannot be
satisfactorily affirmed without more complete investigation. Both mounds
have been partially opened near their summits, but with only negative
results, as might have been anticipated, as the Christian Anglo-Saxons
in such cases buried the body in the earth, and afterwards heaped the
tumulus or barrow above it, as a monument to the memory of the deceased
warrior or warriors. This mode of interment had been adopted in the
instance of the tumulus removed by Mr. Hubbertsty in 1836. Interesting
results, both to geologists and archæologists, may, therefore, be
anticipated from a thorough examination of the contents of these
remarkable "lowes" or "mounds;" but, as some expense would be attendant
thereupon, they may yet, for some time, remain an interesting puzzle,
both to the learned and the unlearned in such matters. They are situated
in the midst of the level alluvial plain. The largest is nearly twenty
feet high, and forms a prominent object.
When I first visited the locality I was much amused at the rough and
ready way in which some of the country people accounted for their
construction, or rather the object thereof. They had seen sheep, when
the Ribble valley was flooded, mount on the top of them for safety, and
they innocently concluded that these historic monuments, mementoes of
deadly civil strife during the eighth century, or of the glacial period
of geologists, had been erected by some benevolent or thrifty ancestor
of the owner of the soil for the especial accommodation of ovine
refugees during the deluges to which the low-lying land on the margin of
the river is occasionally subjected.
It is, of course, at the present time, impossible to define the extent
of ground covered by the contending armies during the conflict, or to
give even a satisfactory outline of the general features of the battle.
The Roman road, the seventh iter of Richard of Cirencester, which leads
from the Wyre (the Portus Setantiorum of Ptolemy), by Preston and
Ribchester to York, passed through the township of Billington, crossed
the Calder near the present "Potter's Ford," a little above its junction
with the Ribble, and proceeded a little south of Clitheroe and north of
Pendle-hill, by Standen Hall, and Worston, in Lancashire, and Downham,
into Yorkshire. Mr. Abram seems to think that the battle was most
probably fought on this line of road. He says--"Eardulf encountered the
insurgent army on the extreme verge of his kingdom (for it seems certain
that the country south of the Ribble was then a part, not of the Saxon
kingdom of Northumbria, but that of Mercia). Wada and his army had
probably been driven upon the neutral territory before the decisive
battle could be forced upon him."
This notion that the Ribble and not the Mersey was the southern boundary
of Northumbria in the earlier period of the Heptarchy, was first
propounded by Dr. Whitaker, but upon very slight evidence. It is
sufficient here to say that the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, under the date
923, expressly states that King Edward sent a force of Mercians to take
possession of "Mameceastre (Manchester), _in Northumbria_, and repair
and man it." Again, the same chronicle, when referring to this very
battle, A.D. 798, expressly states that it took place "at Whalley, _in
the land of the Northumbrians_." Against such evidence, Dr. Whitaker's
mistaken dialectal argument, as well as that based on the extent of the
episcopal see of Lichfield, at some period of the Heptarchy, is utterly
valueless. His authority is the ancient document entitled "De Statu
Blackborneshire," supposed to have been written in the fourteenth
century by John Lindeley, Abbot of Whalley. Some notion of the value of
this monkish compilation, with reference to the earlier history of the
district, may be gathered from the fact that the author makes Augustine,
and not Paulinus, the missionary who planted Christianity amongst the
Northumbrian Angles. Dr. Whitaker likewise contends that the Ribble is
the _dialectic_ boundary between the two kingdoms. My own observation,
however, leads me to a very different conclusion. To my ear the change
is by no means so distinctly marked on the north and south sides of the
Ribble as it is on the north and south banks of the Mersey. The swampy
country between the two rivers would rather seem to have been a kind of
"march" or "debateable ground," during the earlier portion of the
Anglo-Saxon and Danish periods, districts in it being sometimes governed
by tributary British chieftains under both Northumbrian and Mercian
kings as the fortune of war from time to time prevailed. Lancashire is
not referred to as a county till the middle of the twelfth century. The
name is never mentioned in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. As we find the
"Lands between the Ribble and the Mersey" are surveyed with those of
Cheshire, in the Domesday book, it seems highly probable that they
formed a part of Leofric's earldom of Mercia, at the time of the Norman
conquest. Consequently it is to the latter and not to the earlier
portion of the Anglo-Saxon period that the Ribble formed the southern
boundary of the _earldom_ of Northumbria, rather than of the earlier
independent _kingdom_.
