Colliers in the "English Broadside Ballad Archive"

I was recently made aware if the "English Broadside Ballad Archive" - an online archive of "9,359 Early Modern Broadside Ballads. Free to the Public as Text, Art, and Music" - housed at the University of California at Santa Barbara, Department of English this is fully accessible and a very interesting resource: http://ebba.english.ucsb.edu/

So I did the obvious thing - well obvious to me - of searching for the word "collier" (See my previous post of why I am confident the term Collier is the correct period term for what we now call "charcoal makers/burner": https://tudorwoodcollier.blogspot.com/2016/06/colliers-in-online-kent-county-archive.html)

Below are the mentions of Colliers up to around 1650 (I know outside my Elizabethan research window, but the archive is mainly 17th century so.. wait, anyway this is my blog so I decide the rules).

Spoiler alert: Colliers are not considered to be honest people... who would have guessed!?

Below are the examples I have found:

EBBA 20209, Title: A Mad Crue; Or, That shall be tryde. Published: 1625

Verse about Colliers:

I met then a Collier, that sold me good Coales,

Where two, of foure Bushels, ran out at the holes,

Yet more then full measure, the Collier still cryde.

Well, quoth the Pillory, that shall be tryde.

EBBA 20072 Title: A merry nevv catch of all Trades. Published: 1620?

Verse about Colliers:

The Collier sweares heele loose his eares,

But he will falsly deale:

And such are glad as mand the Pad,

For trifles for to steale. For trifles, etc.

EBBA 30361, Title: The Coaches Overthrow. OR, A Joviall Exaltation of divers Tradesmen, and others, for the suppression of troublesome Hackney Coaches. To the tune of, Old King Harry. Published:1636

Verse about Colliers:

The Collier hes a sack of mirth,

and though as black as soote,

Yet still he tunes, and whistles forth,

And this is all the Note.

Heigh downe, dery dery downe,

With the hackney Coaches downe:

They long made fooles

Of poore Carry-coales,

But now must leave the towne.

EBBA 20066, Title: The Golden Age: Or, An Age of plaine-dealing To a pleasant new Court tune: Or, Whoope doe me no harme good man. Published: 1625-1635?

Verse about Colliers:

Grim the blacke Collier,

brings Coales to the towne,

In Sacks more then measure,

yet spends he his crowne,

From the broad Pillory,

to keepe himselfe downe.

Amongst the blue Beadles,

To purchase renowne,

Oh this is an honest Age,

Oh this is a mending Age.

EBBA 30310, Title: VVat VVilliamas VVill. / Well-wishing Williams Will and Testament, / Which to the Ballad-singer he hath sent, / To be dispers'd to all good people kinde, / That would doe well, and beare an honest minde. Published: 1601-1640?

Verse about Colliers:

Would Bakers all were honest;

and Colliers sell true measure,

Nor shrinke their Sackes to wrong the poore,

twould doe them mickle pleasure:

Would Souters use good Leather,

and Taylers leave their stealing,

The needy sort should better live,

if all usd honest dealing.

EBBA 20086, Title: Londons Ordinairie, / OR / Euery Man in his humour. Published 1634-1658?

The Carpenters will dine to the Axe, the Colliers will dine at the Sacke, Your Fruterer hee to the Cherry Tree, good fellowes no liquor will lacke.

What stands out to me in these snippets:

1.  Colliers were selling their coals to townsfolk direct: "Grim the blacke Collier, brings Coales to the towne,"

2. There was very public punishment in place for selling short measure: "Well, quoth the Pillory, that shall be tryde.", "The Collier sweares heele loose his eares,", "From the broad Pillory, to keepe himselfe downe."        

3. Colliers were dirty and distinctive looking: "and though as black as soote,", "Grim the blacke Collier,"

4.  Lastly, They were well known for selling short measure: "Where two, of foure Bushels, ran out at the holes, Yet more than full measure, the Collier still cryde", "Would Bakers all were honest; and colliers sell true measure, Nor shrinke their sackes to wrong the poore"; these ballads were all published in London after the 1610 statute was enacted in the city regulating the size of colliers sacks to ensure short measure was not given... so a law that was obviously not enforced well as these issues are being sung about years later.

 The statute in question:

No. 6 'Colliers' in the online Kent County Archive Individual analysis - Receiving stolen goods

Receiving stolen goods

Finding Nos. (copy and paste references into search box) -  QM/SI/1597/1/15

"Robert Johnson and Thomas Kyst, both of Groombridge, labourers, for burgling the shop of John Laneham at Lamberhurst and taking 3 ells of canvas worth 2s. and 6 yds. silk lace worth 12d. and that Willima Harding of Fant (co. Sussex), collier, recived the goods knowing them to be stolen." 9 Sep 1596

Here we are again, Colliers in court for more criminal activity.  This time receiving burgled  -burgle being a specific crime of breaking into a dwelling, in this case a shop -  silk lace and Canvas.

