FOOTNOTES:
[1] Mr W. H. St John Hope arrived independently at similar conclusions.
[2] In the paper on Earthworks in the second volume of the Victoria County History of Yorkshire, this subdivision of the promiscuous class X., is used.
[3] Since the above was written, Mr Hadrian Allcroft’s work on Earthwork of England has furnished an admirable text-book of this subject.
[4] See [Frontispiece].
[6] For instance, at Berkeley, Ewias Harold, Yelden, and Tomen y Roddwy.
[7] As at Rayleigh and Downpatrick.
[8] In some of these castles there is no gap in the bailey banks for an entrance. They must have been entered by a movable wooden stair, such as horses can be taught to climb. See the plan of Topcliffe Castle, Yorks ([Fig. 1]).
[9] Vor Oldtid, p. 629.
[10] Entwickelung des Kriegswesens, iii., 379.
[11] See [Chapter VII].
[12] Primitive Folkmoots. See [Appendix A].
[13] Early Fortifications in Scotland, p. 13. He adds an instance showing that Moot Hill is sometimes a mistake for Moot Hall.
[14] Scottish Review, vol. xxxii.
[15] Some writers give the name of moot-hill to places in Yorkshire and elsewhere where the older ordnance maps give moat-hill. Moat in this connection is the same as motte, the Scotch and Irish mote, i.e., the hillock of a castle, derived from the Norman-French word motte. As this word is by far the most convenient name to give to these hillocks, being the only specific name which they have ever had, we shall henceforth use it in these pages. We prefer it to mote, which is the Anglicised form of the word, because of its confusion with moat, a ditch. Some writers advocate the word mount, but this appears to us too vague. As the word motte is French in origin, it appropriately describes a thing which was very un-English when first introduced here.
[16] At York, a prehistoric crouching skeleton was found by Messrs Benson and Platnauer when excavating the castle hill in 1903, 4 feet 6 inches below the level of the ground. The motte at York appears to have been raised after the destruction of the first castle, but whether the first hillock belonged to the ancient burial is not decided by the account, “Notes on Clifford’s Tower,” by the above authors. Trans. York. Philosoph. Soc., 1902. Another instance is recorded in the Revue Archæologique, to which we have unfortunately lost the reference.
[17] From the report of a competent witness, Mr Basil Stallybrass.
[18] Earle, Two Saxon Chronicles Parallel, Introd., xxiii.
[19] Nennius says that Ida “unxit (read cinxit) Dynguayrdi Guerth-Berneich”=a strength or fort of Bernicia. Mon. Hist. Brit., 75. Elsewhere he calls Bamborough Dinguo Aroy. It is quite possible that there might have been a Keltic din in a place so well fitted for one as Bamborough.
[20] Bede, H. E., iii., 16.
[21] See Bede, as above, and Symeon, ii., 45 (R.S.).
[22] We infer this from the strong defences of what is now the middle ward.
[23] The fact, however, that the Trinoda Necessitas, the duty of landholders to contribute to the repair of boroughs and bridges, and to serve in the fyrd, is occasionally mentioned in charters earlier than the Danish wars, shows that there were town walls to be kept up even at that date. See Baldwin Brown, The Arts in Early England, i., 82.
[24] See Wright, History of Domestic Manners, p. 13.
[25] The Danish fortress of Nottingham is mentioned by the Chronicle in 868, but we are speaking now of purely Anglo-Saxon fortresses.
[26] Asser, ch. 91, Stevenson’s edition.
[27] “That same year King Alfred repaired London; and all the English submitted to him, except those who were under the bondage of the Danish men; and then he committed the city (burh) to the keeping of Ethelred the ealdorman.” A.-S. C., 886. The word used for London is Londonburh. Asser says: “Londoniam civitatem honorifice restauravit et habitabilem fecit,” p. 489.
[28] Birch’s Cartularium, ii., 220, 221.
[29] Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 878, 893, 896. According to Henry of Huntingdon, the work on the Lea was the splitting of that river into two channels; but I am informed that no trace of such a division remains.
[30] Gesta Pontificum, 186. See [Appendix C].
[31] Birch’s Cartularium, ii., 222; Kemble’s Codex Diplomaticus, v., 142.
[32] He signs a charter in 889 as “subregulus et patricius Merciorum,” Kemble’s Codex Diplomaticus. See Freeman, N. C., i., 564; and Plummer, A.-S. C., i., 118.
[33] The dates in this chapter are taken from Florence of Worcester, who is generally believed to have used a more correct copy of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle than those which have come down to us.
[34] See [Appendix B].
[35] A.-S. C., 910, 911.
[36] New English Dictionary, Borough.
[37] Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 942. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle has three words for fortifications, burh, faesten, and geweorc. Burh is always used for those of Edward and Ethelfleda, faesten (fastness) or geweorc (work) for those of the Danes.
[38] See the illustrations in Wright, History of Domestic Manners.
[39] Bury is formed from byrig, the dative of burh.
[40] Professor Maitland observed: “To say nothing of hamlets, we have full 250 parishes whose names end in burgh, bury, or borough, and in many cases we see no sign in them of an ancient camp or of an exceptionally dense population.” Domesday Book and Beyond, 184.
[41] Schmid, Gesetze der Angelsachsen, pp. 176, 214, 372. It is not absolutely certain that the burh in these three cases does not mean a town.
[42] Schmid, 138. Professor Maitland says: “In Athelstan’s day it seems to be supposed by the legislator that a moot will usually be held in a burh. If a man neglect three summonses to a moot, the oldest men of the burh are to ride to his place and seize his goods.” Domesday Book and Beyond, 185. “All my reeves,” are mentioned in the Preface to Athelstan’s Laws, Schmid, 126.
[43] Schmid, 138. “Butan porte” is the Saxon expression, port being another word for town; see Schmid, 643.
[44] Schmid, Edgar III., 5; Ethelred II., 6.
[45] Edgar IV., 2.
[46] The writer was first led to doubt the correctness of the late Mr G. T. Clark’s theory of burhs by examining the A.-S. illustrated MSS. in the British Museum. On p. 29 of the MS. of Prudentius (Cleopatra, c. viii.), there is an excellent drawing of a four-sided enclosure, with towers at the angles, and battlemented walls of masonry. The title of the picture is “Virtutes urbem ingrediuntur,” and urbem is rendered in the A.-S. gloss as burh. See [Fig. 2].
[47] Florence translates burh as urbs nineteen times, as arx four times, as murum once, as munitio once, as civitas once.
[48] Published in 1884, but comprising a number of papers read to various archæological societies through many previous years, during which Mr Clark’s reputation as an archæologist appears to have been made.
[49] “Eallum thæm folc to gebeorge.” Birch’s Cartularium, ii., 222.
[50] Professor Maitland has claimed that the origin of the boroughs was largely military, the duty of maintaining the walls of the county borough being incumbent on the magnates of the shire. Domesday Book and Beyond, 189. See [Appendix C].
[51] Parker’s Domestic Architecture in England from Richard II. to Henry VIII., part ii., 256.
[52] A.-S. C., 1048.
[53] William of Jumièges, vii.-xvii.
[54] A.-S. C. (Peterborough), 1048.
[55] A.-S. C., 1052 (Worcester). This castle is generally supposed to be Richard’s Castle, Herefordshire, built by Richard Scrob; but I see no reason why it should not be Hereford, as the Norman Ralph, King Edward’s nephew, was Earl of Hereford. We shall return to these castles later.
[56] Mr Freeman says: “In the eleventh century, the word castel was introduced into our language to mark something which was evidently quite distinct from the familiar burh of ancient times.... Ordericus speaks of the thing and its name as something distinctly French: “munitiones quas Galli castella nuncupant.” The castles which were now introduced into England seem to have been new inventions in Normandy itself. William of Jumièges distinctly makes the building of castles to have been one of the main signs and causes of the general disorder of the days of William’s minority, and he seems to speak of the practice as something new.” N. C., ii., 606. It is surprising that after so clear a statement as this, Mr Freeman should have fallen under the influence of Mr Clark’s burh theory, and should completely have confused castles and boroughs.
[57] Codex Diplomaticus, i., 138.
[58] History of Rochester, 1772, p. 21.
[59] Stevenson’s edition of Asser, 331. See [Appendix D].
[60] Asser, c. xlix.
[61] Worcester, Chester, Tamworth, Stafford, Warwick, Hertford, Buckingham, Bedford, Maldon, Huntingdon, Colchester, Stamford, and Nottingham.
[62] Domesday Book and Beyond, 216.
[63] Buckingham is the only place which is included in both lists. See [Appendix E].
[64] Domesday Book and Beyond, 188. See [Appendix E]. Southwark, one of the names, which is not called a borough in Domesday, retains its name of The Borough to the present day.
[65] No Roman remains have been found in either place.
[66] Beauties of England and Wales, Oxfordshire.
[67] See Skeat’s Dictionary, “Timber.”
[68] Excavation has recently shown that many of the great hill-forts were permanently inhabited, and it is now considered improbable that they were originally built as camps of refuge. It seems more likely that this use, of which there are undoubted instances in historic times (see Cæsar, Bello Gallico, vi., 10, and v., 21), belonged to a more advanced stage of development, when population had moved down into the lower and cultivatable lands, but still used their old forts in cases of emergency.
[70] Haverfield, in V. C. H. Worcester, Romano-British Worcester, i.
[71] Early Fortifications in Scotland, p. 105.
[72] Gairdner and Mullinger, Introduction to the Study of English History, 268.
[73] The tower called Cæsar’s Tower is really a mural tower of the 13th century. E. W. Cox, “Chester Castle,” in Chester Hist. and Archæol. Soc., v., 239.
[74] Cox, as above. See also Shrubsole, “The Age of the City Walls of Chester,” Arch. Journ., xliv., 1887. The present wall, which includes the castle, is an extension probably not earlier than James I.’s reign.
[75] The charter is given in Ormerod’s History of Cheshire, ii., 405.
[76] Journ. of Brit. Arch. Ass., 1875, p. 153.
[77] Itin., ii., 2.
[78] “Arcem quam in occidentali Sabrinæ fluminis plaga, in loco qui Bricge dicitur lingua Saxonica, Ægelfleda Merciorum domina quondam construxerat, fratre suo Edwardo seniore regnante, Comes Rodbertus contra regem Henricum, muro lato et alto, summoque restaurare cœpit.” 1101.
[79] A good deal has been made of the name Oldbury, as pointing to the old burh; but Oldbury is the name of the manor, not of the hillock, which bears the singular name of Pampudding Hill. Tradition says that the Parliamentary forces used it for their guns in 1646. Eyton’s Shropshire, i., 132.
[80] “Bricge cum exercitu pene totius Angliæ obsedit, machinas quoque ibi construere et castellum firmare præcepit.” Florence, 1102.
[81] Florence in fact says urbem restauravit.
[82] D. B., i., 246.
[83] These buildings formed part of a hunting lodge built in the reign of Edward III., called The Chamber in the Forest. See Ormerod’s Cheshire, ii., 3. When visiting Eddisbury several years ago, the writer noticed several Perpendicular buttresses in these ruins.
[84] D. B., i., 238a, 1.
[85] “Abbas de Couentreu habet 36 masuras, et 4 sunt wastæ propter situm castelli.... Hae masurae pertinent ad terras quas ipsi barones tenent extra burgum, et ibi appreciatae sunt.” D. B., i., 238.
[86] Domesday Book and Beyond, p. 189. See [Appendix D].
[87] Dugdale’s Warwickshire, 1st edition, pp. 50 and 75. The derivation of Kirby from Cyricbyrig is not according to etymological rules, but there can be no doubt about it as a fact; for in Domesday it is stated that Chircheberie was held by Geoffrey de Wirche, and that the monks of St Nicholas [at Angers] had two carucates in the manor. In the charter in which Geoffrey de Wirche makes this gift Chircheberie is called Kirkeberia [M. A., vi., 996], but in the subsequent charter of Roger de Mowbray, confirming the gift, it is called Kirkeby.
[88] Britannia, ii., 375.
[89] Numismatic Chronicle, 3rd S., xiii., 220.
[90] Fowler’s History of Runcorn gives a plan of this fort, and there is another in Hanshall’s History of Cheshire, p. 418 (1817). A very different one is given in Beaumont’s History of Halton.
[91] Beaumont’s Records of the Honour of Halton. In 1368, John Hank received the surrender of a house near to the castle in Runcorn.
[92] Mediæval Military Architecture, ii., 120.
[93] Essex Naturalist, January 1887.
[94] Danbury Camp, which has also been surveyed by Mr Spurrell (Essex Naturalist, 1890), is precisely similar in plan to Witham, but nothing is known of its history.
[95] See Victoria History of Bedfordshire, i., 281.
[96] Morant’s History of Essex, i. Three sides of the rampart were visible in his time.
[97] D. B., ii., 5.
[98] Itin., i., 12.
[99] Baker’s History of Northampton, ii., 321.
[100] D. B., i., 219b.
[101] A.-S. C., 921. “Wrohte tha burg æt Tofeceastre mid stan wealle.” Florence says 918.
[102] Baker, History of Northants, ii., 318. See also Haverfield, V. C. H., Northants, i., 184.
[103] Atkinson’s Cambridge Described, p. 1.
[104] There is, however, this difficulty, that Cambridge was still occupied by a Danish force when Wigingamere was built. It submitted to Edward in 918.
[105] See Mr Plummer’s discussion of these variations in his edition of the Chronicle, ii., 116.
