The three civil wars that wracked England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland, between 1642-1651 saw a greater percentage of the population killed than in the First World War. Hartlebury Castle, the home of the bishop of Worcester, saw involvement in all three wars. If you look for it in books on the civil war you will rarely find it mentioned and yet it was one of the two main fortresses guarding the north of the county and also a vital communication route for the Royalist troops from Wales and Ireland. Its troops were involved in skirmishes and battles and yet, when it was besieged in 1646, the governor of the Castle, William Sandys, is said to have surrendered without a shot being fired. A contemporary chronicler described this as done 'most poorly and cowardly'. Was this a justified accusation or did Sandys have no choice?