Passion for the past, brought to the present...

Were There Black People in Britain During The English Civil War? (erm, yes!)

Spencer Houghton • 9 April 2021
 The simple answer to this question is yes; Black People (People of African dependency) had been part of the British landscape for 1500 years when the Civil War broke out.

Earliest records of Black people in Britain goes back to 210AD when a Black Roman soldier was described in military records as “this Ethiopian of great frame amongst clowns and good for a laugh”. 

Later in the 3rd Century up to 500 Roman cavalry originating from Sudan and Ethiopia who were part of the Muarorum Aurelianorum which was named after Emperor Marcus Aurelius who was described as a “Moor”.

More evidence of Black troops being part of Roman Britain on Hadrian’s Wall at a fort at Aballava near Burgh by Sands , Carlisle and modern DNA testing of the existing inhabitants shows much higher than average levels of African DNA indicating that they troops mingled with the local indigenous population potentially marrying and having families.

Archaeological excavations in Sycamore Terrace, York discovered a 4th Century high status stone coffin containing the remains of the “Ivory Bangle Lady” who was a sub Saharan Black lady about 5 foot tall who died in her early 20’s. She was well nourished and the grave was adorned with high status grave goods. The archaeologists suspected she could have been the wife of a senior military commander or a successful trader. Continued excavations on the site and the subsequent DNA testing of skeleton’s led to an estimate that up to 10% of this important Roman city had their origins in Africa.

Not all evidence of Black people in early Britain were directly related to the Roman army, in 1953 the discovery of “Beachy Head Lady” during an excavation of an early Anglo-Saxon cemetery from about 200-245AD that raised in excess of 300 skeleton’s. This one skeleton, during DNA testing, showed that this young woman originated sub-Saharan Africa although brought up and lived for some time in Sussex.


During the post Roman period there is little evidence or records of the existence of Black Britain’s but you can assume that any Black Romans left behind will have had mixed marriages and the origins would have dissipated over the generations.


However during “The Dark Ages” leading into the early medieval period with the growth of Christianity, a Black Roman commander born in Thebes, Egypt about 250AD was venerated in 926AD. St Maurice led a Roman Legion of 10,000 Christian troops and was executed along with many of his Legion for not butchering Christians when ordered to do so by the Emperor.



During the Medieval period, there was increased trade with Africa, no doubt Black sailors and tradesmen would not have been uncommon at major ports around the coast of Britain.


The Mappa Mundi (circa 1300) clearly shows three distinct Christian continents of the known world, Europe, Asia and Africa with Ethiopia as the heart of Christian Africa. Africa was seen in Medieval Britain as a very rich and plentiful continent with strange and exotic animals and mystical human entities.




The Moorish invasion of the Spanish peninsula didn’t enhance the standing of many Black people in Europe as a whole but there is plenty of evidence that Black soldiers were employed in many armies throughout the continent. When the Moorish forces were driven out of Southern Europe not all the Moors who have headed back to Africa but many came north through France and up into Northern Europe.




With Britain entering the Tudor Age, we see the country entering a period of sustained growth of its Black population and clear evidence starts appearing again.


Catherine of Aragon, future wife of Henry VII came from Spain to Britain with at least one Black woman in her entourage, known as Catalina de Cardos and was important enough to be given the role of Head of the Bed Sheets. She may have been involved in proving that Catherine’s doomed first marriage to Prince Arthur had not been consummated ahead of her marriage to Henry in 1509.


In 1511, King Henry VIII held the Westminster Tournament at which his Royal Trumpeters performed and in painting celebrating the event we clearly see a Black trumpeter. His name was John Blanke, probably came to this country as part of Catherine of Aragon’s entourage and first employed by King Henry in 1507.


John Blanke was involved in what we would today describe as an employment dispute as he brought a grievance against the King as he was being paid less than his White counterparts. Unlike many who stood against Henry, John Blanke was successful and received an increase in his wage to bring up to parity with his white colleagues.


When John Blanke married in 1512, the King presented him with “a gown of violet cloth and also a bonnet and a hat to be taken of our gift against his marriage” so we can assume he was highly respected by his employer.  Again in a painting of The Field of Gold from 1520 there appears a Black Royal Trumpeter who it is assumed was John Blanke still in the King’s employment.