[106] Lewis, Topographical Dictionary of England. Mr Rye remarks:—“The silting up of the harbour has ruined a port which once promised to be of as great importance as Norwich.” History of Norfolk, p. 228.
[107] It is really wonderful that the identification of Cledemuthan with the mouth of the Cleddy in Pembrokeshire could ever have been accepted by any sober historian. That Edward, whose whole time was fully occupied with his conquests from the Danish settlers, could have suddenly transported his forces into one of the remotest corners of Wales, would have been a feat worthy of the coming days of air-ships. William of Worcester has preserved a tradition that Edward repaired Burgh, “quae olim Saxonice dicebatur Burgh-chester,” but he confuses it with Norwich. Itinerarium, 337. Is it possible that we ought to look for Cledemuthan at Burgh Castle, at the mouth of the Waveney? It would be quite in accordance with Edward’s actions elsewhere to restore an old Roman castrum.
[108] Leland says: “There were 7 principall Towers or Wards in the waulles of Staunford, to eche of which were certeyne freeholders in the Towne allottid to wache and ward in tyme of neadde.” Itinerarium, vii., 11.
[109] A.-S. C., 868.
[110] Shipman’s Old Town Wall of Nottingham, pp. 73-75. The evidence for a Roman origin of the borough is altogether too slight, as, except some doubtful earthenware bottles, no Roman remains have been found at Nottingham.
[111] A.-S. C., 921. Florence of Worcester, 919.
[112] I am indebted for much of the information given here to the local antiquarian knowledge of Mr Harold Sands, F.S.A. He states that the old borough was 1400 yards from the Trent at its nearest point, and that the highest ground on the south side of the Trent is marked by the Trent Bridge cricket ground, the last spot to become flooded. Here, therefore, was the probable site of Edward’s second borough.
[113] See [Appendix F].
[114] Whitaker’s History of Manchester, i., 43.
[115] Trans. of Lanc. and Chesh. Hist. and Ant. Soc., v., 246.
[116] “Castle” in combination with some other word is often given to works of Roman or British origin, because its original meaning was a fortified enclosure; but the name Castle Hill is extremely common for mottes.
[117] We may remark here that it is not surprising that there should be a number of motte castles which are never mentioned in history, especially as it is certain that all the “adulterine” castles, which were raised without royal permission in the rebellions of Stephen’s and other reigns, were very short-lived.
[118] Mediæval Military Architecture, i., 18. See Mr Round’s remarks on Mr Clark’s vagueness in his “Castles of the Conquest,” Archæologia, 1902.
[119] The A.-S. C. speaks of this Danish host as “a great heathen army.” 866.
[120] “Worhton other fæsten ymb hie selfe.” The same language is frequently used in the continental accounts of the Danish fortresses: “Munientes se per gyrum avulsæ terræ aggere,” Dudo, 155 (Duchesne): “Se ex illis (sepibus et parietibus) circumdando munierant.” It., p. 81.
[121] The earthworks at Bayford Court must belong to the mediæval castle which existed there. See Beauties of England and Wales, Kent, p. 698. Castle Rough is less than an acre in area.
[122] Mr Harold Sands, Some Kentish Castles, p. 10.
[123] See the plan in Victoria History of Kent, paper on Earthworks by the late Mr I. C. Gould. Hasted states that there was a small circular mount there as well as an embankment, and that there are other remains in the marsh below, which seem to have been connected with the former by a narrow ridge or causeway, Kent, iii., 117. The causeway led to a similar mount in the marsh below, but Mr Gould inclined to think the mounts and causeway later, and possibly part of a dam for “inning” the marsh. V. C. H., p. 397.
[124] “Hæsten’s Camps at Shoebury and Benfleet,” Essex Naturalist, iv., 153.
[125] The Chronicle says that the ships of Hæsten were either broken to pieces, or burnt, or taken to London or Rochester. 894.
[126] Essex Naturalist, as above, p. 151. These berms certainly suggest Roman influence.
[127] A.-S. C., 894.
[128] Montgomery Collections, xxxi., 337; Dymond, On the Site of Buttington. See also Steenstrup, Normannerne, ii., 80.
[129] Beauties of England and Wales, vii., 246. There is nothing left either at Great or Little Amwell now but fragments of what are supposed to be homestead moats. Royal Commission on Historical Monuments, pp. 95, 142, Herts. vol.
[130] Florence’s date.
[131] Victoria History of Bedfordshire, i., 282, from which this description is taken.
[132] The Chronicle speaks of Tempsford as a burh, so it must have been a large enclosure.
[133] Mr Clark actually speaks of a subsequent Norman castle at Tempsford (M. M. A., i., 78), but we have been unable to find any confirmation of this. Faint traces of larger works in the fields below were formerly visible. V. C. H. Bedfordshire.
[134] Stephenson’s Asser, p. 27.
[135] There are no remains of earthworks in Thanet or Sheppey, except a place called Cheeseman’s Camp, near Minster in Thanet, which the late Mr Gould regarded as of the “homestead-moat type.” V. C. H. Kent, i., 433. Nor are there any earthworks on Mersey Island mentioned by Mr Gould in his paper on Essex earthworks in the V. C. H.
[136] Stukeley, who saw this earthwork when it was in a much more perfect state, says that it contained 30 acres. See Mr Hope’s paper in Camb. Antiq. Soc., vol. xi.
[137] Blomefield’s Norfolk, ii., pp. 7, 8, 27. His description is very confused.
[138] See Erlingssen’s Ruins of the Saga Time, Viking Club, p. 337.
[139] Richerii, Historiarum Libri Quatuor, edition Guadet, p. 67.
[140] “In modo castri, munientes se per girum avulsæ terræ aggere.” Dudo, 155 (edition Duchesne).
[141] “The castle end of Cambridge was called the Borough within the memory of persons now living.” Atkinson’s Cambridge Described (1897), p. 9.
[142] Steenstrup says that the Northmen built themselves shipyards all round Europe, especially on the islands where they had their winter settlements. Normannerne, i., 354.
[143] A.-S., hyth, a shore, a landing-place.
[144] Victoria County History of Beds., i., 282.
[145] Steenstrup’s Normannerne, vol. iv.; Danelag, p. 40.
[146] A.-S. C., 914-921.
[147] Steenstrup, Danelag, p. 41.
[148] Ibid., pp. 22, 23.
[149] Such quartering must have been confined to the unmarried Danes, but there must have been plenty of unmarried men in the piratical host, even at the period when it became customary to bring wives and children with the army.
[150] Normannerne, i., 282.
[151] Dudo, 76 (Duchesne).
[152] Herr Steenstrup shows that so far from the settlement of the Danes in Normandy being on feudal lines, they only reluctantly accepted the feudal yoke, and not till the next century. Normannerne, i., 305, 310. It is not till the 11th century that feudal castles become general in Normandy.
[153] The Danes in Normandy soon made Rouen a great centre of trade. Normannerne, i., 190.
[154] Cunningham’s Growth of English Industry, i., 92.
[155] See Vinogradoff, English Society in the 11th Century, pp. 5, 11, 478.
[156] See Stubbs, Constitutional History, i., 251; Maitland’s Domesday Book and Beyond, p. 157; Round’s Feudal England, p. 261; Vinogradoff’s English Society in the 11th Century, p. 41.
[157] Professor Maitland wrote: “The definitely feudal idea that military service is the tenant’s return for the gift of land did not exist [before the Norman Conquest], though a state of things had been evolved which for many practical purposes was indistinguishable from the system of knight’s fees.” Domesday Book and Beyond, p. 157. Dr Round holds that “the military service of the Anglo-Norman tenant-in-chief was in no way derived or developed from that of the Anglo-Saxons, but was arbitrarily fixed by the king, from whom he received his fief.” Feudal England, p. 261. Similarly, Professor Vinogradoff states that “the law of military fees is in substance French law brought over to England by the [Norman] conquerors.” English Society in the 11th Century, p. 41.
[158] Giesebrecht, Geschichte der Kaiserzeit, i., 224. The word Burg, which Giesebrecht uses for these strongholds, means a castle in modern German; but its ancient meaning was a town (see Hilprecht’s German Dictionary), and it corresponded exactly to the Anglo-Saxon burh. It was used in this sense at least as late as the end of the 12th century; see, e.g., Lamprecht’s Alexanderlied, passim. It is clear by the context that Giesebrecht employs it in its ancient sense.
[159] Ibid., 222. Henry’s son Otto married a daughter of Edward the Elder. Henry received the nickname of Townfounder (Städtegründer).
[160] “Carolus civitates Transsequanas ab incolis firmari rogavit, Cinomannis scilicet et Turonis, ut præsidio contra Nortmannos populis esse possent.” Annales Bertinianorum, Migne, Pat., 125, 53.
[161] Flodoard, Hist. Ecc. Remensis, iv., viii.
[162] Modern historians generally say that he built the castle of Coucy; but from Flodoard’s account it seems very doubtful whether anything but the town is meant. Annales, iv., xiii. His words are: “Munitionem quoque apud Codiciacum tuto loco constituit atque firmavit.” Munitio properly means a bulwark or wall.
[163] Gesta Episcop. Cameracensium, Pertz, vii., 424.
[164] Chron. Camarense et Atrebatorum, Bouquet, x., 196.
[165] Sismondi, Histoire des Français, ii., 172.
[166] Guizot, Histoire de la Civilisation en France, iii., 311.
[167] Enlart, Manuel d’Archæologie Française, ii., 494.
[168] See Dr Haverfield’s articles in the Victoria County Histories, passim. The late J. H. Burton justly wrote: “We have nothing from the Romans answering to the feudal stronghold or castle, no vestige of a place where a great man lived apart with his family and his servants, ruling over dependants and fortifying himself against enemies.” History of Scotland, i., 385.
[169] Annals of Fulda, 394, Pertz, i.
[170] Cap. Regum Francor., ii., 360.
[171] Thus De Caumont unfortunately spoke of the fortress built by Nicetus, Bishop of Treves, in the 6th century, as a château (Abécédaire, ii., 382); but Venantius Fortunatus, in his descriptive poem, tells us that it was a vast enclosure with no less than thirty towers, built by the good pastor for the protection of his flock. It even contained fields and vineyards, and altogether was as different from a private castle as anything can well be. Similarly the castrum of Merliac, spoken of by Enlart (Architecture Militaire, p. 492) as a “veritable château,” is described as containing cultivated lands and sheets of water! (Cited from Gregory of Tours, Hist. Francorum, liii., 13.) De Caumont himself says: “Les grandes exploitations rurales que possédaient les rois de France et les principaux du royaume du Vième au Xième siècle ne furent pas des forteresses et ne doivent point être confondues avec les chateaux.” Abécédaire, ii., 62.
[172] See [Appendix D].
[173] “Volumus et expresse mandamus, ut quicunque istis temporibus castella et firmitates et haias sine nostro verbo fecerint, Kalendis Augusti omnes tales firmitates disfactas habeant; quia vicini et circummanentes exinde multas depredationes et impedimenta sustinent.” Capitularia Regum Francorum, Boretius, ii., 328.
[174] These instances are as follows:—868, A certain Acfrid shut himself up in a casa firmissima in the villa of Bellus Pauliacus on the Loire, and it was burnt over his head (Annales Bertinianorum, pp. Migne, 125, 1237); 878, The sons of Goisfrid attack the castellum and lands of the son of Odo (ibid., p. 1286); 879, Louis the Germanic besieges some men of Hugh, son of Lothaire, in quodam castello juxta Viridunum: he takes and destroys the castellum (Annals of Fulda, Pertz, i., 393); 906, Gerard and Matfrid fortify themselves in a certain castrum, in a private war (Regino, Pertz, i., 611). Sismondi states that the great nobles wrested from Louis-le-Bégue (877-879) the right of building private castles. So far, we have been unable to find any original authority for this statement.
[175] See Guizot, Histoire de la Civilisation, iii., 309. “On voit les villæ s’entourer peu à peu de fossés, de remparts de terre, de quelques apparences de fortifications.”
[176] We hear of monasteries being fortified in this way; in 869 Charles the Bald drew a bank of wood and stone round the monastery of St Denis; “castellum in gyro ipsius monasterii ex ligno et lapide conficere cœpit.” Ann. Bertinian, Migne, pp. 125, 1244. In 889 the Bishop of Nantes made a castrum of his church by enclosing it with a wall, and this wall appears to have had a tower. Chron. Namnetense, p. 45, in Lobineau’s Bretagne, vol. ii. In 924 Archbishop Hervey made a castellum of the monastery of St Remi by enclosing it with a wall. Flodoard, p. 294 (Migne). But the fortification of monasteries was a very different thing from the fortification of private castles.
[177] In 951 Duke Conrad, being angry with certain men of Lorraine, threw down the towers of some of them; these may have been the keeps of private castles. Flodoard, Annales, p. 477.
[178] Presidium is one of those vague words which chroniclers love to use; it means a defence of any kind, and may be a town, a castle, or a garrison. The town in which this turris stood appears by the context to have been Chateau Thierry. Cf. Flodoard, Annales, pp. 924, with 933.
[179] “Castrum muro factum circa eam [ecclesiam].” Chron. Namnetense, p. 45. “Precepit [Alanus] eis terrarium magnum in circuitu Ecclesiæ facere, sicut murus prioris castri steterat, quo facto turrem principalem reficiens, in ea domum suam constitit.” Ibid.
[180] Flodoard, Annales, pp. 931 and 949. This tower was heightened by Charles, the last of the Carlovingians, and furnished with a ditch and bank, in 988.