Mr. J. R. Green ("Making of England,") says--"The first missionaries to
the Englishmen, strangers in a heathen land, attached themselves
necessarily to the courts of the kings, who were their earliest
converts, and whose conversion was generally followed by that of their
people. The English bishops were thus at first royal chaplains, and
their diocese was naturally nothing but the kingdom. The kingdom of Kent
became the diocese of Canterbury, and the kingdom of Northumbria became
the diocese of York. So absolutely was this the case that the diocese
grew or shrank with the growth or shrinking of the realm which it
spiritually represented, and a bishop of Wessex or of Mercia found the
limits of his see widened or cut short by the triumphs of Wolfhere or of
Ine. In this way two realms, which are all but forgotten, are
commemorated in the limits of existing sees. That of Rochester
represented, till of late, an obscure kingdom of West Kent, and the
frontier of the original kingdom of Mercia might be recovered by
following the map of the ancient bishopric of Lichfield."
After describing in detail some of the subdivisions made by Archbishop
Theodore (A.D. 669-672), he adds--"The see of Lichfield thus returned to
its original form of a see of the Mercians proper, though its bounds on
the westward now embraced much of the upper Severn valley, with Cheshire
and the lands northward to the Mersey."
Notwithstanding this error with regard to the southern boundary of
Northumbria at that period, the Roman road, in all probability, was
utilised by the contending forces, and some portion of the main battle
was, doubtless, fought in its immediate vicinity. On the other hand, it
is equally probable, as the two larger tumuli are situated on the
north-west bank of the Ribble, that the chief conflict occurred in their
neighbourhood. On this hypothesis, Wada and his allies, on leaving
Waddington, crossed the Hodder, at the ford nearest its mouth, met the
King's army on the banks of the Ribble, and the possession of
Bullasey-ford was the immediate object of the encounter in which the
rebellious chieftain was discomfited. Or the route may have been
reversed. Wada may have crossed the Ribble, at the Bungerley
"hyppyngstones," to the north-west of Clitheroe, or the Edisford, to the
south-west, and after penetrating the southern portion of the present
county, had to fall back before the advance of the King's army, and,
unable to retrace his steps he made for the nearer ford at Bullasey,
where he was defeated and pursued across the river. As the slaughter is
generally greater when a discomfited enemy is routed, perhaps the two
large tumuli, named "lowes," mark the spot where the greatest carnage
ensued. This, however, of course, is merely conjecture. Its value cannot
be tested unless a thorough investigation of the contents of these huge
mounds should throw additional light upon the subject.
The good fortune of King Eardulf deserted him on a future occasion. The
Anglo-Saxon Chronicle says--"A.D. 806. This year the moon was eclipsed
in the Kalends of September; and Eardulf, King of the Northhumbrians,
was driven from his kingdom.... Also in the same year, on the 2nd before
the Nones of June, a cross appeared in the moon on a Wednesday at dawn;
and afterwards in this year, on the 3rd before the Kalends of September,
a wonderful circle was seen about the sun." This is the last we hear of
the victor of Billangahoh, and the manner of his exit from the historic
stage would seem to indicate that his rule, like that of his
predecessor, had become so intolerable that further revolts ensued, and
that Wada's successors, whoever they may have been, being successful in
their contumacy, would be regarded, not as traitors, but as "saviours of
their country." Truly, in struggles of this character, in all ages,
successful "rebels," writing their own history, are ever lauded as
heroes or patriots, while discomfited rulers are, with equal verity,
denounced as tyrants and enemies of the common weal.
A little higher up the Ribble than its junction with the Hodder, and
about a mile below the venerable ruin of the keep of Clitheroe Castle,
the ancient stronghold of the De Lacies, is a handsome modern bridge,
named Edisford or Eadsford, to which I have previously referred. The
country people, however, call it "Itch-uth Bridge," pronouncing the
latter syllable as in Cuthburt.