What was taken: 3 ells of canvas, an ell in this period in England was 45 ins (it varied in other countries, for example it was 37 inches in Scotland) or 3 feet and 9 inches;  so in total 11 feet 3 inches was taken.  It was worth 2 shillings which would make this canvas worth 8 pence per Ell. The silk lace was worth 2 pence per yard.  I am not an expert of fabric prices of the time but, neither strike me as very expensive items? Please tell me otherwise in the comments.

Whether Harding was going to try and sell the goods on or was going to use them himself is unsure?  I doubt lace would have been much use to a collier, but maybe his wife would have appreciated it? Canvas on the other hand would be very useful: I have used canvas to make sacks for charcoal and temporary shelters when doing charcoal burns. Either way he was charged with receiving the goods "knowing them to be stolen" so very much complicit in this crime... if he was guilty of course? 

One final point, it says Harding came from 'Fant' in Sussex, there is no Fant in Sussex; there is a Frant, just over the border about ten miles from Lamberhurst, so I think this is a typo in the record.

No.5 'Colliers' in the online Kent County Archive Individual analysis - No good Pommeys? 1594-95

No good Pommeys? 1594-95 

Finding Nos. (copy and paste references into search box) -  QM/SI/1595/1/4   QM/SI/1595/1/3    QM/SI/1595/1/2

" James Pommey of Lamberhurst, collier, Michael Pommey and John Pommey for breaking into the fish ponds of Lawr. Broker and taking 20 'Troutes' and 20 eels." 

"Michael Pommey of Lamberhurst, collier, for breaking into the close of Lawr. Broker and damaging 3 rods of hedges."

"John Pommey of Lamberhurst, collier, for breaking into the close of Lawr. Broker at Lamberhurst and assaulting Robt. Crowher, his servant."

This post is about the Pommey family, in particular James, Michael and John Pommey:  all colliers of Lamberhurst.  I am making the assumption they are related due to the shared surname and place of residence, but have no idea of their relationship - brothers, father & sons, cousins?  I think it is also worth saying this post is equally about Lawrence Broker, a fairly well off person, in that he owned a 'close', 'fish ponds', and had at least one servant - all of which were violated by the Pommeys.  I can't help but feel a bit sorry for Mr. Broker as it would appear that the Pommeys really had it in for him.  Or did they?

We have no further record of the trial or more crucially its result, so we can only speculate if they were guilty or not and this could even be a case of 'fitting up' the local Colliers as a convenient scapegoat?  The indictments are from different dates on but, were all filed as 'indictments for Easter 1595', so the crimes may have happened at the same time or they may have been perpetrated at different times... if indeed the accusations are genuine?  

As for the specific accusations, I can't help but wonder if they were caught with the fish they stole because I find it hard to imagine Broker knew, to the last fish, how many were in his pond: 20 'Troutes' and 20 eels is a specific number that implies someone counted how many they had, or maybe that's a convenient round number of fish to guess they might be able to catch/carry and they were never caught red handed.  Another thing that strikes me is how practical is it to steal 40 fresh fish?  In a pre-refrigeration age, how long would twenty fish keep? Assuming, or course, they have killed and  bagged the fish rather than being able take the fish alive to another pond or similar place - Eels of course can survive out of water a lot longer than fish -  It leads me to speculate if this may have been more of a malicious act of vandalism or revenge (if it ever happened) rather than a robbery for fiscal gain; mainly because the other two indictments are for vandalism and assault - namely damaging 3 rods (a rod is 5 1/2 yards) of hedges and assaulting Robert Crowher, Broker's servant. 

Did the Pommeys have a bone to pick with Broker?  Maybe he had stopped them charcoal making on his land? Maybe he just didn't like them and being around and he concocted the allegations to get rid of them? Or maybe they were no good thieving colliers attacking a poor honest upright citizen for no real reason?  We just don't know but, it is fair to say that the Pommeys probably wouldn't have been  invited around to Broker's house for a fish based supper any time soon!

'Ere mate... do you want to buy a fish? Fell off the back of a cart, honest!

Illustraion a detail from 'A caveatt for the citty of London, or, A forewarninge of offences against penall lawes - Billingesgate' dated 1598 

No.4 'Colliers' in the online Kent County Archive Individual analysis - A Frenchman, July 1593

 A Frenchman, 'Dying suddenly at his work' -  July 1593 

Finding No. (copy and paste references into search box) -  P26/1/A/1

" July 1593, burial of a collier dying suddenly at his work, a Frenchman born"

Just a quick post this time, an extract from the Biddenden parish register.