[181] It is often supposed that these towers were derived from the Pretoria, or general’s quarters in the Roman castra. It is far more probable that they were derived from mural towers. The Pretorium was not originally fortified, and it was placed in the centre of the Roman camp. But one great object of the feudal keep was to have communication with the open country. The keep of Laon was certainly on the line of the walls, as Bishop Ascelin escaped from it down a rope in 989, and got away on a horse which was waiting for him. Palgrave, England and Normandy, ii., 880.
[182] The word motte or mota does not occur in any contemporary chronicle, as far as is known to the writer, before the 12th century; nor is the word dangio to be found in any writer earlier than Ordericus. But the thing certainly existed earlier.
[183] [Fulk and his son Geoffrey] “in occidentali parte montis castellum determinaverunt.... Aggerem quoque in prospectu monasterii cum turre lignea erexerunt.“ Chron. St Florentii, in Lobineau’s Bretagne, ii., 87. Some remains of this motte are still visible. De Salies, Foulques Nerra, p. 263.
[184] “Elegantissimus in rebus bellicis” is the quaint language of the Angevin chronicler, 176.
[185] See De Salies, Histoire de Foulques Nerra, which indirectly throws considerable light on the archæological question.
[186] Salies, Histoire de Foulques Nerra, p. 170. M. Enlart, in his Manuel d’Archæologie Française, ii., 495, has been misled about this castle by the Chronicon Andegavense, which says: “Odo.... Fulconem expugnare speravit, et totis nisibus adorsus est. Annoque presenti (1025) Montis Budelli castellum, quod circiter annos decem retro abhinc contra civitatem Turonicam firmaverat Fulco, obsedit, et turrim ligneam miræ altitudinis super domgionem ipsius castri erexit.” Bouquet, x., 176. M. Enlart takes this to be the first recorded instance of a motte. But the passage is evidently corrupt, as the other accounts of this affair show that Count Odo’s wooden tower was a siege engine, employed to attack Fulk’s castle, and afterwards burnt by the besieged. See the Gesta Ambasiens. Dom., ibid., p. 257, and the Chron. St Florentii. Probably we should read contra domgionem instead of super. The Chronicon Andegavense was written in the reign of Henry II.
[187] When Fulk invaded Bretagne in or about 992, he collected an army “tam de suis quam conductitiis.” Richerius, edition Guadet. The editor remarks that this is perhaps the first example of the use of mercenaries since the time of the Romans (ii., 266). Spannagel, citing Peter Damian, says that mercenaries were already common at the end of the 10th century. Zur Geschichte des Deutschen Heerwesens, pp. 72, 73.
[188] This was always the custom in mediæval castles. See Cohausen, Befestigungen der Vorzeit, p. 282.
[189] “Qui vivens turres altas construxit et ædes, Unam Carnotum, sed apud Dunense reatum.” Chron. St Florentii.
[190] Chron. Namnetense, Lobineau, ii., 47.
[191] Gesta Ambasiensium Dominorum, in Spicilegium, p. 273.
[192] Guide Joanne, p. 234.
[193] The furthest point of the headland on which the castle is placed is a small circular court, with a fosse on all sides but the precipices. From personal visitation.
[194] Dunio is subsequently explained by Lambert as motte: “Motam altissimam sive dunionem eminentem in munitionis signum firmavit.” Lamberti Ardensis, p. 613. It is the same word as the Saxon dun, a hill (preserved in our South Downs), and has no connection with the Irish and Gaelic dun, which is cognate with the German zaun, a hedge, A.-S. tun, and means a hedged or fortified place. The form dange appears in Northern France, and this seems to be the origin of the word domgio or dangio which we find in the chroniclers, the modern form of which is donjon. If we accept this etymology, we must believe that the word dunio or domgio was originally applied to the hill, and not to the tower on the hill, to which it was afterwards transferred. It is against this view that Ordericus, writing some fifty years before Lambert, uses the form dangio in the sense of a tower. Professor Skeat and the New English Dictionary derive the word donjon or dungeon from Low Lat. domnionem, acc. of domnio, thus connecting it with dominus, as the seignorial residence.
[195] Ducange conjectured that the motte-castle took its origin in Flanders, but it was probably the passage cited above from Lambert which led him to this conclusion. See art. “Mota” in Ducange’s Glossarium.
[196] Steenstrup, Normannerne, i., 297.
[197] Ibid., i., 301.
[198] England and Normandy, ii., 535.
[199] “Muros et propugnacula civitatum refecit et augmentavit.” Dudo, p. 85 (Duchesne’s edition).
[200] “Henricus rex circa turrem Rothomagi, quam ædificavit primus Richardus dux Normannorum in palatium sibi, murum altum et latum cum propugnaculis ædificat.” Robert of Toringy, R.S., p. 106.
[201] Ordericus, ii., 15, 17, 46 (edition Prévost).
[202] William of Jumièges, anno 1035. Mr Freeman remarks that the language of William would lead us to suppose that the practice of castle-building was new.
[203] There are some facts which render it probable that the earliest castles built in Normandy were without mottes, and were simple enclosures like those we have described already. Thus the castle of the great family of Montgomeri is an enclosure of this simple kind. Domfront, built by William Talvas in Duke Robert’s time, has no motte. On the other hand, Ivry, built by the Countess Albereda in Duke Richard I.’s days, “on the top of a hill overlooking the town” (William of Jumièges), may possibly have been a motte; and there is a motte at Norrei, which we have just mentioned as an early Norman castle.
[204] Manuel d’Archæologie Française, p. 457.
[205] This want will be supplied, as regards England, by the completion of the Victoria County Histories, and as regards France, by the Societé Préhistorique, which is now undertaking a catalogue of all the earthworks of France. The late M. Mortillet, in an article in the Revue Mensuelle de l’École d’Anthropologie, viii., 1895, published two lists, one of actual mottes in France, the other of place-names in which the word motte is incorporated. Unfortunately the first list is extremely defective, and the second, as it only relates to the name, is not a safe guide to the proportional numbers of the thing. All that the lists prove is that mottes are to be found in all parts of France, and that place-names into which the word motte enters seem to be more abundant in Central France than anywhere else. It is possible that a careful examination of local chroniclers may lead to the discovery of some earlier motte-builder than Thibault-le-Tricheur. We should probably know more about Thibault’s castles were it not that the Pays Chartrain, as Palgrave says, is almost destitute of chroniclers.
[206] Cited at length by De Caumont, Bulletin Monumental, ix., 246. Von Hochfelden considered that the origin of feudal fortresses in Germany hardly goes back to the 10th century; only great dukes and counts then thought of fortifying their manors; those of the small nobility date at earliest from the end of the 12th century.
[207] Die Befestigungen der Vorzeit, p. 28.
[208] Entwickelung des Kriegswesens, iii., 370.
[209] Antiquitates Italicæ, ii., 504. He says they are many times mentioned both in charters and chronicles in Italy.
[210] We hear of Robert Guiscard building a wooden castle on a hill at Rocca di St Martino in 1047. Amari, Storia dei Musulmani di Sicilia, i., 43. Several place-names in Italy and Sicily are compounded with motta, as the Motta Sant’Anastasia in Sicily. See Amari, ibid., p. 220.
[211] Especially Montfort and Blanchegarde. But there is a wide field for further research both in Palestine and Sicily.
[212] “Bei den Sclaven haben die Chateaux-à-motte keinen Eingang gefunden, weil ihnen das Lehnswesen fremd geblieben ist.” iii., 338.
[213] Professor Montelius informed the writer that they are quite unknown in Norway or Sweden; and Dr Christison obtained an assurance to the same effect from Herr Hildebrand.
[214] “These are small well-defended places, the stronghold of the individual, built for a great man and his followers, and answering to mediæval conditions, to a more or less developed feudal system.” Vor Oldtid, p. 642.
[215] I am informed by a skilled engineer that even in the wet climate of England it would take about ten years for the soil to settle sufficiently to bear a stone building.
[216] Köhler says: “By far the greater part of the castles of the Teutonic knights in Prussia, until the middle of the fourteenth century, were of wood and earth.” Die Entwickelung des Kriegswesen, iii., 376.
[217] Cal. of Patent Rolls, 1232-1247, p. 340. Mandate to provost of Oléron to let Frank De Brene have tools to make a new motte in the isle of Rhé. Later the masters and crews of the king’s galleys are ordered to help in building the motte and the wooden castle. P. 343.
[218] Antiquitates Italicæ, ii., 504. Can Grande’s motte at Padua. Anno 1320. “Dominus Alternerius [podesta of Padua] ... cum maxima quantitate peditum et balistariorum Civitatis Paduæ, iverunt die predicto summo mane per viam Pontis Corvi versus quamdam motam magnam, quam faciebat facere Dominus Canis, cum multis fossis et tajatis ad claudendum Paduanos, ne exirent per illam partem, et volendo ibidem super illam motam ædificare castrum. Tunc prædictus Potestas cum aliis nominatis splanare incœperunt, et difecerunt dictam motam cum tajatis et fossa magna.”
We may remark here that as early as the 17th century the learned Muratori protested against the equation of mota and fossatum, and laughed at Spelman for making this translation of mota in his Glossary. Antiquitates Italicæ, ii., 504.
[219] Cited by Westropp, Journal of R.S.A., Ireland, 1904.
[220] Vicars’ Parliamentary Chronicle, cited by Hunter, South Yorks, ii., 235.
[221] “Camps on the Malvern Hills,” Journ. Anthrop. Inst., x., 319.
[222] M. de Salies has traced in detail the connection between Fulk Nerra’s castles and the Roman roads of Anjou and Touraine.
[223] See some excellent remarks on this subject in Mr W. St John Hope’s paper on “English Fortresses” in Arch. Journ., lx., 72-90.
[224] Only a very small number of mottes have as yet been excavated. Wells were found at Almondbury, Berkeley, Berkhampstead, Carisbrook, Conisborough, Kenilworth, Northallerton, Norwich, Pontefract, Oxford, Tunbridge, Worcester, and York. At Caus, there is a well in the ditch between the motte and the bailey. Frequently there is a second well in the bailey.
[225] The writer at one time thought that the ruins at the east end of the castle of Pontefract concealed a second motte, but wishes now to recant this opinion. Eng. Hist. Review, xix., 419.
[226] Thus Henry I. erected a siege castle to watch Bridgenorth (probably Pampudding Hill), and then went off to besiege another castle. Mr Orpen kindly informs me that the camp from which Philip Augustus besieged Château Gaillard contains a motte. Outside Pickering, Corfe, and Exeter there are earthworks which have probably been siege castles.
[227] Henry II. built a castle and very fine borough (burgum pergrande) at Beauvoir in Maine. Robert of Torigny, R.S., p. 243. Minute regulations concerning the founding of the borough of Overton are given in Close Rolls, Edward I. (1288-1296), p. 285.
[228] See Round, Studies in Domesday, pp. 125, 126.
[229] Neckham, “De Utensilibus,” in Wright’s Volume of Vocabularies, pp. 103, 104. Unfortunately this work of Neckham’s was not written to explain the construction of motte castles, but to furnish his pupils with the Latin names of familiar things; a good deal of it is very obscure now.
[230] See [frontispiece].
[231] Acta Sanctorum, 27th January, Bolland, iii., 414. This biography was written only nine months after Bishop John’s death, by an intimate friend, John de Collemedio.
[232] Guisnes is now in Picardy, but in the 12th century it was in Flanders, which was a fief of the Empire.
[233] This description is from the Historia Ardensium of Walter de Clusa, which is interpolated in the work of Lambert, Bouquet, pp. 13, 624.
[234] Yet in some of the later keeps, such as Conisburgh, where we find only one window to a storey, the room must have been undivided.
[235] See Wright, History of Domestic Manners, p. 26.
[236] According to Littré, the original derivation of the word motte is unknown. I have not found any instance of the word mota in chronicles earlier than the 12th century, but the reason appears to be that mota or motte was a folk’s word, and appeared undignified to an ambitious writer. Thus the author of the Gesta Consulum Andegavensium says that Geoffrey Martel, Count of Anjou, gave to a certain Fulcoius the fortified house which is still called by the vulgar Mota Fulcoii. D’Achery, Spicilegium, p. 257.
[237] See [Appendix G].
[238] See [Appendix H].
[239] Peel, its Meaning and Derivation, by George Neilson.
[240] See [Appendix I]. Cohausen has some useful remarks on the use of hedges in fortification. Befestigungen der Vorzeit, pp. 8-13. A quickset hedge had the advantage of resisting fire. The word sepes, which properly means a hedge, is often applied to the palitium.
[241] This list or catalogue raisonné was originally published in the English Historical Review for 1904 (vol. xix.). It is now reproduced with such corrections as were necessary, and with the addition of five more castles, as well as of details about thirty-four castles for which there was not space in the Review. The Welsh castles are omitted from this list, as they will be given in a separate chapter.
[242] The list is brought up to fifty by interpreting the regis domus of Winchester to be Winchester castle; the reasons for this will be given later. The number would be increased to fifty-two if we counted Ferle and Bourne in Sussex as castles, as Mr Freeman does in his Norman Conquest, v., 808. But the language of Domesday seems only to mean that the lands of these manors were held of Hastings castle by the service of castle-guard. See D. B., i., pp. 21 and 206.
[243] The total number would be eighty-six if Burton and Aldreth were included. Burton castle is mentioned in Domesday, but there is no further trace of its existence. The castle of Alrehede or Aldreth in the island of Ely is stated by the Liber Eliensis to have been built by the Conqueror, but no remains of any kind appear to exist now. Both these castles are therefore omitted from the list.