Black people were coming to this country during early Tudor period and being employed as musicians, dancers, entertainers and domestic servants. Most were to be found in and around the major southern ports like London, Southampton and Bristol but not exclusively.


Specialist workers were being brought into Britain, in 1545, King Henry VIII hired a Venetian Salvage Expert, Corci, based in Southampton where he worked with the Italian traders when their boats were lost coming into harbour. Henry had lost his flagship, the Mary Rose in Portsmouth harbour and wanted to recover his ordinance from on board and Corci’s lead diver was Jacques Francis who originally came from a small island off the coast of Guinea where pearl and fishing divers were employed by Europeans for their swimming and diving skills.

We know a reasonable amount about Jacques Francis as he was the first Black Man to appear in court records when he gave evidence on behalf of his employer, Corci, when he was involved in a case where he had been accused of theft from a clients ship.


Trade with West Africa continued to grow throughout the 16th Century but it was during the Elizabethan period where Britain saw a big increase in the numbers of Black Africans coming to our shores. As Britain’s trade grew, we saw conflict with the traditional partners, namely Portugal and Spain with Queen Elizabeth’s “Privateers” such as Drake, Hawkins and their like regularly raiding Spanish and Portuguese trade ships going from the Spanish mainland to West Africa and then over the Atlantic Ocean to their colonies in The America’s.


As well as gold, ivory, spice and exotic African goods, the Privateers were taking the African slaves from the Iberian ships who along with the rest of their bounty were brought back to Britain.


Generally speaking these poor souls were either released on the docks of port cities like London, Southampton and Bristol to fend for themselves or as local people realised there was a regular supply of Black workers, they would offer the ship Captains a fee to take them off their hands.


These were not classed as slaves as we would later recognise but like anyone, regardless of race in this time who was penniless, homeless and disorientated by their dreadful experience they would have had a difficult time however learning the language and more importantly becoming a Christian would see their lives improve. The first Black worker in the port city of Bristol is found in 1560 when Sir John Young employed a African straight from the ships to work as a gardener in his grounds located just behind what is now The Red Lodge Museum.


Most Africans were to be commonly found in and around the port cities generally employed as domestic servants, musicians, entertainers, sex workers and low level tradesmen. Most common though was likely to be sailors on trade ships


The subject of slavery is one that can’t be ignored, generally speaking slavery didn’t exist and Queen Elizabeth described the trade as “detestable and would call down the vengeance of Heaven upon the undertakers”. However some Royal loans could be linked to small scale slave trade operations. The only commercial slave trade during this period was linked to Sir John Hawkins who made four trips from West Africa to The Americas before ceasing the trade. He saw the financial opportunity follow numerous successful raids on Spanish ships filled with African slaves bound for their colonies.


In 1596, following successive failed harvests and subsequent food shortages, Queen Elizabeth wrote to the Mayor of London & other leading Aldermen around the country expressing concern over the increased numbers of Black people in the country and suggesting they should be deported. Showing the value employers regarded their Black workers and their embeddedness into society, only 10 were ever deported.


Reflecting how Black people were an intrinsic part of Elizabethan society, we just have to look at the writings of Shakespeare whose plays had a number of important Black roles such as Othello based it is believed on his Black mistress’s father and Caliban from the Tempest.


In the previous article, we looked at how Black Africans had been an important part of society for 1500 years leading up to the 17th Century and the English Civil War.


The beginning of the 17th Century saw significant changes in Britain with the Tudor dynasty making way for the Stewarts with James VI of Scotland coming south to take the crown from the deceased Elizabeth.


With James and his royal entourage arriving in London there is evidence of a small but significant number of black domestic and personal servants. Black servants were seen as a very fashionable thing to have throughout Europe’s elite and these people would have been richly attired to show off their existence. In addition to the servants, high society entertainment would very often involve Black musicians, dancers, acrobats and entertainers.


On the birth of his first son, Henry, James VI held what described as a magnificent pageant with the centrepiece being a famous Black entertainer playing the part of a ferrous lion who was described as being “Black-Moor and very richly attyred”


King James with his richly attired Black servants would have set the present for his courtiers to follow the fashion and no doubt as the middle classes grew in financial strength they too would have wanted to be seen as having Black domestic servants.