Johannes, Prior of Hagulstald, records that in this neighbourhood, in
the year 1138, one William, the son of the bastard brother of David,
king of Scotland, when engaged on a foray into England, was gallantly
encountered by a small band, near Clitheroe, but, being overpowered by
numbers, the Lancashire men sustained a slight defeat, and the Scots
took a considerable number of prisoners. The monkish chronicler calls
the northern assailants "Picts and Scots," and adds that they with
difficulty held their own till the fight had lasted three hours.
Tradition has preserved both the memory and the site of this conflict.
Mr. Edward Baines says:--"Vestiges of this sanguinary engagement have
been found at Edisford Bridge, and along the banks of the Ribble, during
successive ages up to the present time."
The "Bashall-brook," after passing "Bashall Hall," enters the Ribble a
little above Edisford Bridge. This is the stream referred to by Mr.
Haigh,[29] as the "Bassus" of Nennius, and the site of one of the
Arthurian victories which attended Colgrin's flight to York, after his
defeat on the Douglas, near Wigan. I have, however, never heard of any
legend or tradition which referred to a battle in the neighbourhood,
except the one recorded by the Prior of Hagulstald.
Near the bridge above Clitheroe may yet be seen the ancient
"hyppyngstones" to which I have previously referred, and by means of
which the river was crossed before the erection of the present viaduct.
These "hyppyngstones" have at least one mournful historical association.
After the fatal battle of Hexham, in the year 1464, the unfortunate
Henry the Sixth, the defeated son of the renowned victor at Agincourt,
was for a time concealed at Bolton-in-Bolland and Waddington Halls. What
transpired is best told in the words of the old chronicler:--
"Also the same yere, Kinge Henry was taken byside a howse of religione
[_i.e._, Whalley Abbey] in Lancashyre, by the mene of a blacke monke of
Abyngtone, in a wode called Cletherwode, beside Bungerley hyppyngstones,
by Thomas Talbott, of Bashalle, and Jhon Talbott, his cosyne, of
Colebury [_i.e._, Salesbury, near Ribchester], with other moo; which
discryvide (him) beynge at his dynere at Waddington Hall; and [he was]
carryed to London on horsebacke, and his legges bound to the
styropes."[30]
Mr. J. G. Nichols (Notes and Queries, vol 2., p. 229), says--"Waddington
belonged to Sir John Tempest, of Bracewell, who was the father-in-law to
Thomas Talbot. Both Sir John Tempest and Sir James Harrington, of
Brierley, near Barnsley, were concerned in the king's capture, and each
received one hundred marks reward, but the fact of Sir Thomas Talbot
being the chief actor, is shown by his having received the large sum of
£100." In addition to his one hundred marks, Sir James Harrington
received from Edward IV. large grants of land, forfeited by Richard
Tunstell, and other "rebels," "for his services in taking prisoner, and
withholding as such, in diligence and valour, his enemy, Henry, lately
called Henry VI." Mr. Baines says Sir John Talbot likewise received, "as
a reward for his perfidy, a grant of twenty marks a year, from Edward
IV., confirmed by his successor, Richard III., and made payable out of
the revenues of the county palatine of Lancaster."
In his "History of Craven," Dr. Whitaker gives engravings of the
unfortunate monarch's boots, gloves, and a spoon, which were preserved
at Bolton Hall, in Bolland, Yorkshire, then the seat of Sir Ralph
Pudsey, who married a daughter of Sir Thomas Tunstell. I understand
these relics of the unfortunate king have been since removed to Hornby
Castle, Lancashire. The "Old Hall" at Waddington, which has been
converted into a farmhouse, yet presents some massive masonry, and a
field in the neighbourhood still retains the name of "King Henry's
meadow."
The fate of the unhappy monarch is too well known to necessitate further
reference here.
