THE LEAGUER BEGINS
In late October, Brereton began to set up the first of a series of fortified outposts around Chester, aimed at eventually cutting the city off from outside supplies and assistance. The Parliamentarians, with their forward headquarters at Tarvin. about six miles from Beeston, would be seriously inconvenienced by an unneutralised Royalist garrison so close to their rear. In a first step towards containing Beeston, detachments of troops were sent out From Nantwich and Tarvin to seize the garrison cattle which were grazing at the foot of the crag. Malbon describes the incident, saying that a report reached Nantwich that "the King's partie at Beeston Castle had an intente to have robbed and spoyled Namptwiche markett folks on theire retourne home: But the forces from Tarvin did prevente Theim; and sent 12 of the Souldiers neere the Castle who brought away the Envmes Cattell, wch when they in the Castle p'rceyved, yssued forth to have rescued theim; But the bodie of horse from Namptwiche being on Tilstone heathe, and Lt. Col. Masseye havinge layd some of his company in Ambushment drewe from the Castle towards Tilstone Heath; and Tarvyn forces being gotten betwixte the Enymye and the Castle, upon retreate of the Enymy towards the Castle, havinge espyed the Bodie of Namptwiche horse on Tilstone heathe did set upon them, and took about 20 of them prisoners, and 12 of their horse, and the rest fledd into the Castle: without loss of any in the p'liament partie."[14] On October 28th, Captain Gimbart and a party of his firelocks made a nocturnal raid, capturing 37 cattle and oxen, whilst a few nights later, Major Croxton's men took another 60, losing two men wounded. [15] On October 28th, Brereton reported to the Committee of Both Kingdoms: "On Saturday a party of our men from Tarvin took away divers cattle belonging to the Governor of Beeston Castle, and enticed the enemy into an ambuscade, killing several and taking seventeen prisoners, whereof one was an ensign, besides thirty stand of arms, without loss of one man." [16]
On November 16th, Brereton, "receiving intelligence that they in Beeston Castle were in want of Matches, fewell and other Necessaries" [17] tightened the pressure further, bringing up a strong force in order to cover the establishment of a series of outposts surrounding thegarrison. These included Beesron Hall, about halt a mile to the northeast, and several farms around the toot ot the crag itselt. The garrison struck back on the same night, making a sally in which they "tyred one Owyn's Barne, standing att the foote of the hill, and burned the same Barne and the wheate therein." [18] Brereton's object was not immediately to reduce Beeston itself, but to prevent further sorties by its garrison.
The Parliamentarians were not at first successful in this aim, for, as well as Royalist thrusts from Holt and Chester, the most successful counterstroke was launched from Beeston itself, when on December 7th a party of about 40-50 Royalists slipped out ot a sally port, and surprised a Parliamentarian outpost in "Owen's House", very possibly on the site now occupied by Castle Gate Farm, firing part of the building whilst the defenders were at dinner and killing 2-4 out of the 26 men present. The survivors were carried off to the castle as prisoners. [19]
Nevertheless, the blockade was maintained, and on January 17th, Brereton was writing optimistically to the Committee of Both Kingdoms: "Beeston Castle is every day more and more distressed, so, unless speedily relieved, I hope a good account may be given thereof." [20] Next day, he was given more grounds for satisfaction when a major Royalist sortie from Chester, with the eventual objective of relieving Beeston, was defeated at Chrisleton. [21]
By February 10th, Sir William was reporting that: "we still maintain the siege of Beeston Castle, which we hope cannot hold out long. [22]
But the plight of Chester and its outlying garrisons had now attracted the attention of the Royalist high command, and their preservaton was to be a major consideration in the King's strategy for much of the remainder of the war. As a first step, troops under Prince Maurice were despatched to relieve Chester. They succeeded in this aim on February 19th, but proved unable to assist Beeston, a relief attempt mounted by the Governor ot Holt, Colonel John Robinson, being repulsed.
However, Maurice was shortly reinforced by his redoubtable brother, Prince Rupert, and with his arrival Royalist efforts proved more successful. On March 18th, Rupert's men forced Brereton to abandon the blockade of Beeston. A Royalist diarist recorded: "the enemy, having intelligence ot our intention to relieve Beeston, quitted the siege; left their works undemohshed and a sow behind them. No distress; 8000 weight ot biscuit; plenty ot beet, only some want ot fire and beer." [23] The reference to the sow, evidently a battering ram of some kind, has caused some puzzlement, for unless the Parliamentarians were contemplating an assault on the Outer Gatehouse, it is difficult to see how it could practicably have been employed.
Before departing, Rupert's men burnt Beeston Hall, and possibly some of the surrounding farms, and ordered the neighbourhood to pay the garrison all contributions outstanding since the commencement of the leaguer.
THE LEAGUER RESUMED
On Rupert's departure, Brereton at once ordered troops from Tarporley to resume the blockade, but had difficulty in maintaining it. On April 10th, it was reported that most of Captain Glegg's company of Brereton's Regiment of Foot, which had been garrisoning the outpost at Tilston, about eight miles south-east of Beeston, had deserted, complaining that in their absence, their homes lay open to the depredations of Parliamentarian troops from elsewhere. [24] Indeed, the Deputy Lieutenants in Nantwich complained to Brereton: "If not prevented nor supplied by others, that part of the county which heth within the power of Beeston Castle will be absolutely ruinated and those few left at Tilston subjected to being lost." Captain Holford's company (regiment unknown) and Captain Gimbarts Firelocks (Brereton's Regiment of Foot) were ordered to the scene. [25] Gimbart was a professional soldier of unknown origins, but ironically, it is possible that some of his men were survivors of Sandford's old company, who had been captured at Nantwich and had then changed sides.
