How hopeful were those who remained? There had been every chance of defeating Northampton’s small, weak army, but Warwick was a very different prospect. Determination to do or die must have been mixed with doubt, especially among the better-off yeomen, who had most to lose. It is quite possible that August saw a shift in power in the camp towards the younger, more radical element, with the least to lose. Kett retained his leadership throughout but, as we shall see, there are signs that perhaps by the very end he was no longer fully trusted.
There must, inevitably, have been deserters who preferred to go home rather than face death – this too may have shifted the balance of power in the camp. It would be easy for them to get out, as the wide frontiers of Mousehold Heath were impossible to police effectively.
What would the rebels do if they won? It is interesting that, when it later became clear that they would have to give battle outside Norwich, they brought down the walls of the northern part of the city. 2 This denied the walls as a position from which government forces could attack them. In Tombland I have speculated that they may have further intended, had they won the final battle, to sweep on into north Norwich, where they had support among the citizens, then perhaps afterwards to try to reinstate the camps of the South-East, possibly even march on London to face the Protector himself. This seems the most likely plan that the optimists might have envisaged.
As Warwick approached the city, the rebels shored up the walls. 3 This does not mean that they did not envisage more street fighting in Norwich – they did, and were to be extremely effective – but it presented an extra barrier for Warwick’s forces. If he broke in and fighting inside Norwich failed, the fallback was to give battle in open country, where the rebels had the advantage of being able to choose the site, which must have been well prepared.
There has been discussion in recent years over where the battle site might be, focused on the discovery by the archaeologist Anne Carter of a site named ‘Dussing’s Deale’, three miles east of Norwich, in eighteenth-century records, which she argued presented suitable terrain. 4 Previously most writers followed Sotherton, who states that the site of the battle was at ‘Dussens Dale’ which was ‘not past a myle of[f]’. 5 Since Warwick left from Coslany Gate in the north of the city, however, the destination was surely likely to be to the north – if he had intended to follow a rebel march to the east he would have left from one of the southern gates. Such a long march would have been hard for him, but equally so for the rebels. I think Leo Jary’s argument that the battle site was directly north of Norwich, and a mile from Kett’s headquarters at St Michael’s Chapel, is correct. It accords with the sources and makes military sense. He also points out that the name Dussin is not uncommon in Norfolk. 6 Meanwhile the idea, originating with Sotherton, that the rebels were influenced in their choice of battle site by a prophecy can be dismissed: everything we know about the rebels in battle indicates their decisions were based on careful planning.
The country gnoffes, Hobb, Dick, and Hick,
with clubs and clouted shoon,
Shall fill up Dussyn dale
with slaughtered bodies soone. 7
On 24 August Warwick, camped three miles from Norwich where he was awaiting the arrival of the mercenaries, once more sent a Herald to Norwich. Augustine Steward suggested that another offer of pardon be made to the rebels. Warwick agreed to this, and sent the Herald back to try and negotiate it. 1 Steward must surely have acted on Kett’s instructions. Kett sent some forty horsed rebels, who returned to the camp with the Herald, a trumpeter and two aldermen (and, from what transpired, clearly some soldiers as well). When the Herald arrived outside Bishopsgate Bridge the sound of the trumpet fetched a large number of rebels. Kett himself was not present at first.
The Herald addressed the group. Many removed their caps and cried ‘God save King Edward’ (the camp’s loyalty to Edward had never been in question). He was then joined by Kett with a further body of men. The Herald announced that the King had sent down the Earl of Warwick with power to suppress the rebels, but ‘if they would ... humbly submit themselves to ye Kings mercy hee woulde graunt to them his Highness pardon for life and goods Kett only excepted’. If they refused, Warwick would not depart until he had ‘vanquishd them with the sword’.
Sotherton records that although many trembled, others said that they might seem fair words but that afterwards they would be hanged, others again that the Herald was not sent by the King at all but was an agent of the gentleman ‘putting on him a piece of an old cope for his cote armour’. Clearly, the camp was in no mood to surrender. However, Kett was allowed to lead the Herald to another part of the camp to repeat his message.
Then a tragedy occurred. A boy in the crowd bared his backside at the Herald; as shown in Tombland, this was a standard Tudor insult, but one of the men with the Herald immediately shot the boy dead with a currier (a small arquebus). He must have been a soldier, with a fire already lit. I have made Simon Scambler the victim of this real event in Tombland . We have no idea who the boy actually was.
This was the end of any slim prospect of negotiation. Rebels rode through the wood calling out ‘our men are kylled by the water syde’. The Herald rode back towards Norwich. Kett accompanied him, apparently intending to return with him to Warwick, but he was followed and surrounded by a rebel company saying ‘whither away, whither away, Master Kett; if you goe, we will goe with you, and with you will live and dye’. This sounds like suspicion on the part of the camp-men that Kett had decided to try and carry negotiation further despite the will of the camp. The Herald told him to stay with his men, and rode away.
Warwick now brought his army up to the gates and, having been apprised by Augustine Steward that entry could easily be gained through one gate, the ‘Brazen Gate’, quickly broke through, while Steward ordered the neighbouring Westwick Gate to be opened.
This (hardly unexpected) about-face by Steward allowed Warwick to make a surprise entry into the city. He and his troops reached the market square where some fifty rebels were captured and later hanged. At about three in the afternoon of this eventful day, the baggage carts and artillery entered the city.
The rebels gathered in Tombland and divided into companies to begin street fighting. The government forces’ lack of knowledge of the streets had already caused their artillery train to lose its way, and in Tombland it was subject to a rebel assault. Most of the artillery was captured and taken to Mousehold, and later used by the rebels. By now there was fierce fighting in the streets; in one encounter near St Andrew’s Hall rebel bowmen gave a good account of themselves, but were surprised by Captain Drury with a band of handgunners and set to flight. Elsewhere, the rebels shot down the tower off Bishopsgate Bridge, but after a further skirmish Captain Drury won back the position. At the end of the afternoon they had been driven from the city, retreating to Mousehold. To the south of the city large areas were set on fire.
Next day, the 25th, Kett’s forces attacked again and at one point gained control of both the north and south of the city, although fierce fighting forced them again to withdraw. At this point Warwick planned to blow up the bridges connecting the north to the rest of the city, and the city authorities, seeing no end to the destruction, begged him to leave. If he had, this would probably have given victory to the rebels, certainly bringing Norwich back under their control. However, he refused, demanded the authorities’ loyalty, and compromised by blowing up only one bridge. He also set up a system of billeting troops on householders.