[244] Exact numbers cannot be given, because in some cases the bounds of the ancient borough are doubtful, as at Quatford.
[245] At Winchester and Exeter. For Winchester, see Milner, History of Winchester, ii., 194; for Exeter, Shorrt’s Sylva Antiqua Iscana, p. 7.
[246] Colchester is the only exception to this rule, as the castle there is in the middle of the town; but even this is only an apparent exception, as the second bailey extended to the town wall on the north, and had been royal demesne land even before the Conquest. See Round’s Colchester Castle, ch. vii.
[247] These five are Berkeley, Berkhampstead, Bourn, Pontefract, Rayleigh.
[248] I am indebted for these measurements to Mr D. H. Montgomerie.
[249] Notification in Round’s Calendar of Documents preserved in France, p. 367. Mr Round dates the Notification 1087-1100.
[250] Description furnished by Mr D. H. Montgomerie, F.S.A.
[251] “Castrum Harundel T. R. E. reddebat de quodam molino 40 solidos, et de 3 conviviis 20 solidos, et de uno pasticio 20 solidos. Modo inter burgum et portum aquæ et consuetudinem navium reddit 12 libras, et tamen valet 13. De his habet S. Nicolaus 24 solidos. Ibi una piscaria de 5 solidos et unum molinum reddens 10 modia frumenti, et 10 modia grossæ annonæ. Insuper 4 modia. Hoc appreciatum est 12 libras. Robertus filius Tetbaldi habet 2 hagas de 2 solidis, et de hominibus extraniis habet suum theloneum.” Several other hagæ and burgenses are then enumerated. (D. B., i., 23a, 1.)
[252] See Mr Round’s remarks on the words in his Geoffrey de Mandeville, [Appendix O]. The above was written before the appearance of Mr Round’s paper on “The Castles of the Conquest” (Archæologia, lviii.), in which he rejects the idea that castrum Harundel means the castle.
[254] Florence of Worcester mentions the castle of Arundel as belonging to Roger de Montgomeri in 1088.
[255] See [Appendix R].
[256] The expenses entered in the Pipe Rolls (1170-1187) are for the works of the castle, the chamber and wall of the castle, the houses of the castle (an expression which generally refers to the keep), and for flooring the tower (turris) and making a garden. Turris is the usual word for a keep, and is never applied to a mere mural tower.
[257] This gateway is masked by a work of the 13th century, which serves as a sort of barbican.
[258] In operibus castelli de Arundel 22l. 7s. 8d. Et debet 55l. 18s. 6d. Pipe Roll, 31, Henry I., p. 42.
[259] D. B., i., 23a, 1.
[260] Testa de Nevill, i., iii., 236, cited by C. Bates, in a very valuable paper on Bamborough Castle, in Archæologia Æliana, vol. xiv., “Border Holds.” Mr Bates gives other evidence to the same effect. The early existence of the castle is also proved by the fact that Gospatric, whom William had made Earl of Northumberland, after his raid on Cumberland in 1070, brought his booty to the firmissimam munitionem of Bamborough. Symeon of Durham, 1070.
[261] Vita S. Oswaldi, ch. xlviii., in Rolls edition of Symeon.
[262] This was the opinion of the late Mr Cadwalader Bates, who thought that the smallness of the sums entered for Bamborough in Henry II.’s reign might be accounted for by the labour and materials having been furnished by the crown tenants. Border Strongholds, p. 236.
[263] Bamborough rock has every appearance of having been once an island. As late as 1547 the tide came right up to the rock on the east side; the sea is now separated from the castle by extensive sandhills.
[264] M. A., v., 197.
[265] Domesday mentions the destruction of twenty-three houses at Barnstaple, which may have been due partly or wholly to the building of the castle. I., 100.
[266] From a lecture by Mr J. R. Chanter.
[267] The Fundatio of Belvoir priory says that Robert founded the church of St Mary, juxta castellum suum, M. A., iii., 288. As Robert’s coffin was actually found in the Priory in 1726, with an inscription calling him Robert de Todnei le Fundeur, the statement is probably more trustworthy than documents of this class generally are.
[268] Nicholls, History of Leicester, i., 110.
[269] D. B., i., 233b.
[270] “In Ness sunt 5 hidæ pertinentes ad Berchelai, quas comes Willielmus misit extra ad faciendum unum castellulum.” D. B., i., 163a, 2.
[271] “Castella per loca firmari præcepit.” Flor. Wig., 1067. See Freeman, N. C., iv., 72. Domesday tells us that FitzOsbern built Ness, Clifford, Chepstow, and Wigmore, and rebuilt Ewias.
[272] Robert Fitzhardinge, in his charter to St Austin’s Abbey at Bristol, says that King Henry [II.] gave him the manor of Berchall, and all Bercheleiernesse. Mon. Ang., vi., 365.
[273] It is not necessary to discuss the authenticity of the story preserved by Walter Map; it is enough that Gytha, the wife of Godwin, held in horror the means by which her husband got possession of Berkeley Nunnery. D. B., i., 164.
[274] Mediæval Military Architecture, i., 236.
[275] The gift of the manor was made before Henry became king, and was confirmed by charter on the death of Stephen in 1154. Fitzhardinge was an Englishman, son of an alderman of Bristol, who had greatly helped Henry in his wars against Stephen. See Fosbroke’s History of Gloucester.
[276] He held Berkeley under the crown at the time of the Survey. D. B., i., 163a.
[277] From information received from Mr Duncan Montgomerie.
[278] Fosbroke’s History of Gloucester attributes this bailey to Maurice, son of Robert Fitzhardinge. One of the most interesting features in this highly interesting castle is the wooden pentice leading from the main stairway of the keep to the chamber called Edward II.’s. Though a late addition, it is a good instance of the way in which masonry was eked out by timber in mediæval times.
[279] Clark, M. M. A., i., 229.
[280] D. B., i., 163.
[281] Victoria County History of Herts, from which the description of these earthworks is entirely taken.
[282] Mon. Ang., vii., 1090.
[283] They were excavated by Mr Montgomerie in 1905, and no trace of masonry was found.
[284] Roger of Wendover, 1216.
[285] D. B., i., 163.
[286] The charter, which is in both Anglo-Saxon and Latin, is given in Dugdale’s History of St Paul’s, 304.
[287] See Freeman, ii., 356; and D. B., i., 134a.
[288] From report by Mr D. H. Montgomerie.
[289] Waytemore has sometimes been identified with the puzzling Wiggingamere, but in defiance of phonology.
[290] D. B., i., 351b.
[291] M. A., vi., 86.
[292] Itin., i., 27.
[293] Associated Archæological Societies, VI., ix.
[294] Report by Mr D. H. Montgomerie.
[295] Ipse Willielmus tenet Wasingetune. Guerd Comes tenuit T. R. E. Tunc se defendebat pro 59 hidis. Modo non dat geldum. In una ex his hidis sedet castellum Brembre. D. B., i., 28a, 1.
[296] We often find that the architecture of the nearest church throws light on the date of the castle. A Norman seldom built or restored his castle without doing something for the church at the same time.
[297] See Ordericus, ii., 178.
[298] The Chronica de Fundatoribus of Tewkesbury Abbey seems to be the origin of the tradition that Earl Robert was the builder of Bristol Castle. There can be no doubt that his work was in stone, as the same authority states that he gave every tenth stone to the Chapel of Our Lady in St James’ Priory. M. A., ii., 120. According to Leland, the keep was built of Caen stone. Itin., vii., 90. Robert of Gloucester calls it the flower of all the towers in England.
[299] We have no historical account of the Norman conquest of Bristol, and the city is only mentioned in the most cursory manner in D. B.
[300] Seyer (Memoirs of Bristol, i.) was convinced that the plan published by Barrett, and attributed to the monk Rowlie, was a forgery; his own plan, as he candidly admits, was largely drawn from imagination.
[301] Castellum plurimo aggere exaltatum. Gesta Stephani, 37.
[302] Seyer, i., 391, and ii., 82.
[303] Quoted by Seyer, ii., 301, from Prynne’s Catal., p. 11.
[304] Calculated from the measurements given by William of Worcester. Itin., p. 260. William probably alludes to the motte when he speaks of the “mayng round” of the castle.
[305] Benedict of Peterborough, i., 92.
[306] Hist. of Bristol, i., 373.
[307] Ibid., vol. ii.
[308] De Gestis Herewardi Saxonis, Wright’s edition. See Freeman, N. C., iv., 804.
[309] Beauties of England and Wales, Buckingham, p. 282.
[310] Camden’s Britannia, i., 315.
[311] D. B., i., 143.
[312] “Willielmus de Scohies tenet 8 carucatas terræ in castellaria de Carliun, et Turstinus tenet de eo. Ibi habet in dominio unam carucam, et tres Walenses lege Walensi viventes, cum 3 carucis, et 2 bordarios cum dimidio carucæ, et reddunt 4 sextares mellis. Ibi 2 servi et una ancilla. Hæc terra wasta erat T. R. E., et quando Willelmus recepit. Modo valet 40 solidos.” D. B., i., 185b, 1.
[313] The Gwentian Chronicle, Cambrian Archæological Association, A.D. 962, 967. It is not absolutely impossible that these passages refer to Chester. Caerleon appears to have been seized by the Welsh very soon after the death of William I.
[314] Itin. Camb., p. 55.
[315] Loftus Brock, in Journ. Brit. Arch. Ass., xlix. J. E. Lee, in Arch. Camb., iv., 73.
[316] D. B., i., 185b.
[317] [Rex] “in reversione sua Lincolniæ, Huntendonæ et Grontebrugæ castra locavit.” Ord. Vit., p. 189.
[318] D. B., i., 189.
[319] A similar plan was made independently by the late Professor Babington. Some traces of the original earthwork of the city are still to be seen. See Mr Hope’s paper on The Norman Origin of Cambridge Castle, Cambridge Antiquarian Soc., vol. xi.; and Babington’s Ancient Cambridgeshire, in the same society’s Octavo Publications, No. iii., 1853.
[320] W. H. St John Hope, as above, p. 342.
[321] “Archiepiscopus habet ex eis [burgensibus] 7 et abbas S. Augustini 14 pro excambio castelli.” D. B., i. a, 2.
[322] “Et undecim sunt perditi infra fossatum castelli”; cited by Larking, Domesday of Kent, App. xxiv. Domesday says, “sunt vastatæ xi. in fossa civitatis.” There can be no doubt that the Chartulary gives the correct account.
[323] The hill is called the Dungan, Dangon, or Dungeon Hill in many old local deeds. See “Canterbury in Olden Times,”Arch. Journ., 1856. Stukeley and Grose both call it the Dungeon Hill.
[324] See [Appendix N].
[325] Somner’s Antiquities of Canterbury, p. 144. Published in 1640.
[326] Antiquities of Canterbury, p. 75.
[327] Mr Clark thought there was another motte in the earthworks outside the walls, though he expresses himself doubtfully: “I rather think they [the mounds outside the city ditch] or one of them, looked rather like a moated mound, but I could not feel sure of it.“ Arch. Cantiana, xv., 344. Gostling (A Walk about Canterbury, 1825) says there were two, which is perhaps explained by a passage in Brayley’s Kent (1808), in which he describes the external fortification as “a lesser mount, now divided into two parts, with a ditch and embankment.” P. 893. Stukeley’s description (circa 1700) is as follows: “Within the walls is a very high mount, called Dungeon Hill; a ditch and high bank enclose the area before it; it seems to have been part of the old castle. Opposite to it without the walls is a hill, seeming to have been raised by the Danes when they besieged the city. The top of the Dungeon Hill is equal to the top of the castle.” Itin. Curiosum, i., 122. It is of course not impossible that there may have been two mottes to this castle, as at Lewes and Lincoln, but such instances are rare, and it seems more likely that a portion of the bailey bank which happened to be in better preservation and consequently higher was mistaken for another mount. Mr Clark committed this very error at Tadcaster, and the other writers we have quoted were quite untrained as observers of earthen castles. At any rate there can be no doubt that the Dane John is the original chief citadel of this castle, as the statements of Somner, Stukeley, and we may add, Leland, are explicit. The most ancient maps of Canterbury, Hoefnagel’s (1570), Smith’s (Description of England, 1588), and Grose’s (1785), all show the Dungeon Hill within the walls, but take no notice of the outwork outside.
[328] Archæologia Cantiana, xxxiii., 152.
[329] Ibid., xxi.
[330] Close Rolls, i., 234b, ii., 7b, 89.
[331] Now, to the disgrace of the city of Canterbury, converted into gasworks.
[332] For instance, at Middleham, Rochester, Rhuddlan, and Morpeth.
[333] Beauties of England and Wales, Kent, p. 893.