Not all Africans in Britain would be in service; again in Bristol, a barmaid called Katherine worked at The Horses Head in Christmas Street until her death in 1612.


A self sufficient Single woman described as a “negra” (a Black Woman”) called Cattelena of Almonsbury near Gloucester appeared to make a living from the proceeds of the products from her cow and provided food for travellers passing through the town. Records show clear evidence of 50 other independent Black women between 1571-1640


Parish records from the 17th Century show evidence of Black residence in Cornwall, Devon, Somerset, Wiltshire, Gloucester, Kent, Northampton and Suffolk although London appears to be the main location for the Black community. In 1610, ships records show up to 30% of ships crews were Black African sailors but also others from Japan and Asia


In 1618, the Thirty years War broke out in Europe and it is estimated that up to 50,000 refugees fled to Britain with London being the location of choice especially for professionals and skilled tradesmen from the Low Countries.


Many of these new citizens would have brought their domestic servants with them and considering that Holland and especially Antwerp where many of them had fled from had the second largest population of Africans (Lisbon being the largest as the capital of the European slave trade) in Europe.

A census in the early part of the 17th Century in Southwick, a very poor South London borough with a total of 20,000 inhabitants (10% of London’s total population) had 2004 “alien” households representing 10% of the boroughs population.


Parish records in London from this period show regular Black inhabitants getting baptised, married and buried. It is interesting that it appears that the majority of Black men marry white British women and therefore it is safe to assume that there was a significant population of mixed race people growing up in the 17th Century


As we move into the middle of this century there is evidence that a lot of Black residence of London have taken on specialist trades and records show involvement in needlemakers, seamstresses, milliners and silk work. Many of these had learnt their trade from being servants from Holland who took over from their employer following their death.




Not everything was positive with the relationship between Britain and the relationship with Black Africans. In 1610 James I granted a license to set up the Guinea Company who primarily traded in gold but it is believed they did get involved in low volume slave trading in 1619 (Virginia, US) and 1626 (St Kitts). In 1631 King Charles I grants a monopoly to this company for sole trade between Guinea and London.


With the increase in trade came far greater travel and access to Africa and many of the explorers were far from complimentary about what they found especially being derogatory about the inhabitants of the continent that challenged the beliefs and values of Protestant Gentlemen of the time.


Sir Thomas Herbert in 1627-9 described the Africans as “fearful blacke….devilish”, devils incarnate” and “worshipped the Devil”. In 1634 Herbert wrote “Comparing their limitations, speech and visages, I doubt many of them have no better processors than monkeys” and also implied that they copulated with Apes and told stories of Baboons raping Black women.


William Bosman described Africans as “Nothing but the utmost necessity can force them to labour, they are besides incredibly careless an stupid”


There are many such extracts from travel writers of the time and none paint positive pictures of the inhabitants of Africa and the influence of these writings on those in Britain reading them would no doubt had a negative response to those Black inhabitants of Britain


Any suspicion or negativity towards the Black population would not have been helped by continued raids on the coastal towns of the South & West of Britain by those known as the Barbary Pirates.


These North African pirates generally speaking were linked to trade with the Ottoman Empire and spread terror throughout the coastal settlements of Europe. In 1626, it was estimated that there were up to 60 Barbary men-of-war ships prowling the coastal waters of Devon and Cornwall looking for boats and ships to attack or unprotected coastal towns and villages to raid. As well as looking for ships and there contents, the Barbary Pirates would take entire populations of towns and villages to be sold into slavery in the Ottoman Empire. In 1645 it was estimated that there were between 3000-5000 English slaves in Algiers.


The traditional view that there were no Black people in Britain during the mid 17th Century is clearly inaccurate however there is little evidence of Black soldiers being directly involved in the Civil War in any great numbers


In 1643, the Parliamentarian leader, the Earl of Stamford was accused by the Royalists “when the Earl of Stamford was last at Exeter he took divers, Turks out of Launston gaol and listed them for the King & Parliament”. There is evidence of a “Turk” (another name for a North African/Barbary Pirate who was potentially Black) serving in the Exeter garrison alongside a range of other ethnic groups in its Parliamentarian ranks


General Massey’s Western Brigade was said to include “Ethiopians, Egyptians and Mesopotamians” when it was disbanded in 1646. Evidence in the records that Black soldiers in Massey’s Brigade were given passes to leave Britain suggests that they were very likely to have been paid mercenaries rather than settled men from this country.