An interesting sidelight on the Beeston garrison, and a commentary on the increasing bitterness of the conflict, is contained in a letter of April 12th to Brereton from Major Thomas Croxton, Governor ot Nantwich: "I received a command from you for the executing ot some of Beeston's soldiers. I could have wished that no quarter had been given to them that were first taken, but having quarter given them I know of no order or ordnance that authoriseth the taking away of their lives. But if you please to send a warrent to the Marshall I shall see it put into execution. They that were taken last were pressed for pioneers and had overrun the castle since the raising of the siege. Therefore I conceive the giving of quarter to them was fit. The castle soldiers have taken divers of our men prisoners since theirs were taken, who must expect no more mercy than we intend to them. I refer this to your further order." [26]
The ordnance which Croxton referred to was that by which Parliament had ordained the execution of any native Irish found in arms for the King. In practice this was interpreted with a good deal of variation, and during the spring of 1645 both sides carried out a number of executions either under the terms of the ordnance, or in the case of the Royalists, as reprisals. It may be that some of the Beeston garrison were actually native Irish, possibly of Lord Byron's own Regiment of Foot, or men of more uncertain origin who had been serving with the English forces in Ireland, or were simply chosen as as scapegoats. It seems however, that Croxton's obvious disapproval bore fruit, for there is no record of the executions being carried out. The Parliamentarians, recognising the impracticability of carrying Beeston by assault, were at this time concentrating their main efforts on reducing Chester's other satellite garrison at Hawarden, and confining their efforts at Beeston to effectively sealing the garrison off from the outside world. Work began on digging an entrenchment surrounding the entire crag, [27] and on the construction of a mount about a musket-shot from the Outer Gateway. Malbon records that the besiegers "had begun to have reased a brave mounte with a strong ditch about the same: and had placed good buildings therein, weh were scarce finished" by early May. [28] Croxton's letter suggests that the garrison must have attempted to disrupt the work, though few details survive.
The Parliamentarians were evidently encountering difficulties in maintaining their forces, as evidenced by a letter of April 8th from Colonel Robert Duckenfield to Sir George Booth of the County Committee in Nantwich: "My regiment hath lain so long at the siege of Beeston without pay that many of them are grown sick and [discontented] so that I cannot persuade them to march presently, unless your gentlemen of the county would be pleased to order some pay for them." [29] By April 14th, Beeston was apparently fairly closely blockaded again, and on May 8th, Brereton reported to the Committee of Both Kingdoms: "We have almost finished a mount before Beeston Castle gate, which is encompassed with a strong, deep trench. This will command and keep them in the castle, so that they dare not issue out in strong parties to annoy the country or bring in provisions." [30]
View from the Inner Ward, looking North West (Large 264K)
There was considerable venom displayed in an exchange of letters between the opposing commanders, triggered by the Parliamentarians' operations to extend the siege works. On May 9th, Captain William Vallett wrote to Captain Godfrey Gimbart, apparently in command of operations: "I understand by the bearer that you intend to burn the house. [apparently "Owen's House", below the Outer Gateway] Indeed it should not have been left for you to have done it, but that I did commiserate a poor widow and two poor orphans in so much that I was content rather to shew that extremity to suffer it to be a den of thieves and traitors. But if you take this course you prevent that which I might, upon good reasons, do myself and I shall make it such a precident as the surveyors of your works -Aldersley, Spurstowe, Metcalfe cum multis aliis of your traitorous faction shall repent. And whereas you flatter yourself with hopes of taking this place, I scorn your threats and attempts and the forces of your best general, for all his great ram's head. [Presumably a reference to the "sow" captured in March] " [31]
Possibly stung by Vallett's letter, but, one suspects, rather enjoying himself, Girnbart replied: "From my royal fort which stands for the confusion of a den of traitors in Beeston Castle. Governor, I have received your civil expressions in a scandalous paper. You said you delighted in civility; it appears in your beastlike expressions. You told me you would not be tied to conditions. And do you think to tie me, that am at liberty, and that by you whom I keep close prisoner amongst your anti-Christian, Babylonian crew and will wait to expend my dearest blood upon the destruction of such traitors to King and state as that den of blasphemers are whereof you are chief. You cause me to burn the house by your expressions..... For your scandals to my general, you put it upon him whose shoes you are not worthy to clean. But I suppose you take the counsel to write this letter with the asses whom you took prisoners." [32]
Within a few days, the Parliamentarians were again forced to abandon the leaguer, on the approach of the mam Royalist army in the First stages of the Naseby campaign.
Part 1 of the Article
Part 3 of the Article
Back to English Civil War Times No. 51 Table of Contents
Back to English Civil War Times List of Issues
Back to Master Magazine List
© Copyright 1995 by Partizan Press
This article appears in MagWeb.com (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other articles from military history and related magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com