The neighbourhood of Whalley was the scene of a relatively more recent
combat, of some local importance. During the civil war between Charles
I. and his Parliament, the Earl of Derby advanced, in 1643, from
Preston, to operate in the hundred of Blackburn. One of the "Civil War
Tracts," edited by Ormerod, and published by the Chetham Society,
says:--"The Earl of Derby, the Lord Molineux, Sir Gilbert Hoghton,
Colonel Tildesley, with all the other great papists in the county,
issued out of Preston, and on Wednesday now came to Ribchester, with
eleven troops of horse, 700 foot, and an infinite number of clubmen, in
all conceived to be 5,000." Colonels Ashton and Shuttleworth opposed
them with some regular troops, and a body of peasantry and militia,
hastily levied. A regular engagement, or rather a running fight, took
place between Whalley and Salesbury, in which the Earl was defeated and
pursued to Ribchester. This success appears to have been the precursor
of the subsequent declension of the Earl of Derby's military power in
the county. It was judged to be of so much importance at the time by the
"Roundheads," that a day of thanksgiving was set apart for the victory
by order of Parliament.
The ruin of Clitheroe Castle, on its well-wooded limestone eminence
overlooking the town, forms a picturesque object in the beautiful valley
of the Ribble. I remember well, in my early boyhood, being seriously
informed that the venerable feudal stronghold of the De Lacies was
battered into ruin by no less a personage than the redoubtable Oliver
Cromwell. The truth of this tradition was implicitly believed by me till
some slight study of Lancashire history, and a special visit to the
locality, threw serious doubt upon it. I have likewise a distinct
recollection of the consternation I caused amongst some aged friends,
after a careful inspection of the ruined keep, by my informing them that
if, as the tradition asserted, Cromwell had placed his cannon on "Salt
Hill," about a mile to the east of the fortress, the said ordnance must
have possessed some of the marvellous property ascribed to the Hibernian
weapon, which, on occasion, could "shoot round a corner," the wall of
the keep presenting the largest amount of superficial damage facing
directly west. This dilapidated aspect had, in my hearing, often been
attributed to the pounding the wall had received from Oliver's cannon. A
careful examination, however, satisfied me that the western face of the
structure was simply most weather-worn, on account of the lengthened
action of the prevailing south-westerly winds. Again, "Salt Hill" was
too far distant for the eight-pounder field pieces of the parliamentary
army to make any serious impression on the massive walls.[31] But
tradition is "tough" indeed, and especially if an element of
superstition or partizan zeal be embedded in it. Of course, my critics
had not the slightest objection to allow that there might possibly be
some mistake with regard to the site of his guns, but "everybody knew
that Cromwell did batter the castle into ruin," notwithstanding; and I
was frankly told that nobody thanked me for my _mischievous_ endeavour
to undermine people's faith in the well-known legend!
Cromwell must certainly have _seen_ Clitheroe Castle on his memorable
forced march from Gisburne to Stonyhurst Hall, on August 16th, 1648, the
day previous to his decisive victory over the Marquis of Langdale, on
Ribbleton Moor, and the Duke of Hamilton at Preston and the "Pass of the
Ribble." But there are two good and sufficient reasons why he did not
stay to expend his gunpowder on the fortress. In the first place, he had
not time, having important business on hand that demanded the utmost
expedition. In the second place, the castle was garrisoned by a portion
of the Lancashire Militia, who held the stronghold for the Parliament,
and Cromwell was not the man to amuse himself by bombarding his friends
on the eve of a great, and, as it proved, a decisive battle.
In point of fact, the castle remained intact, till the end of the civil
war, when the only recorded instance of its ever having been even
seriously threatened with a siege, occurred. An ordinance, disbanding
the militia generally throughout the country, did not, it seems, meet
with the approval of the Puritan warriors who held possession of the
Clitheroe fortress, and who, instigated, it was said, by clerical
advisers, "professed for the Covenant," and, in the first instance,
flatly refused to disband until their terms were accepted. After the
enforcement of the law, however, had been entrusted to Major-General
Lambert, these chivalrous champions of the Covenant thought, under such
circumstances, discretion was unquestionably the better part of valour,
and they surrendered the castle to the Parliamentary general without
further pressure. By an order of a Council of State, several of these
strongholds throughout the country were dismantled, with a view to
prevent their military occupation in case of a renewal of the war, and
amongst those so doomed were the castles of Clitheroe and Greenhaugh, in
the county of Lancaster. Thus ignominiously expires one element in the
presumed historic truth of Cromwell's numerous castle and abbey
battering exploits, referred to at length in the first chapter of this
work, and on which the most remarkable and wide-spread legend of
_modern_ and strictly historic times is based.