This is another intriguing one that opens more questions than it answers.... firstly though, it is a good indication of the term collier actually meaning a charcoal maker rather than a coal miner: there were no coal mines in Kent in the 1590s so for this unfortunate fellow to die suddenly 'at his work', indicates he was probably making charcoal.

There is no detail of how he died; was he involved in an accident?  I have heard tales of men standing on heaps and the crust giving way for them to plunge into the heap and die a horrible fiery death - not pleasant and the reason I never even put my foot on the side of a heap to reach the top!  Cutting up wood with various sharp objects all day every day is also intrinsically dangerous of course so the list of methods of death is potentially quite long. If you are really interested in this kind of thing check out the 'Everyday Life and Fatal Hazard in Sixteenth-Century England' Project... seriously it is proper research.

He is also not named, but there are plenty of other individuals interred on the same register that are not named - too poor or no family to be able to find it out?

Perhaps the most intriguing aspect of this entry is the fact that he was a 'Frenchman born'. Kent had a large population of immigrants from the Low Countries in this period, who were fleeing religious persecution but, I have yet to find a large French refugee population. Was this individual a collier that had emigrated with his occupation or had he been forced into it through poverty? Or indeed was he an infant when he came England?  Sadly, we will never know.  

He was probably a protestant to be buried in the Parish Church but, again we just don't know.

Well rest in Peace Monsieur, whoever you were?

No.3 'Colliers' in the online Kent County Archive Individual analysis - Richard Vynton of Tonbridge, 17 October 1594

Richard Vynton of Tonbridge, Collier -  "Gun Founder” – 17 October 1594 

Finding No. (copy and paste references into search box) -  QM/SRc/1594/77

"Richard Vynton of Tonbridge, collier, in £5, to appear, answer and to be of good behaviour; sureties, John Denton and John Turner of Speldhurst, gun founder."

This case is surprisingly the only collier, in the Kent archive, that I can directly link to the booming iron industry that was happening in the Sussex, Surrey and Kent Weald at the time.

The process of making iron was a heavy consumer of charcoal: it wasn't until the early 18th century that coke was invented as a fuel for furnaces.  According to Hammersley in the article "The Charcoal Iron Industry and Its Fuel, 1540-1750"1 to produce one ton of bar iron took 13.5 loads of charcoal in the 1590s at the Middleton and Oakamoor furnaces (Hammersley, table 2, page 604).  A load was a waggon loaded with twelve sacks of charcoal.  Hammersley estimates that a load of charcoal was made of around 300 cubic feet of solid wood, so that is 4050 cubic feet of wood per ton of iron produced.  He goes on to state that by the end of the sixteenth century the annual output of a Wealden furnace was around 200 tons (Hammersley, Page 600), that is a whopping 81,000 cubic feet of wood converted to charcoal per annum... and that is just one of the 50 blast furnaces in Weald in the 1590s. (Hammersley, Table 1, Page. 595).

Getting back to out collier Richard Vynton, a quick search online took me to the 'Wealden Iron Research Group' (www.wirgdata.org) that links Richard's Surety 'John Turner of Speldhurst, gun founder' with the Barden Furnace and Forge (this is the only furnace in the Parish of Speldhurst). See http://www.wirgdata.org/printpro.cgi?personid=565
  

The furnace operated from 1574 until 1761, and there is evidence that guns were being founded from 1588-89.  see http://www.wirgdata.org/searchpro2.cgi?personid=73

Whether Richard worked directly for the Furnace  we don't know but, even if he was not directly employed the quantity of charcoal required would have kept him busy, though not busy enough to stop him getting into trouble and having "appear, answer and to be of good behaviour" at the West Kent Quarter sessions.

The Wealden Iron research Group's website is well worth a browse, I particularly like this modern artist's cross section illustration of a blast furnace and gun foundry in operation. 

Illustration from http://www.wealdeniron.org.uk/hist.htm

Notes and Sources:

1:  The Charcoal Iron Industry and Its Fuel, 1540-1750 by  G. Hammersley, available to read for free online at http://www.jstor.org/stable/2593700

No.2 'Colliers' in the online Kent County Archive Individual analysis - Walter Dawes of Broadgate, 30 June 1594

Walter Dawes of Broadgate, Collier “for goyng away from his Captian.” – 30 June 1594

Finding No. (copy and paste references into search box) - QM/SRc/1594/12

This case is an interesting one, for me,  as it crosses over into my other passion for the era: military History.  