[334] The passages from the Pipe Roll bearing on this subject (which have not been noticed by any previous historian of Canterbury) are as follows:—
| 1166-7. | In operatione civitatis Cantuar. claudendæ | £5 19 6 |
| " | Ad claudendam civitatem Cantuar. | 20 0 0 |
| 1167-8. | Pro claudenda civitate Cantuar. | 5 1 1 |
| 1168-9. | In terris datis Adelizæ filie Simonis 15 solidos de tribus annis pro escambio terræ suæ quæ est in Castello de Cantuar. | 0 15 0 |
| 1172-3. | In operatione turris ejusdem civitatis | 10 0 0 |
| " | In operatione predicte turris | 53 6 8 |
| " | Summa denariorum quos vicecomes misit in operatione turris | 73 1 4 |
| 1173-4. | In operatione turris et Castelli Chant. | 24 6 0 |
| " | In operatione turris Cantuar. | 5 11 7 |
| 1174-5. | Et in warnisione ejusdem turris | 5 8 0 |
The latter extract, which refers to the provisioning of the keep, seems to show that it was then finished. The sums put down to the castle, amounting to about £4000 of our money, are not sufficient to defray the cost of so fine a keep. But the entries in the Pipe Rolls relate only to the Sheriff’s accounts, and it is probable that the cost of the keep was largely paid out of the revenues of the archbishopric, which Henry seized into his own hands during the Becket quarrel.
[335] The portion of the wall of Canterbury, which rests on an earthen bank, extends from Northgate to the Castle, and is roughly semicircular in plan. In the middle of it was St George’s Gate, which was anciently called Newingate (Gostling, p. 53) and may possibly have been Henry II.’s new gate. The part enclosing the Dungeon Hill is angular, and appeared to Mr Clark, as well as to Somner and Hasted, to have been brought out at this angle in order to enclose the hill.
[336] Arch. Journ., 1856.
[337] D. B., i., 2a, 1.
[338] “Isdem rex tenet Alwinestone. Donnus tenuit. Tunc pro duabus hidis et dimidia. Modo pro duabus hidis, quia castellum sedet in una virgata.” D. B., i., 2a, 1.
[339] See below, under [Windsor].
[340] “In hac [insula] castellum habebat ornatissimum lapidum ædificio constructum, validissimo munimine firmatum.” Gesta Stephani, R. S., p. 28.
[341] Stone’s Official Guide to the Castle of Carisbrooke, p. 39.
[342] Mr W. H. Stevenson, in his edition of Asser, pp. 173, 174, shows that the name Carisbrooke cannot possibly be derived from Wihtgares-burh, as has been sometimes supposed, as the older forms prove it to have come from brook, not burh. The lines of the present castle banks, if produced, would not correspond with those of the Tilt-yard, which is proof that the Norman castle was not formed by cutting an older fortification in two.
[343] Bower’s Scotochronicon, v., xlii. Cited by Mr Neilson, Notes and Queries, viii., 321. See also Palgrave, Documents and Records, i., 103.
[344] Cal. of Close Rolls, Edward II., iii., 161.
[345] Mon. Ang., v., 12. “Castelli nostri de Acra.”
[346] As at Burton, Mexborough, Lilbourne, and Castle Colwyn.
[347] Harrod’s Gleanings among the Castles and Convents of Norfolk. See also Arch. Journ., xlvi., 441.
[348] D. B., ii., 160b.
[349] “Castellum de Estrighoiel fecit Willelmus comes, et ejus tempore reddebat 40 solidos, tantum de navibus in silvam euntibus.” D. B., i., 162. Tanner has shown that while Chepstow was an alien priory of Cormeille, in Normandy, it is never spoken of by that name in the charters of Cormeille, but is always called Strigulia. Notitia Monastica, Monmouthshire. See also Marsh’s Annals of Chepstow Castle.
[350] I must confess that in spite of very strong opposing opinions, I see no reason why this building should not be classed as a keep. It is of course a gross error to call Martin’s Tower the keep; it is only a mural tower.
[351] D. B., 162, 1a.
[352] “Cestriæ munitionem condidit.” P. 199 (Prévost’s edition).
[353] Chester Historical and Archæological Society, v., 239.
[354] Pipe Rolls, ii., 7. Ranulph, Earl of Chester, died in 1153, and the castle would then escheat into the king’s hands.
[355] This work seems to have been completed in the reign of Edward II., who spent £253 on the houses, towers, walls, and gates. Cal. of Close Rolls, Edward II., ii., 294.
[356] Close Rolls, 35, Henry III., cited by Ormerod, History of Cheshire, i., 358.
[357] See Mr Cox’s paper, as above, and Shrubsole, Chester Hist. and Arch. Soc., v., 175, and iii., New Series, p. 71.
[358] Benedict of Peterborough, i., 135, R. S.
[359] D. B., i., 262b.
[360] “Willelmus comes fecit illud [castellum] in wasta terra quam tenebat Bruning T. R. E.” D. B., i., 183a, 2.
[361] “Ancient Charters,” Pipe Roll Society, vol. x., charter xiii., and Mr Round’s note, p. 25.
[362] It is extraordinary that Mr Clark, in his description of this castle, does not mention the motte, except by saying that the outer ward is 60 or 70 feet lower than the inner. M. M. A., i., 395.
[363] This passage occurs in a sort of appendix to Domesday Book, which is said to be in a later hand, of the 12th century. (Skaife, Yorks. Arch. Journ., Part lv., p. 299.) It cannot, however, be very late in the 12th century, as it speaks of Roger’s holdings in Craven in the present tense.
[364] See Farrer’s Lancashire Pipe Rolls, p. 385. The castle is not actually mentioned, but “le Baille” (the bailey) is spoken of. Mr Farrer also prints an abstract of a charter of Henry I. (1102): “per quam concessit eidem Roberto [de Laci] Boelandam [Bowland] quam tenuit de Rogero Comite Pictavensi, ut extunc eam de eodem rege teneat.” P. 382.
[365] In an inquisition of Henry de Laci (+ 1311) it is said that “castelli mote et fossæ valent nihil.” (Whitaker’s History of Whalley, p. 280.) This is probably an instance of the word motte being applied to a natural rock which served that purpose. See another instance under Nottingham, post, [p. 176].
[366] Dugdale’s Baronage, i., p. 99. Dugdale’s authority appears to have been the “Historia Laceiorum,” a very untrustworthy document, but which may have preserved a genuine tradition in this instance. The loopholes in the basement of the keep, with the large recesses, appear to have been intended for crossbows, and the crossbow was not reintroduced into England till the reign of Richard I.
[367] Victoria History of Lancashire, ii., 523.
[368] See Farrer, Lancashire Pipe Rolls, i., 260.
[369] Printed by Mr Round in Essex Arch. Society’s Transactions, vii., Part ii. The charter is dated 1101.
[370] See Maitland, Domesday Book and Beyond, p. 22.
[371] History of Colchester Castle, p. 141.
[372] It has been much debated whether these tiles are Roman or Norman; the conclusion seems to be that they are mixed. See Round’s History of Colchester, p. 78.
[373] The single Pipe Roll of Henry I. shows that he spent £33, 15s. on repairs of the castle and borough in 1130.
[374] In operatione unius Rogi (a kiln), £13, 18s. In reparatione muri castelli, £16, 3s. 2d. The projection of the buttresses (averaging 1 ft. 3 ins.) is about the same as that found in castles of Henry I. or Henry II.’s time.
[375] Ad faciendum Ballium circa castellum, £50. Pipe Rolls, xix., 13. This is followed by another entry of £18, 13s. 7d. “in operatione castelli,” which may refer to the same work.
[376] Round’s History of Colchester.
[377] Close Rolls, i., 389. Mandamus to the bishop of London to choose two lawful and discreet men of Colchester, “et per visum eorum erigi faceatis palicium castri nostri Colecestrie, quod nuper prostratum fuit per tempestatem.”
[378] Round’s History of Colchester, pp. 135, 136.
[379] Tota civitas ex omnibus debitis reddebat T. R. E., £15, 5s. 4d., in unoquoque anno. Modo reddit £160. D. B., ii., 107.
[380] Eyton, Key to Domesday, p. 43. This passage was kindly pointed out to me by Dr Round. The castle is not mentioned in Domesday under Wareham, but under Kingston. “De manerio Chingestone habet rex unam hidam, in qua fecit castellum Warham, et pro ea dedit S. Mariæ [of Shaftesbury] ecclesiam de Gelingeham cum appendiciis suis.” D. B., i., 78b, 2.
[381] “Advocatio ecclesie de Gillingeham data fuit abbati [sic] de S. Edwardo in escambium pro terra ubi castellum de Corf positum est.” Testa de Nevill, 164b.
[382] It is by no means certain that Corfe was the scene of Edward’s murder, as we learn from a charter of Cnut (Mon. Ang., iii., 55) that there was a Corfe Geat not far from Portisham, probably the place now called Coryates.
[383] Called by Asser a castellum; but it has already been pointed out that castellum in early writers means a walled town and not a castle. (See [p. 25].) Wareham is a town fortified by an earthen vallum and ditch, and is one of the boroughs of the Burghal Hidage. (See Ch. II, [p. 28].) A Norman castle was built there after the Conquest, and its motte still remains. D. B. says seventy-three houses were utterly destroyed from the time of Hugh the Sheriff. I., 75.
[384] Edred granted “to the religious woman, Elfthryth,” supposed to be the Abbess of Shaftesbury, “pars telluris Purbeckinga,” which would include Corfe. Mon. Ang., ii., 478.
[385] Both these kings spent large sums on Corfe Castle. See the citations from the Pipe Rolls in Hutchins’ Dorset, vol. i., and in Mr Bond’s History of Corfe Castle.
[386] See Professor Baldwin Brown’s paper in the Journal of the Institute of British Architects, Third Series, ii., 488, and Mr Micklethwaite’s in Arch. Journ., liii., 338; also Professor Baldwin Brown’s remarks on Corfe Castle in The Arts in Early England, ii., 71.
[387] There are other instances in which the chapel is the oldest piece of mason-work about the castle, as, for example, at Pontefract.
[388] Cited in Hutchins’ Dorset, i., 488, from the Close Rolls.
[389] Close Rolls, i., 178b.
[390] Hutchins’ Dorset, i., 488.
[391] Castrum Doveram, studio atque sumptu suo communitum. P. 108. Eadmer makes Harold promise to William “Castellum Dofris cum puteo aquæ ad opus meum te facturum.” Hist. Novorum, i., d. The castle is not mentioned in Domesday Book.
[392] Norman Conquest, iii., 217.
[393] In 1580 an earthquake threw down a portion of the cliff on which the castle stands, and part of the walls. Statham’s History of Dover, p. 287.
[394] “Wendon him tha up to thære burge-weard, and ofslogen ægther ge withinnan ge withutan, ma thanne 20 manna.” Another MS. adds “tha burh-menn ofslogen 19 men on othre healfe, and ma gewundode, and Eustatius atbærst mid feawum mannum.”
[395] See ante, [pp. 17-19].
[396] His description is worth quoting:
Est ibi mons altus, strictum mare, litus opacum,
Hinc hostes citius Anglica regna petunt;
Sed castrum Doveræ, pendens a vertice montis,
Hostes rejiciens, littora tuta facit.
Clavibus acceptis, rex intrans mœnia castri
Præcepit Angligenis evacuare domos;
Hos introduxit per quos sibi regna subegit,
Unumquemque suum misit ad hospitium.
“Carmen de Bello Hastingensi,” in Monumenta Britannica, p. 603.
[397] William’s description is also of great interest: “Deinde dux contendit Doueram, ubi multus populus congregatus erat, pro inexpugnabile, ut sibi videtur, munitione; quia id castellum situm est in rupe mari contigua, quæ naturaliter acuta undique ad hoc ferramentis elaborate incisa, in speciem muri directissima altitudine, quantum sagittæ jactus permetiri potest, consurgit, quo in latere unda marina alluitur.” P. 140.
[398] The following entries in the Pipe Rolls refer to this:—
| 1194-5. | Three hundred planks of oak for the works of the castle | £2 0 0 |
| 1196-7. | Repair of the wall of the castle | 76 3 0 |
| 1208-9. | Timber for walling the castles of Dover and Rochester, also rods and [wooden] hurdles and other needful things | 76 13 4 |
| 1210-11. | Payment for the carpenters working the timber | 24 9 5 |
| 1212-13. | For the carriage of timber and other things | 48 16 7 |
| 1214-15. | For the carriage of timber for the castle works | 2 0 0 |
| 1214-15. | For timber and brushwood for the works, and for cutting down wood to make hurdles, and sending them | sum not given, |
but £100 entered same year for the works of the castle. There is no mention of stone for the castle during these two reigns, but after the death of John we find that works are going on at Dover for which kilns are required. (Close Rolls, i., 352, 1218.) This entry is followed by a very large expenditure on Dover Castle (amounting to at least £6000), sufficient to cover the cost of a stone wall and towers round the outer circuit. The orders of planks for joists must be for the towers, and the large quantities of lead, for roofing them. The order for timber “ad palum et alia facienda” in 1225 may refer to a stockade on the advanced work called the Spur, which is said to be Hubert’s work. (Close Rolls, ii., 14.)
[399] Cited by Statham, History of Dover, pp. 265, 313.
[400] Commune of London, pp. 278-81.
[401] The ninth name, Maminot, is attached to three towers on the curtain of the keep ward.
[402] “Recepto castro, quæ minus erant per dies octo addidit firmamenta.” P. 140.
[403] Lyon says: “The keep [hill] was formed of chalk dug out of the interior hill.” Cited by Statham, p. 245.
[404] “Per præceptum regis facta est apud Doveram turris fortissima.” II. 8, R. S., anno 1187. The Historia Fundationis of St Martin’s Abbey says that Henry II. built the high tower in the castle, and enclosed the donjon with new walls: “fit le haut tour en le chastel, et enclost le dongon de nouelx murs.” M. A., iv., 533.
[405] Puckle’s Church and Fortress of Dover Castle, p. 57.