Bearing in mind the clear evidence that anything up to 30% of sailors in the fleets around Britain were of African descendency, it is safe to assume that when the military fleets were formed during the Civil War that they would have called upon the skilled and experienced Black sailors that were available. The small Royalist fleet in Bristol in 1643 was reported to have twelve Black sailors in its midst


The Royalist commander of Cheshire, Lord Byron argued that Royalists should actively recruit from all nations “I know no reason why the King should make any scruple of calling in the Irish or the Turk if they should serve him”.


Byron is pictured with his young Black squire as indeed was King Charles himself.



In summary, there were a significant number of Black people in Britain during the time of the English Civil War especially in London and the port towns of the South and West coast of Britain.


Primary occupations for these people were sailors, domestic servants, musicians, entertainers, skilled tradesmen/women, entrepreneurs, single women and sex workers


There were Black men directly involved in the War being in both navies and soldiers especially in the west Country although you do question that with the significant numbers based in London during the middle of the century that there were not Black soldiers involved in the formation of the London based Regiments but evidence hasn’t been found yet to my knowledge.



by Alan Turton 31 October 2021
Malmesbury in the First Civil War – 1642-46 By Alan Turton
10 July 2021
The chaos of battle: controlled by the beat of a drum...
10 July 2021
Big Dave & Little Wayne demonstrate postures of the pike and the calls of war...
by Nick Boyle 3 June 2021
by Paul Hargreaves 3 June 2021
Introduction This is a guide designed to support new and existing members to produce a convincing representation of the clothing of the common people in the mid seventeenth century. It is written with the aim of supporting members with getting together a typical basic outfit that can then be developed further as expertise, interest and finances allow and involvement in the hobby grows. It is not intended as a great academic work covering every aspect of clothing of the period. Neither is it produced with the intention of being the definitive truth about what people wore in the period – the only way we will ever know for sure is by travelling back in time and seeing with our own eyes! It is simply one possible interpretation of the written, pictorial and (rare!) surviving garments from which has developed a representation of clothing of the period which, through being worn at a range of events and while undertaking period activities in a range of weather conditions, has been proved to work – being reasonably comfortable, waterproof and warm, while looking convincing as a fairly standard outfit for the period. The clothing that we wear for re-enactments and re-creations matters. Beyond the uniform coat colour and pattern that those members who are portraying a military role are required to wear, we have a good degree of choice over our appearance and what we select to wear in our representation of a person from the past. Clothing is also the first thing that the public notice about us as individuals and one of the first things that they are able to compare with their life today. There are countless questions from curious members of the public about what we wear – what it is made of, what it is like to wear, why certain things are worn. The clothing worn by members also affects how we carry ourselves, how we act, and how we under- take activities. Costume in the re-enactment of the seventeenth century has suffered from a number of fads, fashions and inaccuracies, some of which have survived since the 1960s, some of which have dominated for a few years and then faded away but can still linger in some quarters. However, recent years has seen a growing interest in the development of realistic representations of common clothing. Those with a more academic skill than I have focused on written evidence (wills, inventories and the like), examined a full range of pictorial evidence (wood cuts, illustrations, paintings), and undertaken practical experimentation (making the things to see if they work). This guide is based on much of this research by many others, together with practical personal experience of making and trying out the garments.
28 May 2021
If you are interested in the 17th Century, and the 'English Civil Wars' period, we recommend the following literature... General Politics/Military
by Charles Kightly 20 May 2021
[Note: This series of articles was written by Charles Kightly, illustrated by Anthony Barton and first published in Military Modelling Magazine. The series is reproduced here with the kind permission of Charles Kightly and Anthony Barton. Typographical errors have been corrected and comments on the original articles are shown in bold within square brackets.]
by Kathleen Davies 28 April 2021
