The Face of Birmingham.

The earliest description of the appearance of the town is contained in the "Itinerary" of John Leland, who visited it in about the year 1540. (See Map 1] His route from Worcester lay through Droitwich, Bromsgrove, Alvechurch, King's Norton, and Birmingham, thence into Staffordshire. In view of the fact that we shall later be discussing Colonel Greaves, who came from King's Norton, some of Leland's comments are worth quoting.

At Northon (King's Norton) "there be some faire howsys of staplears that use to by wolle" and also "a faire churche and a goodly piramis of stone over the bell frame". Although King's Norton is now a suburb of Birmingham, it was quite divorced from the City at the time Leland passed through.

Five miles further on, he entered 'Bremischam' (one of many variations of the name.) He entered the town through Deritend, which as he remarks, was not strictly speaking, a part of the town at that time, but belonged to the adjoining parish. At the end of this "pratey strete", "caullyd Dyrtey" there was built 'a proper chapel' {the chapel of St. John, probably built shortly before 1400, long since destroyed without trace.}, and "a mansion howse of tymber hard on the rype" (or bank) of the "brooke that devydithe this strete from Bremischam {probably the house know as the 'Old Crown' still standing at the corner of Deritend and Heath Mill Lane}.

He then crossed "the brooke" (the River Rea) and entered Birmingham, which he describes as "a good market towne," whose "bewty is in one strete gounge up alonge almoste from the lefte ripe of the broke up a mene hille by the lengthe of a quartar of a mile." Having thus ascended Digbeth hill, he passed St. Martin's Church (the 'paroche church') and continued north to Southeton (Sutton Coldfield), crossing the River Tame at Sharford Bridge (Salford Bridge), at the foot of Gravelly Hill, noting on the way that there were "faire medows" hereabouts, but that further on the ground was sandy and "betar woodyd than fertile of whete."

Towards the latter part of the C16th, William Camden came to Birmingham. He came after visiting Kenilworth and Solihull, and like Leland, went on to Sutton Coldfield. However, unlike Leland, he had little to say of the town, confining himself to a comment that "the lower part of it is very wet, the upper adorned with handsome buildings." Thus is the town dismissed.

But both Leland and Camden provide useful accounts of the occupations of the inhabitants. The former says that "there be many smithes in the towne that use to make knives and all maner of cuttynge tooles, and many lorimars that make byts, and a great many naylors, so that a great parte of the towne is maintained by smithes," who, he adds, obtained their "yren out of Staffordshire and Warwikshire, and their see coale out of Staffordshire". Camden, with commendable brevity, describes the town as being "full of inhabitants, and echoing with forges, most of the inhabitants being iron manufactureres".

However, from these accounts, and the researches of later historians, we can piece together a picture of Birmingham. As early as the middle of the C16th, the working of iron had become a principal industry of the town - although probably not of ancient foundation. An earlier industry, and one in which some of the leading local families were concerned, was the tanning of leather, for which the abundant water supply obtainable from the streams and watercourses in the Digbeth quarter was particularly suitable. Wearing, flax and yarn dressing were also carried on, but probably from an earlier point. There were, in the town, many skinners, butchers, mercers, and dealers. But both the C16th visitors who have recorded their impressions observed chiefly the iron-workers - and it is as an iron-working centre that the town has since been noted. Thus in 1600, Birmingham was not a town dependent on agriculture for its life, but rather dependent on the sinews of its own industry.

The most authoritative view of Birmingham in the first half of the C17th is undoubtedly that which is found in Gill {History of Birmingham 1952 O.U.P.}; but after extensive research with the fullest co-operation of the City Council, he is forced to admit: "There is a surprising lack of materials for the history of Birmingham in some parts of that (the C17th) century, and later "...the scattered mentions in national and county archives do not enable us to piece together a coherent history." But certain facts can be established, and it is possible at least to give an idea of what Birmingham must have been like in, say, 1620.

Undoubtedly the Stuart age brought rapid growth and new enterprise to Birmingham. At the accession of James I the population was between two and three thousand, and although a major part of the city's income came from iron working (see above), it must still have been rural in character (consider the illustrations from Dugdales 'Warwickshire' in 1640). During that period the City grew with great rapidity - by the C17th, it was five times as big as at the accession of James I.

The town was governed by three bodies, the Manorial Court, the Parish, and the Bench of County Justices. The Manorial Court regulated markets, and provided for inspection of food and drink, while the Parish - through the vestry and churchwardens, and the overseers - ensured the supply of poor relief, and the upkeep of highways. The Bench of Justices was the most important controlling body, and guaranteed the maintenance of law and order. Under the Tudors, the JP's had become the chief agents of local government, and the magistrate who was most involved with cases relating to Birmingham was Sir Thomas Holte of Aston Hall. During the Civil War Holte was disliked because he was a Royalist (see below), and was even accused slanderously of attacking his cook with a hatchet ! However a more friendly contemporary described him as "truly just, charitable, and exemplary in his life and conversation….a gentleman well read in most parts of learning, and versed in several languages." {the design of Aston Hall shows Italianate Renaissance ideas}

It is highly probable that the attack on Aston Hall in 1643 was in part a reprisal for Prince Rupert's sacking of the town, and in part a paying back of grievances by local dissidents, who had felt Sir Thomas's justice in court.

Between 1600-60, the small woollen industry in Birmingham had declined, but to counter this, the manufacture of cutlery increased - and from cutlery to swords and guns was not so very great a change. Birmingham had two fairs each year, and two courts-leet, and so was not negligible. In this sixty year period, Birmingham had four plagues. In 1626, the fairs were cancelled, and restrictions placed on wayfarers; and that of 1631 was by repute nearly as bad as that of 1665. A lesser plague hit the town in 1637, but judging by the parish records, that of 1654 hit Birmingham hardest, for only in that year did burials exceed baptisms. Nevertheless, by 1660, the population of the town was probably about 6,000, and in religious terms, the town was principally Puritan. At any rate, it was of size sufficient for Nathanael Nye, 'Practicioner of Astronomy' to produce in 1642, 'A new Almanacke and Prognostication for the year of Lorde God 1642; calculated exactly for the faire and populous Towne of Birmicham in Warwickshire' though designed 'to serve for any part of this kingdome'. This almanac was printed in London.

Maps of the County of Warwickshire all show Birmingham as being of importance second only to Coventry, if to anywhere, and also serve to show how well provided for road communications it was - a factor it would later regret.

In 1548, King Edward VI's Commissioners had reported that the town was deserving of a "Free School. ..to bringe uppe the youthe, being bothe in the towne and thereaboute", since it was " one of the fayrest and most profittable townes to the Kinge's highnesse in all the Shyre." In 1552 the school was founded, not as an extension of an old institution, but as a new entity. There were considerable disputes about the rental for the school, as late as 1675. William Colmore, one of the school officials, was leader of "the many sectaries and schismaticks" who reinforced the garrison of Coventry.

At any rate, by the late 1630's Birmingham was second only to Coventry in importance in the country, and was indeed the chief town in a wide area. Moreover, its hostility to the King's party was ensured on two grounds. Religiously, Birmingham was Puritan: financially, even during the plague years of the 30's the town was required to pay its full share of ship money {Birmingham & Warwick assessed at £100 each & Coventry at £266}, an obviously unreasonable demand when all trade was halted. A petition for some relief was refused and the citizens of the town were so infuriated that "the minister of Birmingham" Francis Roberts, preached a fiery sermon against it. As will later be shown, Roberts had become a marked man.