A still more astounding instance of the appropriation of popular legends
and famous names by localities that have no historical claims to them
whatever, is found in connection with the ancient castle at Bury,
Lancashire. Mr. Edward Baines says--"In the civil wars which raged in
Lancashire in 1644, Bury Castle was battered by the Parliamentary army
from an intrenchment called 'Castle-steads,' in the adjoining township
of Walmersley; and from that period the overthrow of this, as well as of
a large proportion of other castles of the kingdom, may be dated." Mr.
Baines gives no authority whatever for this astounding statement. He
evidently merely repeats a well-known local tradition. It would have
been worth the while of a local historian, one would think, to have made
some enquiry as to the history of the edifice at Bury during the century
which had elapsed between Leland's reference to it, and the redoubtable
exploit of the Parliamentary army in 1644. The earliest authentic record
of the castle is no older than the reign of Henry VIII., but from the
very nature of the record it must have been in existence for a long time
previously. Leland, the "king's antiquary," when travelling through the
country "in search of England's antiquities," _circa_ 1542-9, thus
writes about the place--"Byri-on-Irwell, 4 or V. miles from Manchestre,
but a poore market. There is a Ruine of a Castel by the paroch chirch yn
the Towne. It longgid with the Towne sumetime to the Pilkentons, now to
the Erles of Darby. Pilkenton had a place hard by Pilkenton Park, 3
miles from Manchestre." Leland's distances are, of course, merely
guesses. In this respect he is frequently in error. It is certain that
the de Bury family held land in the parish as recently as 1613, and we
find the manorial rights, at the time of the "Wars of the Roses," were
held by the Pilkington family. Sir Thomas Pilkington, a devoted adherent
to the fortunes of the House of York, obtained from Edward IV. a licence
to "kernel and embattle" his manor-home at Stand, in Pilkington. It is
not, therefore, improbable that the Bury castle at this time ceased to
be a manorial residence, and gradually fell into the ruinous condition
in which it was seen by Leland.
During the time I was inspecting the excavation by the local
commissioners of the site of Bury castle, in October, 1865, I was
courteously permitted by Mr. J. Shaw, of that town, to copy a MS.,
formerly the property of his late father, and, I understood, in that
gentleman's handwriting. It is, however, dated "Bury, April 13th, 1840,"
and signed "T. Crompton," or "Krompton," it is difficult to determine
which. As the document may be said to embody all the "traditional lore"
respecting the subject under consideration, I give it entire:--
"BURY IN THE OLDEN TIME, OR THE SIEGE OF THE CASTLE, ETC.
"Bury Castle, supposed to be built in the reign of Richard II., in 1380.
The date when erected cannot be positively ascertained. The coin of the
Stuarts, etc., have been found in the foundations. The whole of the
castle was destroyed by the Parliamentary arms, in 1642-3, when the wars
between Charles I. and Cromwell deluged poor England in the blood of her
own children. Edward de Bury was attached to the unfortunate Charles's
cause. He fell, with many others, a prey to the party spirit then raging
so horribly in the land. The river Irwell passed by the north side of
the castle, and run by the north-east turret, the site of the castle,
which forms a parallelogram, was about 11 roods square, and from the
foundation [the walls] seem to have been about two yards thick, with
four round towers, about 60 feet high each. A large stone has been found
which belonged to the archway, with the arms of De Bury engraved
thereon. This drama [_sic_] is principally taken from a legendary tale
of Bury Castle. Cromwell's army (by Stanley) was placed on Bury Moor.
The cannon in an intrenchment at Castle Head [_sic_] on the Walmesley
side of the river. Lord Strange arrayed his army of 20,000 for the Royal
cause on Gallow's Hill, Tottington Side. The river opposite the Castle,
before the course was altered, was about 100 to 120 yards wide."
Traditionary lore, though on the whole generally founded on some
fact or facts, which have become distorted, owing to their frequent
oral transmission by persons utterly ignorant of their original
signification, is scarcely ever to be relied on so far as individuals or
dates are concerned. The stories do unquestionably attest the retention
in the popular mind of something of import that took place in that vague
period denominated the "olden time," but not always accurately what that
_something_ may have been. The Adam de Bury referred to in the document
quoted is either a myth, or the name has reference to some earlier
individual interested in the castle at Bury. Indeed the family appears
to have become extinct before the commencement of the civil wars
referred to. On this point the documentary evidence quoted by Mr. E.