[406] Pipe Rolls, 1178-80. “In operatione muri circa castellum de Doura, £165, 13s. 4d. The same, £94, 7s. 1d.”
[407] Mr Statham thinks the port of Dover, though a Roman station, was unwalled till the 13th century, and gives evidence. History of Dover, p. 56.
[408] See Professor Baldwin Brown, “Statistics of Saxon Churches” in the Builder, 20th October 1900; and in The Arts in Early England, ii., 338.
[409] D. B., i., 1.
[410] “Istedem Willelmus tenet Dudelei, et ibi est castellum ejus. T. R. E. valebat 4 libras, modo 3 libras.” D. B., i., 177.
[411] M. M. A., i., 24.
[412] “Circa dies istos castellum de Huntinduna, de Waletuna, de Legecestria, et Grobi, de Stutesbers [Tutbury], de Dudeleia, de Tresc, et alia plura pariter corruerunt, in ultionem injuriarum quas domini castellorum regi patri frequenter intulerunt.” Diceto, i., 404, R. S.
[413] Close Rolls, i., 380.
[414] Parker’s History of Domestic Architecture, Licenses to Crenellate, 13th century, Part ii., p. 402. Godwin, “Notice of the Castle at Dudley,” Arch. Journ., xv., 47.
[415] D. B., i., 95b.
[416] Narrow terraces of this kind are found in several mottes, such as Mere, in Wilts. They are probably natural, and may have been utilised as part of the plan. The more regular terraces winding round the motte are generally found where the motte has become part of a pleasure-ground in later times.
[417] This is the only case in which I have had to trust to Mr Clark for the description of a castle. M. M. A., ii., 24.
[418] Mentioned in Close Rolls, i., 518a.
[419] D. B., i., 95b.
[420] Symeon of Durham, 1072. “Eodem tempore, scilicet quo rex reversus de Scotia fuerat, in Dunelmo castellum condidit, ubi se cum suis episcopus tute ab incursantibus habere potuisset.”
[421] This chapel is an instance of the honour so frequently done to the chapel, which was in many cases built of stone when the rest of the castle was only of timber, and was always the part most lavishly decorated.
[422] The bailey was twice enlarged by Bishops Flambard and Pudsey.
[423] Surtees, Durham, iv., 33.
[424] Surtees Society, xx., 11-13.
[425] Evidently the southern wing wall up the motte; but we need not suppose murus to mean a stone wall.
[426] Domus, a word always used for a habitation in mediæval documents, and often applied to a tower, which it evidently means here.
[427] This is the only indication which Lawrence gives that the keep was of wood.
“Cingitur et pulchra paries sibi quilibet ala,
Omnis et in muro desinit ala fero.”
The translation is conjectural, but gallery seems to make the best sense, and the allusion probably is to the wooden galleries, or hourdes, which defended the walls.
[429] Evidently the northern wing wall.
[430] This is the bailey; the two vast palaces must mean the hall and the lodgings of the men-at-arms, who did not share the bishop’s dwelling in the keep. These were probably all of wood, as the buildings of Durham Castle were burnt at the beginning of Pudsey’s episcopate (1153) and restored by him. Surtees Society, ix., 12.
[431] “Hujus in egressu pons sternitur.” This seems a probable allusion to a drawbridge, but if so, it is an early one.
[432] This describes the addition to the bailey made by Flambard. The part of the peninsula to the S. of the church was afterwards walled in by Pudsey, and called the South Bailey.
[433] Liber Eliensis, ii., 245 (Anglia Christiana). The part cited was written early in the 12th century: see [Preface].
[434] Stowe’s Annals, 145, 1.
[435] D. B., ii., 192.
[436] “Alured de Merleberge tenet castellum de Ewias de Willelmo rege. Ipse rex enim concessit ei terras quas Willelmus comes ei dederat, qui hoc castellum refirmaverat, hoc est, 5 carucatas terræ ibidem.... Hoc castellum valet 10l.” D. B., i., 186a. As there is no statement of the value in King Edward’s day, we cannot tell whether it had risen or fallen.
[437] Feudal England, p. 324. The present writer was led independently to the same conclusion. Pentecost was the nickname of Osbern, son of Richard Scrob, one of Edward’s Norman favourites, to whom he had given estates in Herefordshire. Osbern fled to Scotland in 1052, but he seems to have returned, and was still holding lands in “the castelry of Ewias” at the time of the Survey, though his nephew Alured held the castle. See Freeman, N. C., ii., 345, and Florence of Worcester, 1052.
[438] “Locum vero intra mœnia ad extruendum castellum delegit, ibique Baldwinum de Molis, filium Gisleberti comitis, aliosque milites præcipuos reliquit, qui necessarium opus conficerent, præsidioque manerunt.” Ordericus, ii., 181.
[439] Exeter is one of the few cities where a tradition has been preserved of the site of the Saxon royal residence, which places it in what is now Paul Street, far away from the present castle. Shorrt’s Sylva Antiqua Iscana, p. 7.
[440] “In hac civitate vastatæ sunt 48 domi postquam rex venit in Angliam.” D. B., i., 100.
[441] Norman Conquest, iv., 162.
[442] The outer ditch may have been of Roman origin, but in that case it must have been carried all round the city, and we are unable to find whether this was the case or not. The banks on the north and east sides must also have been of Roman origin, and if we rightly understand the statements of local antiquaries, the Roman city wall stood upon them, and has actually been found in situ, cased with mediæval rubble. Report of Devon Association, 1895.
[443] This resemblance to a pit may be seen in every motte which still retains its ancient earthen breast-work, as at Castle Levington, Burton in Lonsdale, and Castlehaugh, Gisburne. Perhaps this is the reason that we so frequently read in the Pipe Rolls of “the houses in the motte” (domos in Mota) instead of on the motte. Devizes Castle is another and still more striking instance.
[444] Professor Baldwin Brown, The Arts in Early England, ii., 82.
[445] “In custamento gaiole in ballia castelli, £16, 15s. 8d.”
[446] Cited by Dr Oliver, “The Castle of Exeter,” in Arch. Journ., vii., 128.
[447] The whole of this passage is worth quoting: “Castellum in ea situm, editissimo aggere sublatum, muro inexpugnabile obseptum, turribus Cæsarianis inseissili calce confectis firmatum. Agmine peditum instructissime armato exterius promurale, quod ad castellum muniendum aggere cumulatissimo in altum sustollebatur, expulsis constanter hostibus suscepit, pontemque interiorem, quo ad urbem de castello incessus protendebatur, viriliter infregit, lignorumque ingentia artificia, quibus de muro pugnare intentibus resisteretur, mire et artificiose exaltavit. Die etiam et noctu graviter et intente obsidionem clausis inferre; nunc cum armatis aggerem incessu quadrupede conscendentibus rixam pugnacem secum committere; nunc cum innumeris fundatoribus, qui e diverso conducti fuerunt, intolerabile eos lapidum grandine infestare; aliquando autem ascitis eis, qui massæ subterranæ cautius norunt venus incidere, ad murum diruendum viscera terræ scutari præcipere: nonnunquam etiam machinas diversi generis, alias in altum sublatis, alias humo tenus depressas, istas ad inspiciendam quidnam rerum in castello gereretur, illas ad murum quassandum vel obruendum aptare.” Gesta Stephani, R. S., 23.
[448] Pipe Rolls, 1169-1186.
[449] The difficulty about this, however, is that passages branch off from the central cave in every direction.
[450] Oliver’s History of Exeter, p. 186.
[451] [Willelmus Malet] fecit suum castellum ad Eiam. D. B., ii., 379. For Malet, see Freeman, N. C., 466, note 4.
[452] “In operatione castelli de Eya et reparatione veterarum bretascharum et 2 novarum bretascharum et fossatorum et pro carriagio et petra et aliis minutis operationibus 20l. 18s. 4d.” Pipe Rolls, xix., 19 Henry II. The small quantity of stone referred to here can only be for some auxiliary work. The bretasches in this case will be mural towers of wood. “In emendatione palicii et 1 exclusæ vivarii et domorum castelli 20s.” 28 Henry II.
[453] D. B., ii., 319, 320.
[454] D. B., i., 162. “Sedecim domus erant ubi sedet castellum, quæ modo desunt, et in burgo civitatis sunt wastatæ 14 domus.”
[455] Rudge, History of Gloucester, p. 7. Haverfield, Romanisation of Britain, p. 204.
[456] It is, however, possible that by the burgus may be meant a later quarter which had been added to the city.
[457] Fosbroke’s History of Gloucester, pp. 125, 126. Stukeley, writing in 1721, says: “There is a large old gatehouse standing, and near it the castle, with a very high artificial mount or keep nigh the river.” Itin. Cur., i., 69.
[458] “Of al partes of yt the hy tower in media area is most strongest and auncient.” Leland, Itin., iii., 64.
[459] “In excambium pro placea ubi nunc turris stat Gloucestriæ, ubi quondam fuit ortus monachorum.” Mon. Ang., i., 544. The document is not earlier than Henry II.’s reign.
[460] Round, Studies in Domesday, p. 123.
[461] “In operatione frame turris de Glouec, 20l.” Pipe Rolls, i., 27. In the single Pipe Roll of Henry I. there is an entry “In operationibus turris de Glouec,” 7l. 6s. 2d., which may be one of a series of sums spent on the new stone keep.
[462] Pipe Rolls, 1177, 1180, 1181, 1184.
[463] Close Rolls, ii., 88b.
[464] “In reparatione murorum et bretaschiarum,” 20l. 7s. 11d. Pipe Rolls, 1193.
[465] “Jussit ut foderetur castellum ad Hestengaceastra.”
[466] D. B., i., 18a, 2. “Rex Willelmus dedit comiti [of Eu] castellariam de Hastinges.”
[467] “Dux ibidem [at Pevensey] non diu moratus, haud longe situm, qui Hastinges vocatur, cum suis adiit portum, ibique opportunum nactus locum, ligneum agiliter castellum statuens, provide munivit.” Chron. Monast. de Bello, p. 3, ed. 1846. There is also the evidence of Ordericus, who says that Humphrey de Tilleul received the custody of Hastings Castle “from the first day it was built.” iv., 4.
Par conseil firent esgarder
Boen lieu a fort chastel fermer.
Donc ont des nes mairrien iete,
A la terre l’ont traine,
Que le quens d’Ou i out porte
Trestot percie e tot dole.
Les cheuilles totes dolees
Orent en granz bariz portees.
Ainz que il fust avespre
En ont un chastelet ferme;
Environ firent une fosse,
Si i ont fait grant fermete.—Andresen’s edition, p. 289.
[469] The north curtain is of ruder work than the other masonry.
[470] In attractu petre et calcis ad faciendam turrim de Hasting 6l. Idem 13l. 12s. Vol. xviii., p. 130. The work must have been extensive, as it is spoken of as “operatio castelli novi Hasting.” 1181-1182. Though the sum given is not sufficient for a great stone keep, it may have been supplemented from other sources.
[471] See Mr Sands’ paper on Hasting’s Castle, in Trans. of the South-Eastern Union of Scientific Societies, 1908.
[472] This bailey has been supposed to be a British or Roman earthwork, but no evidence has been brought forward to prove it, except the fact that discoveries made in one of the banks point to a flint workshop on the site.
[473] Totum manerium valebat T. R. E. 20 libras, et postea wastum fuit. Modo 18 libras 10 solidos. D. B., i., 18a, 2.
Since the above was written, Mr Chas. Dawson’s large and important work on Hastings Castle has appeared, and to this the reader is referred for many important particulars, especially the passages from the Pipe Rolls, i., 56, and the repeated destructions by the sea, ii., 498-9. The reproduction of Herbert’s plan of 1824 (ii., 512) seems to show more than one bailey outside the inner ward. The evidence for a great outer ditch, enclosing all these works, and supposed to be prehistoric, is given on p. 515, vol. ii.
[474] See Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 1048 (Peterborough) and 1052 (Worcester), and compare with Florence of Worcester.
[475] N. C., ii., 394.
[476] Pipe Rolls, 11 Henry II., p. 100, and 15 Henry II., p. 140. Stephen granted to Miles of Gloucester “motam Hereford cum toto castello.” Charter cited by Mr Round, Geoffrey de Mandeville, Appendix O, [p. 329].
[477] Cited by Grose, Antiquities, ii., 18. Stukeley saw the motte, and mentions the well in it lined with stone. Itin. Curiosum, i., 71. See also Duncombe’s History of Hereford, i., 229.
[478] In custamento prosternandi partem muri castri nostri de Hereford, et preparatione rogi ad reficiendum predictum murum, 26s. 6d. Pipe Rolls, 1181-1182.
[479] In operatione 5 bretaschiarum in castro de Hereford, £15, 3s. 9d. Pipe Rolls, 1173-1174.
[480] Close Rolls, i., 134a.
[481] Hubertus Cantuariensis Archiepiscopus et totius Angliæ summus Justiciarius, fuit in Gwalia apud Hereford, et recepit in manu sua castellum de Hereford, et castellum de Briges, et castellum de Ludelaue, expulsis inde custodibus qui ea diu custodierant, et tradidit ea aliis custodibus, custodienda ad opus regis. Roger of Howden, iv., 35, R. S.
[482] D. B., i., 179.
[483] “In loco castri fuerunt 20 mansiones, quæ modo absunt.” D. B., i., 203.
[484] Ordericus, ii., 185.
[485] Benedict of Peterborough, i., 70. The Justiciar, Richard de Lucy, threw up a siege castle against it.