Housekeeping I will be referring to men and women as those people possessing a penis and vagina respectively - there are very few sources I can find for discussing how the medieval people thought about intersex individuals, so I’m just leaving that out. I will also be using both clinical and slang terms for body parts and activities, where appropriate - these terms may be offensive at times, again, I’m trying to reflect the medieval attitude towards men, women and sex. Try to keep sniggering to a minimum. This goes double for Ant. Chapter 1: Who is doing it? The Ladies Women’s status in medieval society is defined by their relationship status, which largely also dictates their sexual status. Women can be: Virgins - not allowed to have sex Wives - allowed to have sex, with certain rules Widows - have had sex before, but not currently allowed to have sex. Whores - allowed to have sex, but socially excluded and vilified Women are only allowed to have sex within a marriage to be respectable - all other women are supposed to be celibate to maintain societal worth. Virgins can be of two types: Virgins by circumstance - young, unmarried women, whose choices are marriage, if they can find a husband, or taking a vow of virginity Virgins by choice - this normally means nuns. It can also mean married or widowed women who have taken a formal vow of chastity before a bishop. Two famous examples of this are Margery Kempe (1373-1438 approx.), who negotiated a ‘chaste marriage’ with her husband after 14 children to devote her life to God, and Margaret Beaufort who took a vow of chastity in 1499 (with her husband’s permission). Contrary to current common wisdom which states that men think about sex every sex seconds...I mean six seconds...in medieval society, everyone knew that women are UP FOR IT. ALL THE TIME. It was thought that not only do women want sex more than men, but that they gain greater pleasure from the act as well. This, coupled with their innate weakness and susceptibility to temptation, leads to a greater need to control their sexual access to prevent sin and bastards overrunning the earth. Women were expected to go to the marriage bed a virgin and to confine their sexual activity to their husband, but ‘wife out to get extracurricular sex’ was an extremely well-worn trope, and prosecutions in court for adultery and fornication were fairly common. Prostitutes held a very particular place in the medieval mindset. Even the great Church fathers St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas recognise that prostitution serves a public good. It wasn’t seen as ironic that the Bishop of Winchester taxed and regulated the sex trade in Southwark in the 15th century. Prostitutes themselves were also seen as a breed apart from respectable women - they were not the lowest of the low - many of the C15th Ordinances are regulations protecting the prostitutes themselves from exploitation by brothel keepers or stewhouses, but there were also rules on public dress for them, so that respectable members of society knew at a glance their profession. The Gents Gents were much less defined by their sexual status, and while it was acknowledged that men should also not be sowing their wild oats too much because it is immoral, the church and court punishments for adultery and fornication for men are less severe in practice. There are celibate men in members of the clergy and men in holy orders, but celibacy for priests is only made canon law in 1123, and this with an emphasis on the ‘unmarried’ meaning of the term; sexual continence was also expected, but it was something that was recognised as difficult. There are court cases of clergy with ‘housekeepers’ who seem to fall pregnant while unmarried a fair amount, and there are increasing urban legends of clerical sexual misconduct as the reformation draws closer, which while probably largely fabricated, was plausible enough to be accepted. Chapter 2: Why are they doing it? Nature Calls Medieval medicine and understanding of biology was based on Ancient Greek and Roman texts, with Galen, Hippocrates and Aristotle having a big influence. The accepted wisdom is that there are four humours in the body, corresponding to four qualities, four elements and four temperaments. Blood, Black Bile, Yellow Bile and Phlegm are in turns Hot, Cold, Dry and Wet. Men are hot and dry - this is optimal. Women, however are cold and wet by nature. When your humours are out of whack, it leads to illness. Men, by virtue of their hotness and dryness, are able to burn off excess and imbalanced humours and thus not be polluted by them, whereas women lack the heat to do so. This leads to both menstruation (explained as the purging of those poisonous excess humours) and to their desire for sex - sex generates the heat they lack and male seed provides heat as well. This is why women are always UP FOR IT. It is also important for men and women to have regular sex as a mechanism to keep their bodily humours in the correct balance.
by Spencer Houghton 9 April 2021