Baines is very conclusive. There can have been no "Adam de Bury attached
to the unfortunate Charles's cause," or his name would have appeared
amongst the Lancashire "lords, knights, and gentlemen," who compounded
with the sequestration commissioners for their estates in 1646.
Cromwell's army could not have been placed on Bury Moor, by either
Stanley or anyone else, in 1642-3, as that general did not enter
Lancashire till 1648, and then his route lay by Stonyhurst, Preston,
Wigan, and Warrington. Lord Strange's "army" of 20,000 men is but
another form of expression for the public meeting held on Bury Moor, the
numbers stated as attending which are doubtless much exaggerated. A
similar meeting was held on Preston Moor, and, singularly enough,
as it was a numerous one, the same authority employs the same
terms--20,000--to express the fact. The placing of the cannon at Castle
Stead is another proof of the ignorance of some of the transmitters of
the tradition, the ordnance during Charles's time being useless at such
a distance.
The statement in Mr. Shaw's document that "coin of the Stuarts, etc.,
have been found in the foundations," is valueless, inasmuch as until the
excavations in 1865, the soil about the _foundations_ does not appear to
have been disturbed; and yet above the original surface, remains were
found of various relatively modern dates, as might have been
anticipated.
I have said there is generally some germ of truth at the bottom of this
class of legendary stories. In this case it is not only possible but
highly probable, that older traditions having reference to the "Wars of
the Roses," may have been confounded with more recent events. This is by
no means an uncommon occurrence, as I have previously contended.
Singularly enough, Mr. Baines laments the lack of historical documents
relating to Lancashire during this eventful period, and which he
attributes to the wilful destruction to which they were subjected by the
partizans of both the contending houses. The only historical event of
any public interest recorded in connection with the bloody struggle for
the crown of England between the Yorkists and the Lancastrians,
relates to the capture of the unfortunate Henry VI. at "Bungerley
hyppyngstones," previously referred to. It is therefore not improbable
that some local events, lost to history, may have survived in the
mutilated form in which tradition presents them at the present day,
although their strictly historical significance is lost, and, what is
worse, flagrant error has usurped its place in the popular mind.
It does not appear, on the authority of any trustworthy evidence, that
Cromwell ever visited Lancashire, at least in a military capacity,
except on the occasion of his great victory over Langdale and Hamilton
in 1648. Of his movements immediately preceding that event, we have his
own statement in a dispatch addressed to "The Honourable William
Lenthall, Esquire, Speaker of the House of Commons." He says--"Hearing
that the enemy was advanced with their army into Lancashire, we marched
the next day, being the 13th of this instant August, to Otley (_having
cast off our train_, and sent it to Knaresborough, because of the
difficulty of marching therewith through Craven, and to the end that we
might _with more expedition_ attend the enemy's motion): and on the 14th
to Skipton; the 15th to Gisburne; the 16th to Hodder Bridge,
over Ribble; where we held a council of war, at which we had in
consideration, whether we should march to Whalley that night, and so on,
to interpose between the enemy and his further progress into Lancashire,
and so southward,--which we had some advertisement the enemy intended,
and [we are] since confirmed that they intended for London itself: or
whether to march immediately over the said Bridge, there being no other
betwixt that and Preston, and there engage the enemy,--who we did
believe would stand his ground, because we had information that the
Irish forces under Munro lately come out of Ireland, which consisted of
twelve hundred horse and fifteen hundred foot, were on their march
towards Lancashire to join them. It was thought that to engage the enemy
to fight was our business; and the reason aforesaid giving us hopes that
our marching on the north side of Ribble would effect it, it was
resolved we should march over the bridge, which accordingly we did, and
that night quartered the whole army in the field by Stonyhurst Hall,
being Mr. Sherburn's house, a place nine miles distant from Preston.[32]
Very early the next morning we marched towards Preston, having
intelligence that the enemy was drawing together thereabouts from all
his out quarters."
At first sight it appears that Cromwell refers to some bridge which
spanned the river Ribble, and named Hodder Bridge. This, however, is not
the case. By the word "over" he means _beyond_, that is they passed over
the Ribble to a bridge spanning the Hodder. Stonyhurst can be approached
from the east by two bridges over this stream called the "upper" and the
"lower." Both have been superseded by new structures, but some
picturesque ruins of their predecessors yet remain. In a note at page
187, "History of Preston and its Environs," I say--"As Cromwell's army
advanced by way of Gisburn he would _necessarily_ pass through
Waddington to the higher bridge, over the river Hodder, on his route to
Stonyhurst." In this case he could ford the Ribble near Salley Abbey a
few miles above Clitheroe, or at the Bungerley "hyppyngstones," nearer
the town. From Cromwell's slight reference to Clitheroe, and his
uncertainty respecting the troops occupying the place, together with
Colonel Hodgson's reference to "Waddey," both of which will be again
referred to, this is the most probable route. But from Gisburn, he _may_
have come direct to Clitheroe, and, passing through the town, have
crossed the Ribble at Eddisford a little below, and proceeded from
thence to Stonyhurst by the "lower bridge of Hodder."
Further, in the evening after the battle, in a letter to the "Honourable
Committee of Lancashire, sitting at Manchester," dated "Preston, 17th
August, 1648," Cromwell expresses some uncertainty as to the forces
stationed at Clitheroe, which evidently shows he made no stay in the
immediate neighbourhood. He says--"We understand Colonel-General
Ashton's [forces] are at Whalley; we have seven troops of horse or
dragoons that we _believe_ lie at Clitheroe. This night I have sent
order to them expressly to march to Whalley, to join to these companies;
that so we may endeavour the ruin of the enemy."
Captain John Hodgson, of "Coalley," near Halifax, whom Thomas
Carlyle somewhat unceremoniously and unnecessarily describes as an
"honest-hearted, pudding-headed Yorkshire Puritan,"[33] left behind him
a kind of journal, in which the details of the campaign are described
with great clearness and minuteness. Hodgson, as his conduct shows, was
not only an honest, but a brave and skilful soldier. He says--"The next
day we marched to Clitheroe; and at Waddey [Waddow, between Clitheroe
and Waddington,] our forlorn of horse took Colonel Tempest and a party
of horse, for an earnest of what was behind. That night we pitched our
camp at Stanyares Hall, a Papist's house, one Sherburne; and the next
morning a forlorn was drawn out of horse and foot; and, at Langridge
Chapel, our horse gleaned up a considerable parcel of the enemy, and
fought them all the way until within a mile of Preston."
If any military action, of even trifling importance, had taken place at
Clitheroe it could not possibly have escaped the notice both of the
general and his detail-loving "commander of the forlorn of foot." After
describing the earlier portion of the struggle with Langdale's troops on
Ribbleton moor, he says--"My captain sees me mounted[34] and orders me
to ride up to my colonel, that was deeply engaged both in front and
flank: and I did so, and there was nothing but fire and smoke; and I met
Major-General Lambert coming off on foot, who had been with his brother
Bright, and coming to him, I told him where his danger lay, on his left
wing chiefly. He ordered me to fetch up the Lancashire regiment; and God
brought me off, both horse and myself. The bullets flew freely; then was
the heat of the battle that day. I came down to the muir, where I met
with Major Jackson, that belonged to Ashton's regiment, and about three
hundred men were come up; and I ordered him to march, but he said he
would not, till his men were come up. A serjeant, belonging to them,
asked me, where they should march? I shewed him the party he was to
fight; and he, like a true bred Englishman, marched, and I caused the
soldiers to follow him; which presently fell upon the enemy, and losing
that wing the whole army gave ground and fled. Such valiant acts were
done by contemptible instruments: The major had been called to a council
of war, but that he cried _peccavi_."
These Lancashire troops, under the command of "Colonel-General" Ashton,
appear to have been brave fellows enough; but, like militia-men in
general, they appear to have had only lax notions of discipline. If not
actually mutinous, they sometimes lacked the subordination essential to
military discipline. Their qualities Captain Hodgson sums up in the
following pithy sentences--"The Lancashire foot were as stout men as
were in the world, and as brave firemen. I have often told them, they
were as good fighters, and as great plunderers, as ever went to a
field."