[486] “Pro uncis ad prosternandum palicium de Hunted, 7s. 8d. In operatione novi castelli de Hunted, et pro locandis carpentariis et pro croccis et securibus et aliis minutis rebus, 21l.” Pipe Rolls, 20 Henry II., pp. 50, 63. It is clear that the operatio was in this case one of pulling down. Giraldus (Vita Galfredi, iv., 368, R. S.) and Diceto (i., 404, R. S.), both say the castle was destroyed.
[487] Mon. Ang., vi., 80.
[488] Leland tells us that Launceston was anciently called Dunheved. Itin., vii., 122.
[489] “Ibi est castrum comitis.” D. B., i., 121b. “Hæc duo maneria [Hawstone et Botintone] dedit episcopo comes Moriton pro excambio castelli de Cornualia.” D. B., i., 101b, 2.
[490] There are no entries for Launceston except repairs in the reigns of Henry II. and his sons.
[491] Murray’s Guide to Cornwall, p. 203.
[492] “Olim 20l.; modo valet 4l.” D. B., i., 121b.
[493] D. B., ii., 157, 163, 172. The first entry relating to this transaction says: “Hoc totum est pro escangio de 2 maneriis Delaquis.” The second says: “Pertinent ad castellum Delaquis.” It is clear that Lewes is meant, as one paragraph is headed “De escangio Lewes.” I have been unable to find any explanation of this exchange in any of the Norfolk topographers, or in any of the writers on Domesday Book.
[494] Lincoln is the only other instance known to the writer. Deganwy has two natural mottes. It is possible that two mottes indicate a double ownership of a castle, a thing of which there are instances, as at Rhuddlan.
[495] Exeter and Tickhill are instances of early Norman gateways, and at Ongar and Pleshy there are fragments of early gateways, though there are no walls on the banks. We have already seen that Arundel had a gateway which cannot be later than Henry I.’s time.
[496] D. B., i., 26a, 1.
[497] “De predictis wastis mansionibus propter castellum destructi fuerunt 166.” D. B., i., 336b, 2.
[498] “In reversione sua Lincoliæ, Huntendonæ, et Grontebrugæ castra locavit.” Ordericus, 185 (Prévost).
[499] At present the bank is wanting on a portion of the south side, between the two mottes.
[500] Mr Clark gravely argues that the houses were inside what he believes to have been the Saxon castle. There is not a vestige of historical evidence for the existence of any castle in Lincoln in the Saxon period.
[501] Stephen gave Ralph the castle and city of Lincoln, and gave him leave to fortify one of the towers in Lincoln Castle, and have command of it until the king should deliver to him the castle of Tickhill; then the king was to have the city and castle of Lincoln again, excepting the earl’s own tower, which his mother had fortified. His mother was Lucy, daughter of Ivo Taillebois; and as the principal tower was known as the Luce Tower, the masonry may have been her work. In that case the Norman work on the smaller motte may be due to Ralph Gernon, and may possibly be the nova turris which was repaired in John’s reign. Pipe Roll, 2 John. Stephen’s charter is in Farrer’s Lancashire Pipe Rolls.
[502] “In custamento firmandi ballium castelli Lincoll.” Pipe Roll, 5 Richard I. In an excavation made for repairs in modern times it was found that this wall rested on a timber frame-work, a device to avoid settling, the wall being of great height and thickness. Wilson, Lincoln Castle, Proc. Arch. Inst., 1848.
[503] D. B., i. 336b, 2: “Tochi filius Outi habuit in civitate 30 mansiones præter suam hallam, et duas ecclesias et dimidiam, et suam hallam habuit quietam ab omni consuetudine.... Hanc aulam tenuit Goisfredus Alselin et suus nepos Radulfus. Remigius episcopus tenet supradictas 30 mansiones ita quod Goisfredus nihil inde habet.”
[504] “In castello Monemouth habet Rex in dominio 4 carucas. Willelmus filius Baderon custodit eas. Quod rex habet in hoc castello valet c solidos.” D. B., 180b.
[505] Liber Landavensis, Evans’ edition, pp. 277-278. See also Round’s Calendar of Documents Preserved in France, p. 406.
[506] Theatre of Britain, p. 107.
[507] Speed’s map shows the curtain wall surrounding the top of the hill and also a large round tower towards the N.E. part, but not standing on any “other mount.” The square keep is not indicated separately. It must be remembered that Speed’s details are not always accurate or complete.
[508] “Ipse comes tenet in dominio Bishopstowe, et ibi est castellum ejus quod vocatur Montagud. Hoc manerium geldabat T. R. E. pro 9 hidas, et erat de abbatia de Adelingi, et pro eo dedit comes eidem ecclesiæ manerium quod Candel vocatur.” D. B., i., 93a, 1.
[509] Itin., ii., 92.
[510] From a description communicated by Mr Basil Stallybrass. The motte is shown in a drawing in Stukeley’s Itinerarium Curiosum. The “immense Romano-British camp” of which Mr Clark speaks (M. M. A., i., 73) is nearly a mile west.
[511] Mountjoy, Monthalt (Mold), Beaumont, Beaudesert, Egremont, are instances in point.
[512] Gaimar, 214, Wright’s edition. Gaimar wrote in the first half of the 12th century; Wright states that his work is mainly copied from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, but its chief value lies in the old historical traditions of the north and east of England which he has preserved.
[513] Hodgson’s History of Northumberland, Part II., ii., 384, 389.
[514] This account is taken from a description kindly furnished by Mr D. H. Montgomerie.
[515] Bates’ Border Holds, p. 11.
[516] Simeon of Durham, 1080. “Castellum Novum super flumen Tyne condidit.”
[517] See the map in an important paper on Newcastle by Longstaffe, Arch. Æliana, iv., 45.
[518] Guide to the Castle of Newcastle, published by Society of Antiquaries of Newcastle, 1901.
[519] Longstaffe, as above.
[520] “Condidit castellum in excelso preruptæ rupis super Twedam flumen, ut inde latronum incursus inhiberet, et Scottorum irruptiones. Ibi enim utpote in confinia regni Anglorum et Scottorum creber prædantibus ante patebat excursus, nullo enim quo hujusmodi impetus repelleretur præsidio locato.” Symeon of Durham, R. S., i., 140.
[521] “Castellum di Northam, quod munitionibus infirmum reperit, turre validissima forte reddidit.” Geoffrey of Coldingham, 12 (Surtees Society). Symeon says it was built “precepto regis.” The keep was extensively altered in the Decorated period.
[522] M. M. A., ii., 331.
[523] Richard of Hexham, 319 (Twysden).
[524] “In illa terra de quâ Herold habebat socam sunt 15 burgenses et 17 mansuræ vastæ, quæ sunt in occupatione castelli; et in burgo 190 mansuræ vacuæ in hoc quod erat in soca regis et comitis, et 81 in occupatione castelli.” D. B., ii., 116. This shows that the castle and its ditches occupied ground partly within and partly without the ancient burh.
[525] Harrod’s Gleanings among Castles, p. 142.
[526] The authorities from which this map is compiled are not given.
[527] The “new borough” at Norwich was the quarter inhabited by the Normans. D. B., ii., 118. “Franci de Norwich: in novo burgo 36 burgenses et 6 Anglici.” Mr Hudson says that Mancroft Leet corresponds to the new burgh added to Norwich at the Conquest. See his map in Arch. Journ., xlvi.
[528] Norwich was not a Roman town; see Haverfield, Vict. Hist. of Norfolk, i., 320. But the Roman road from Caistor passed exactly underneath the castle motte. Brit. Arch. Assoc. Journ., xlvi., Rev. H. Dukinfield Astley.
[529] Harrod’s Gleanings among Castles, p. 137.
[530] Mon. Ang., iv., 13. In 37 Henry III. the monks of Norwich Priory received “licentiam includendi eandem villam cum fossis,” and by doing this they enclosed the lands of other fees.
[531] Arch. Journ., xlvi., 445.
[532] Kirkpatrick’s Notes of Norwich Castle, written about 1725. He states that the angles of the motte had been spoilt, and much of it fallen away.
[533] Archæologia, vol. xii.
[534] Mr Hartshorne thought it was built between 1120 and 1125. Arch. Journ., xlvi., 260. It is certainly not as late as Henry II.’s reign, or the accounts for it would appear in the Pipe Rolls.
[535] Pipe Rolls, 19 Henry II., p. 117. In reparatione pontis lapidei et palicii et 3 bretascharum in eodem castello, 20l. 4s. 8d.
[536] Close Rolls, ii., 22. Order that the palicium of Norwich Castle, which has fallen down and is threatened with ruin, be repaired.
[537] Kirkpatrick, Notes on Norwich Castle.
[538] Except Kirkpatrick, who shows a judicious scepticism on the subject. Ibid., p. 248.
[539] Mon. Ang., i., 482.
[540] D. B., ii., 117.
[541] Ordericus, ii., 184.
[542] Published in a paper on Nottingham Castle by Mr Emanuel Green, in Arch. Journ. for December 1901.
[543] See Mr Green’s paper, as above, p. 388.
[544] “Apud Rokingham liberavimus Philippo Marco ad faciendam turrim quam dominus Rex precepit fieri in Mota de Notingham 100 marcas quas burgenses de Notingham et Willelmus Fil. Baldwini dederunt domino Regi pro benevolencia sua habenda.” In Cole’s Documents Illustrative of English History, 235. There is some reason to think that John instead of building the cylindrical keeps which were then coming into fashion, reverted to the square form generally followed by his father.
[545] Pipe Rolls, 1170-1186. The Pipe Roll of 6 Richard I. mentions the making of “1 posterne in mota,” which may be the secret passage in the rock.
[546] This is rendered probable by a writ of Henry III.’s reign, ordering that half a mark is to be paid annually to Isolde de Gray for the land which she had lost in King John’s time “per incrementum forinseci ballii Castri de Notinge.” Close Rolls, i., 508.
[547] Close Rolls, i., 548b. “Videat quid et quantum mæremii opus fuerit ad barbecanas et palitia ipsius castri reparanda” (1223). Close Rolls, i., 531b. Timber ordered for the repair of the bridges, bretasches, and palicium gardini (1223). Cal. of Close Rolls, 1286, p. 390: Constable is to have timber to repair the weir of the mill, and the palings of the court of the castle. Nottingham was one of eight castles in which John had baths put up. Rot. Misæ., 7 John.
[548] The murage of the town of Nottingham was assigned “to the repair of the outer bailey of the castle there” in 1288. Patent Rolls, Edward I., i., 308.
[549] Chapter xlii.
[550] D. B., i., 280.
[551] “Ipse Baldwinus vicecomes tenet de Rege Ochementone, et ibi sedet castellum.” D. B., i., 105b, 2.
[552] The late Mr Worth thought the lower part of the keep was early Norman. He was perhaps misled by the round arched loops in the basement. But round arches are by no means conclusive evidence in themselves of Norman date, and the size of these windows, as well as the absence of buttresses, and the presence of pointed arches, are quite incompatible with the early Norman period. The whole architecture of the castle agrees with a 14th century date, to which the chapel undoubtedly belongs.
[553] Eyton, Antiquities of Shropshire, vol. vii.
[554] “Ibi fecit Rainaldus Castellum Luure.” D. B., i., 253b. Rainald was an under-tenant of Roger, Earl of Shrewsbury.
[555] This sketch is reproduced in Mr Parry-Jones’ Story of Oswestry Castle. Leland says, “Extat turris in castro nomine Madoci.” Itin., v., 38.
[556] “In operatione palicii de Blancmuster 2l. 6s. 8d.” XII., 124. Oswestry was known as Blancmoustier or Album Monasterium in Norman times.
[557] Abingdon Chronicle and Osney Chronicle, which, though both of the 13th century, were no doubt compiled from earlier sources.
[558] Osney Chronicle, 1071.
[559] See Ingram’s Memorials of Oxford for an account of the very interesting crypt of this church, p. 8. The battlement storey of the tower is comparatively late.
[560] Mackenzie, Castles of England, i., 160.
[561] D. B., p. 154.
[562] Rymer’s Fœdera, vol. i.
[563] “Terram castelli Pechefers tenuerunt Gerneburn et Hunding.” D. B., i., 276a, 2.
[564] There are similar nook-shafts to Henry II.’s keep at Scarborough, and to Castle Rising. Mr Hartshorne (Arch. Journ., v., 207) thought that there had been an earlier stone keep at Peak Castle, because some moulded stones are used in the walls, and because there is some herring-bone work in the basement. But this herring-bone work only occurs in a revetment wall to the rock in the cellar; and the moulded stones may be quite modern insertions for repairs, and may have come from the oratory in the N.E. angle, or from some of the ruined windows and doorways. The sums entered to this castle between the years 1172 and 1176 are less than half the cost of Scarborough keep, and do not appear adequate, though the keep was a small one. But there is some reason to think that the cost of castles was occasionally defrayed in part from sources not entered in the Pipe Rolls.
[565] Rex E. tenuit Peneverdant. Ibi 2 carucatæ terræ et reddebant 10 denarios. Modo est ibi castellum.... Valent 3 libras. D. B., i., 270.
[566] We need not resort to any fanciful British origins of the name Peneverdant, as it is clearly the effort of a Norman scribe to write down the unpronounceable English name Penwortham.
[567] See ante, under [Clitheroe].
[568] Mr Halton’s book (Documents relating to the Priory of Penwortham) throws no light on this point.
[569] Transactions of the Historic Society of Lancashire and Cheshire, vol. ix., 1856-1857, paper on “The Castle Hill of Penwortham,” by the Rev. W. Thornber; Hardwick’s History of Preston, pp. 103-11.