It would appear Walter had been recruited for service in Brittany but, was somewhat reluctant to go.  I am pretty certain he was on his way to Brittany because of  the very helpful (and free to download) article “Levies from Kent to the Elizabethan Wars(1589—1603)” by J.J.N. McGurk in Archaeologia Cantiana -  Vol. 88  1973.

So what was going on in Brittany in 1594 that involved sending English troops? Well, it was quite complicated but, put simply: the English Government decided to back the Protestant French King Henry IV in fighting Catholic rebels to secure the English Channel ports; the main reason being the Catholic Rebels were allied to Spain and Spanish troops were roving northern France with an eye on securing Brest, or some other deep water port, to act as a spring board for another Armada attempt on England.  The ‘Invincible Armada’ had of course failed in its task back in 1588, but at least half of the ships made it back to Spain and Alexander Farnese, Duke of Parma's Spanish Army of Flanders (that was meant to link up with the fleet and invade South East England) was unaffected by the defeat; so the threat was a real one, in fact two other Armadas did leave Spain to try and invade England, in 1596 and 1597, but both were defeated by the weather.  So in 1594 there was a very real threat of Spanish domination of the French Channel coast and the disastrous implications for England. 

Kent was one of the ‘front line’ counties and due to the departure points for expeditions to France often being in Gravesend or Dover, it made sense to recruit in county to lessen the cost of transporting troops to the departure point.  

It would appear Walter was part of the contingent, recruited in 1594,  who  “…had such a long delay in Gravesend  that many absconded from the Captain’s charge; fifteen of their names were sent to the council which then ordered Sir John Leveson and Sir Thomas Scott to have these men traced and imprisoned[1].”  Sadly the list of the 15 men is not available online to confirm he was one of them.   

It is worth noting that Walter lived a stone’s throw from North Foreland, known as ‘El cabo de Margat’ by the Spanish at the time, which was the location that appears in the instructions given to Parma and Santa Cruz, by King Philip in 1587, as the place for the Armada to anchor and wait for Parma’s army to ferry across to invade[2].  Maybe Walter would have been keener to take up arms if he realised how close Broadstairs came to becoming the front line landing beach for the Spanish invasion back in 1588, or maybe he felt, for this reason, he would rather defend his home rather than fight  across the channel?

Perhaps he was just a reluctant conscript who didn't want to be a soldier anywhere. He sounds like one of 'the very poor sort of men he was about to bring over to him out of Kent'[3], as complained about around this time by Captain Morton to Sir John Norris, leader of the expedition. It was also not unknown, at the time, to use the 'press' for foreign service as a means to rid parishes of undesirables.  Maybe Walter the collier was one of these[4]? 

"The Siege of Rouen 1591", by Frans Hogenberg, 1591 - 1593. English troops (in Normandy) fighting alongside French Royalists. 

Print available to download from the Rijksmuseum

 

---

[1] “Leviesfrom Kent to the Elizabethan Wars (1589—1603)” by J.J.N. McGurk in Archaeologia Cantiana -  Vol. 88  1973.  P. 67

[2] C. Martin and G. Parker, The Spanish Armada, 1988, p.284.

[3] McGurk, P.67

[4] For  the practice of conscription for 'social cleansing' see "A survey of the demands made on the

 Welsh shires to supply soldiers for the Irish War 1594-1602" by J.J.N. McGurk. (1983 PP.56-57

No.1 'Colliers' in the online Kent County Archive Individual analysis - James Ansley of Bromley, 1606

James Ansley of Bromley, collier– “To keep the peace” – July to August 1606

Finding Nos (copy and paste references into search box) -  QM/SRc/1606/162, QM/SRc/1606/207, QM/SRc/1606/208

James seems to have had an ongoing dispute with the Arthur and William Wright, both labourers,  also of Bromley; it starts with James being subject to a recognizance to Keep the peace on 7th July 1606, Just over a month later on the 11th August both William and Arthur Wright have a recognizance against them to ‘keep the peace towards James Ansley’.  

It would seem there was no love lost between James and the Wrights.  

The most interesting aspect of James’ appearance in the records is that he is described as Collier in the original July entry and also in one of the two entries for the 11th August but, in the second is described as a labourer.  This is on the same day in the same court.  This may point to the fluid nature of being a collier: perhaps James had to supplement his charcoal making with other general labouring?  Or, the clerk of the court could have been a bit sloppy in recording occupations, as one would assume it is the same magistrate and recording staff sitting?  

There is a clue to the potential dual career possibility in the late Jos Kingston’s amazing analysis of Norton (Sheffield) ‘Life & Death in Elizabethan Norton’ at http://www.joskingston.org/LDEN/CHAP3.html#Item8 (scroll down to Charcoal Makers).  In this she finds Colliers who are recorded in official documents as both Husbandmen and a Charcoal Makers.