As many of you know, I do medieval (War of the Roses) re-enactment in my spare time and a lot of this takes the form of archery and not just dressing up in lots of tin and battering each other One of the questions that is asked by the public is about the use and effectiveness of the longbow compared with the matchlock. From my personal point of view, I would take a longbow over a musket any day but apart from the illustrations by William Neade’s Double Armed Man project of 1625, I have not seen any real evidence of its use However, I did stumble across an excerpt from a book called “Seventeenth-Century Military Archery” by E.T Fox that provides evidence of significant use and some lovely illustrations. The author explains how as a weapon of war, the longbow began to fall from favour in the sixteenth century, so much so that King Henry VIII had to introduce a number of statutes enforcing the practicing of archery in an attempt to maintain a force of available archers if required. In Queen Elizabeth I reign, the longbow less and less popular until, in 1589, her Privy Council reorganised the trained bands and removed archers from their ranks. With its strong tradition though, the longbow didn’t disappear and its use continued particularly in provincial and rural regions well into the seventeenth century. In Repton, Derbyshire, mustered militia men had “a cote and bowe and a shiffe of arrows and a quiver” in the reign of James I and as late as 1628, Sir Phillip Carteret wrote that Jersey had a force of 3000 able bodied men for the defence of the island, of whom 300 were armed with musket and pikes, “the rest having bows, bills and unarmed” As late as 1638, the Earl of Arundel at Carlisle requested, “some quantity of bows with offensive arrows should be poured into the bordering shires of Cumbria, Northumberland and Westmorland” During the seventeenth century there were a number of schemes to revive the use of the longbow, the best known of which is probably the famous William Neade’s project of 1625 that we all know as the “Double Armed Man”. Neade’s idea was that by arming a pikeman with a longbow in addition to the pike, they would no longer be restricted to standing around on the battlefield getting shot for the majority of the time and waiting just in case they were needed to defend the remaining troops from cavalry. Armed with a longbow they would have an offensive role in addition to their defensive capability.
by Tim Edwards 9 April 2021
Key Points... There is occasional evidence for the use of tents by ordinary soldiers, but billeting in existing civilian buildings or purpose built huts was far more common. Tents were normally the preserve of officers during the English Civil War. The use of tents by regular soldiers was much more common during the contemporary wars in Ireland and Scotland. Where tents were used en masse, they seem to have been made to a standard design: 7ft square and 6ft high, to accommodate a file of six soldiers. Introduction... This article is formed of two parts: the evidence for tent use by soldiers during the Civil Wars, and where issued, the form and fabric of such tents. Our focus is on the British Isles during the 1640s and 1650s. Evidence from the continent and from earlier and later eras is incorporated into Part Two, as it helps to inform our overall understanding and acts as bridge across knowledge gaps when we are compelled to make choices in physical reconstruction. Two surviving examples of 17th century tents, from Austria and Switzerland, are used as examples of tent-making techniques. The layout and organisation of camps, or castramentation, is a vast subject by its self, and will not be examined in this article. Mark will be leading a separate debate over the choices we have in portraying a 17th century encampment. Part One: The Nature of Evidence for Tent Usage There is evidence for use of tents by common soldiers during the English Civil War, however it is very limited. There is a comprehensive and objective summary of the available evidence in A.J.Rowland’s “Military Encampments of the English Civil Wars”, published by Stuart Press. I would heartily recommend anyone with an interest in the subject to beg, borrow or steal a copy. Factors in Choosing Shelter. Therefore, the type of overnight shelter available to our generic ECW infantryman would depend upon a series of factors – the tactical activity of the unit, coherent forward planning, the weather, the availability of civilian buildings, time available for setting up the camp, and time in place, availability of timber and thatch, and the immediacy of the threat posed by the adversary. Billeting as the Default Option Suffice to say, it appears that sleeping in billets (requisitioned civilian buildings) was most common, for most soldiers, most of the time. Suitable billeting sites would be planned and reconnoitred in advance. Only on occasion were soldiers forced to sleep outside, under which circumstances hedges, bushes and trees served as overnight shelters. Better Hutting than Tenting. Where time allowed impromptu shelters known as ‘huts ‘were built, but this was dependent on arrival at the campsite early enough for the surrounding countryside to be ransacked for wood and thatching. Despite the time required to build, and resulting impact on local communities, huts appear to have been preferred over tents. When well constructed, they would be more weatherproof than the average tent and when no longer required could simply be burned rather than require transportation. Fig 1: An officer’s tent, with sentinel. Detail from the portrait of Sir Horace Vere (Sir Thomas Fairfax’s father in-law)
More posts
Share by: