Sir William Waller

If Hereford surrendered easily the first time, it certainly did not overexert itself during the second Parliamentarian attack, led by Sir William Waller in April 1643. After the Parliamentarians left for the first time in December 1642, the Royalists tried to improve the fortifications of the city so that it would be better prepared to withstand a siege in the event of a return of the Roundheads, but for some reason the citizens were not very forthcoming in their support. The following excerpt is taken from the private papers of Viscount Scudamore, a leading Herefordshire Royalist:

"Hereupon ye mayor of ye Cittie was instantly sent for and desired to summon ye citizens, to come in with all ye materials they could bring, to cast up brest workes to strengthen ye weakest partes of ye Towne".

However, few - if any - men turned up. In fact, even after a proclamation was issued that those who did not assist in the building work would be plundered, so few agreed to help that very little improvement was carried out. Viscount Scudamore did a survey of the necessary work to be carried out, but his instructions were only partially followed:

"... first that a breastwork should be made on ye banke of ye river upon both sides of ye bridge, and that ye way under ye Castle being upon ye same banke very plaine, and open as any highway should be likewise strengthened with a good worke, and turnpike, to hinder any entrance by land under ye Castle, or by water in boats; 2ndly that a brestworke should be cast up to defend ye entrance into ye Castle by ye Mill, as plaine and open a place as ye other, only there is a small ascent; 3rdly that deep trenches with any movable bridges untill drawbridges could be provided, should be digged and made within evry open gate; 4thly that Byster's Gate should be dam'd up; 5thly that some old houses on severall places on ye wall should be taken downe ..."

It is not surprising that people would be reluctant to let their homes be destroyed, but it was an important measure taken in siege warfare. The defenders would destroy all buildings surrounding the city wall so that they would have a clean firing line and so that the attackers could not use a high building such as a church tower to fire into the city. The attackers at Brampton Bryan had used the church tower to attack the castle, and in the siege of Hereford in 1645 the Scots used the tower of the original St. Martin's church to fire into the city and onto the castle.

The city walls and the castle had not only been neglected since the Middle Ages, but were not built to withstand the kind of artillery in use during the Civil War. Scudamore's advice was good, but for some reason it was not taken. Why did the inhabitants lack the will to build stronger defences? Was the Parliamentarian faction in the City Council still so influential? Did people not expect another attack to take place? Perhaps this lack of a unified resistance explains why it was so easy for Sir William Waller to take hold of Hereford.

Waller's men attacked shortly after dawn on the 25th April. As part of this attack the Roundheads aimed a saker (a cannon, 3.5 inches (89mm) in diameter and 9 feet (2.77m) long) at Widemarsh Gate and fired shot weighing 6lbs (2.73kg). The first round breached the gate and decapitated an officer. Mr. Corbett, a minister in Waller's army, described this incident:

"To help forward the capture of the city, Massie [one of Waller's staff officers] drew up two sakers in a straight line against Wide Marsh gate, not without extreme hazard of being shot from the walls, and himself gave fire, and the first cannon-shot entered the gate and took an officer's head from his shoulders and slew some besides. More shot were made, each of which scoured the street and so alarmed the enemy that they presently sounded a parley which was entertained by Sir W. Waller."

Early in the afternoon, when the defenders saw how easily the gates were breached, they offered to enter into negotiations to surrender. Ironically, Waller was at this time under orders to join the siege of Reading and if there had been better resistance from the Royalists, he would have had to retreat. However, the Parliamentarians once again held the City of Hereford.

The surrender of Hereford was of little strategic importance in that it did not affect the outcome of the war in the long run, however, it had a demoralising effect on the Royalists. The Royalist high command in Oxford called for an investigation and put Sir Richard Cave, the governor of Hereford Castle who had escaped from Hereford, on trial.

How could Hereford have fallen so easily? It is true that Stamford had removed all the stores to Gloucester when he decamped and that the defenders were left with few munitions. Nevertheless, rumours of treachery abounded. In the end there was no evidence of skulduggery and Sir Richard Cave was acquitted. However the reputation of the Herefordians suffered greatly.

This is reflected in an incident reported in a contemporary news sheet. It seems that when Sir William Waller expected Worcester to surrender, the governor replied that "he was not now at Hereford". However, little were the citizens of Hereford to know then that it would not be long before they could truly prove their mettle.

When Waller and his men moved on less than a fortnight later, the city fell into Royalist hands once again. As a result of this ignominious defeat, the Royalist high command appointed Sir William Vavasour as governor of Hereford and Sir Henry Lingen as sheriff of Herefordshire. To boost morale, they launched an attack on Brampton Bryan Castle, the main Parliamentarian stronghold remaining in the county. The city of Hereford itself did not see serious action again until the siege by the Scottish Army in 1645.

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2003]