[570] In a paper published in the Trans. Soc. Ant. Scot, for 1900, on “Anglo-Saxon Burhs and Early Norman Castles,” the present writer was misled into the statement that this hut was the remains of the cellar of the Norman bretasche. A subsequent study of Mr Hardwick’s more lucid account of the excavations showed that this was an error. There were two pavements of boulders, one on the natural surface of the hill, on which the hut had been built, the other 5 feet above it, and 12 feet below the present surface. The hut appeared to have been circular, with wattled walls and a thatched roof. Several objects were found in its remains, and were pronounced to be Roman or Romano-British. The upper pavement would probably be the flooring of a Norman keep.
[571] Mr Roach Smith pronounced this spur to be Norman. As its evidence is so important, it is to be regretted that its position was not more accurately observed. It was found in the lowest stratum of the remains, but Mr Hardwick says: “As it was not observed until thrown to the surface, a possibility remained that it might have fallen from the level of the upper boulder pavement, 5 feet higher.” We may regard this possibility as a certainty, if the lower hut was really British.
[572] Mr Willoughby Gardner says the castle commands a ford, to which the ancient sunk road leads. Victoria Hist. of Lancashire, vol. ii.
[573] Hugh Candidus, Cœnob. Burg. Historia, in Sparke’s Scriptores, p. 63. This passage was kindly pointed out to me by Mr Round. Hugh lived in Henry III.’s reign, but he must have had the more ancient records of the monastery at his disposal.
[574] Domesday Book mentions that the value of the burgus had greatly risen. It was one of the burhs mentioned in the Burghal Hidage.
[575] Pipe Roll, 1187-1188. William of Jumièges says, “Statim firmissimo vallo castrum condidit, probisque militibus commisit.” VII., 34. Wace professes to give the account of an eye-witness, who saw the timber for the castle landed from the ships, and the ditch dug. But Wace was not a contemporary, and as he has made the mistake of making William land at Pevensey instead of Hastings, his evidence is questionable. Roman de Rou, p. 293 (Andresen’s edition).
[576] The ruins of this keep, until 1908, were buried under so large a mound of earth and rubbish that Mr G. T. Clark mistook it for a motte, and the present writer was equally misled. It ought to be stated, before the date of this keep is finally settled, that the Gesta Stephani speaks of this castle as “editissimo aggere sublatum.” P. 106.
[577] Ibid.
[578] Close Rolls, i., 631a.
[579] D. B., i., 20b.
[580] D. B., i., 373b.
[581] Cited in Holmes’ History of Pontefract, p. 62.
[582] Another charter, which is a confirmation by the second Ilbert de Lacy of the ecclesiastical gifts of Ilbert I. and Robert his son, states that the Chapel of St Clement in the castle of Pontefract was founded by Ilbert I. in the reign of William II. Mon. Ang., v., 128.
[583] It is not necessary to discuss the meaning of the name Pontefract, since for whatever reason it was given, it was clearly bestowed by the Norman settlers.
[584] “Castrum de Pontefracto est quasi clavis in comitatu Ebor.” Letter of Ralph Neville to Henry III., Fœdera, i., 429, cited by Holmes, Pontefract, 194.
[585] The Conqueror had given him more than 200 manors in Yorkshire. Yorks. Arch. Journ., xiv., 17.
[586] Four roundels are shown in the plate given in Fox’s History of Pontefract, “from a drawing in the possession of the Society of Antiquaries.” But the drawing is so incorrect in some points that it can hardly be relied upon for others. There were only three roundels in Leland’s time.
[587] Drake’s account of the siege says that there was a hollow place between Piper’s Tower and the Round Tower all the way down to the well; the gentlemen and soldiers all fell to carrying earth and rubbish, and so filled up the place in a little space. Quoted in Holmes’ Manual of Pontefract Castle.
[588] In the English Historical Review for July 1904, where this paper first appeared, the writer spoke of two mottes at Pontefract, having been led to this view by the great height of the east end of the bailey, where the ruins of John of Gaunt’s work are found. This view is now withdrawn, in deference to the conclusions of Mr D. H. Montgomerie, F.S.A., who has carefully examined the spot.
[589] Mon. Ang., iv., 178.
[590] From a description by Mr D. H. Montgomerie.
[591] D. B., i., 224.
[592] See [Chapter IV].
[593] Domesday Book says: “Ipse comes (Roger) tenet Ardinton. Sancta Milburga tenuit T. R. E. Ibi molinum et nova domus et burgus Quatford dictus, nil reddentes.” I., 254.
[594] G. T. Clark, in Arch. Cambrensis, 1874, p. 264.
[595] Ord. Vit., iv., 32.
[596] “In hoc manerio fecit Suenus suum castellum.” D. B., ii., 33b.
[597] Freeman, N. C., ii., 329, and iv., [Appendix H].
[598] Mr Round has suggested that this castle was at Canfield in Essex, where there is a motte and bailey.
[599] “Isdem Osbernus habet 23 homines in castello Avreton et reddit 10 solidos. Valet ei castellum hoc 20 solidos.” D. B., i., 186b.
[600] Mr Clark’s plan is strangely incorrect, as he altogether omits the bailey. Compare the plan in Mr Round’s Castles of the Conquest, Archæologia, vol. lviii., and Mr Montgomerie’s plan here, [Fig. 27].
[601] “Comes Alanus habet in sua castellata 199 maneria.... Præter castellariam habet 43 maneria.” D. B., i., 381a, 2.
[602] This is stated in a charter of Henry II., which carefully recapitulates the gifts of the different benefactors to St Mary’s. Mon. Ang., iii., 548. It is curious that the charter of William II., the first part of which is an inspeximus of a charter of William I., does not mention this chapel in the castle.
[603] Mr Skaife, the editor of the Yorkshire Domesday, thinks that it was at Hinderlag, but gives no reasons. Hinderlag, at the time of the Survey, was in the hands of an under-tenant. Yorks. Arch. Journ., lii., 527, 530.
[604] “Hic Alanus primo incepit facere castrum et munitionem juxta manerium suum capitale de Gilling, pro tuitione suorum contra infestationes Anglorum tunc ubique exhæredatorum, similiter et Danorum, et nominavit dictum castrum Richmond suo ydiomate Gallico, quod sonat Latine divitem montem, in editiori et fortiori loco sui territorii situatum.” Mon. Ang., v., 574.
[605] There are no remains of fortification at Gilling, but about a mile and a half away there used to be an oval earthwork, now levelled, called Castle Hill, of which a plan is given in M‘Laughlan’s paper, Arch. Journ., vol. vi. It had no motte. Mr Clark says, “The mound at Gilling has not long been levelled.” M. M. A., i., 23. It probably never existed except in his imagination.
[606] See Clarkson’s History of Richmond.
[607] Journal of Brit. Arch. Ass., lxiii., 179.
[608] These are the dates given in Morice’s Bretagne.
[609] Henry spent 51l. 11s. 3d. in 1171 on “operationes domorum et turris,” and 30l. 6s. in 1174 on “operationes castelli et domorum.”
[610] “Episcopus de Rouecestre, pro excambio terræ in qua castellum sedet, tantum de hac terra tenet quod 17 sol. et 4 den. valet.” D. B., i., 2b.
[611] See Mr George Payne’s paper on Roman Rochester, in Arch. Cantiana, vol. xxi. Mr Hope tells me that parts of all the four sides are left.
[612] Thus Egbert of Kent, in 765, gives “terram intra castelli mœnia supra-nominati, id est Hrofescestri, unum viculum cum duobus jugeribus,” Kemble, i., 138; and Offa speaks of the “episcopum castelli quod nominatur Hrofescester,” Earle, Land Charters, p. 60.
[613] See an extremely valuable paper on Mediæval Rochester by the Rev. Greville M. Livett, Arch. Cantiana, vol. xxi.
[614] See the charter of Cœnulf, King of Mercia, giving to Bishop Beornmod three ploughlands on the southern shore of the city of Rochester, from the highway on the east to the Medway on the west. Textus Roffensis, p. 96.
[615] The name Boley may possibly represent the Norman-French Beaulieu, a favourite Norman name for a castle or residence. Professor Hales suggested that Boley Hill was derived from Bailey Hill (cited in Mr Gomme’s paper on Boley Hill, Arch. Cantiana, vol. xvii.). The oldest form of the name is Bullie Hill, as in Edward IV.’s charter, cited below, [p. 200].
[616] Roman urns and lachrymatories were found in the Boley Hill when it was partially levelled in the 18th century to fill up the castle ditch. History of Rochester, p. 281. At the part now called Watt’s Avenue, Mr George Payne found “the fag-end of an Anglo-Saxon cemetery.” Arch. Cantiana, vol. xxi.
[617] “In pulchriore parte civitatis Hrouecestre.” Textus Roffensis, p. 145. Mr Freeman and others have noticed that the special mention of a stone castle makes it probable that the first castle was of wood. Mr Round remarks that the building of Rochester Castle is fixed, by the conjunction of William II. and Lanfranc in its history, to some date between September 1087 and March 1089. Geoffrey de Mandeville, p. 339. Probably, therefore, it was this new castle which Bishop Odo held against Rufus in 1088. Ordericus says that “cum quingentis militibus intra Rofensem urbem se conclusit.” P. 272.
[618] It is now attributed to Archbishop William of Corbeuil, to whom Henry I. gave the custody of the castle in the twenty-seventh year of his reign, with permission to make within it a defence or keep, such as he might please. Continuator of Florence, 1126. Gervase of Canterbury also says “idem episcopus turrim egregiam ædificavit.” Both passages are cited by Hartshorne, Arch. Journ., xx., 211. Gundulf’s castle cost 60l. and can scarcely have been more than an enclosing wall with perhaps one mural tower. See Mr Round, Geoffrey de Mandeville, 340, and Mr Livett’s paper, cited above.
[619] Two common friends of Rufus and Gundulf advised the king that in return for the grant of the manor of Hedenham and the remission of certain moneys, “episcopus Gundulfus, quia in opere cæmentario plurimum sciens et efficax erat, castrum sibi Hrofense lapideum de suo construeret.” Textus Roffensis, p. 146. There was therefore an exchange of land in this affair also.
[620] Arch. Cantiana, vol. xxi.
[621] Arch. Cantiana, vol. xxi., p. 49.
[622] There are several entries in the Close Rolls relating to this wall of Henry III. in the year 1225.
[623] Mr Beale Poste says that this ancient wall was met with some years since in digging the foundations of the Rev. Mr Conway’s house, standing parallel to the present brick walls and about 2 feet within them. “Ancient Rochester as a Roman Station,” Arch. Cantiana, ii., 71. The Continuator of Gervase of Canterbury tells us (ii., 235) that at the siege of Rochester in 1265, Simon de Montfort captured the outer castle up to the keep (forinsecum castellum usque ad turrim), and Mr Livett thinks this outer castle must have been the Boley Hill.
[624] Close Rolls, ii., 98b.
[625] Hasted’s Kent, iv., 163.
[626] “Ymb sætan tha ceastre and worhton other fæsten ymb hie selfe.” See ante, p. 49, [note 120].
[627] Mr Hope suggests the east side, as the north was a marsh.
[628] History of Rochester (published by Fisher, 1772), p. 285.
[629] D. B., i., 56.
[630] “Wasta erat quando Rex W. iussit ibi castellum fieri. Modo valet 36 solidos.” D. B., i., 220.
[631] “I markid that there is stronge Tower in the Area of the Castelle, and from it over the Dungeon Dike is a drawbridge to the Dungeon Toure.” Itin., i., 14.
[632] “In operatione nove turris et nove camere in cast. 126l. 18s. 6d.”
[633] D. B., i., 120.
[634] See the plan reproduced in Wise’s Rockingham Castle and the Watsons, p. 66.
[635] Vol. i., p. 224: cited by Mr Irving in his valuable paper on Old Sarum in Arch. Journ., xv., 1859. Sir Richard made a vague reference to an MS. in the Cottonian and Bodleian libraries, for which Mr Irving says he has searched in vain.
[636] General Pitt-Rivers in his Address to the Salisbury meeting of the Archæological Institute in 1887, says that traces of these roads may still be seen. He adds that Old Sarum does not resemble the generality of ancient British fortifications, in that the rampart is of the same height all round, instead of being lower where the ground is steeper; this led him to think that the original fortress had been modernised in later times. Sir Richard Colt Hoare noticed that the ramparts of Sarum were twice as high as those of the fine prehistoric camps with which he was acquainted. Ancient Wiltshire, p. 226.
[637] Benson and Hatcher’s Old and New Sarum, p. 604.
[638] Cf. Benson and Hatcher, 63, with Beauties of England and Wales, xv., 78.
[639] D. B., i., 66. “Idem episcopus tenet Sarisberie.” Part of the land which had been held under the bishop was now held by Edward the Sheriff, the ancestor of the earls of Salisbury. This in itself is a proof that the castle was new. See Freeman, N. C., iv., 797.
[640] This policy had been dictated by an œcumenical council.
[641] He gives to the canons of the church two hides in the manor, “et ante portam castelli Seriberiensis terram ex utraque parte viæ in ortorum domorumque canonicorum necessitate.” M. A., vi., 1294.
[642] Gentleman’s Magazine, 1795.
[643] The area of the outer camp is 29½ acres.
[644] It is unlikely that this is the turris mentioned in the solitary Pipe Roll of Henry I. “In unum ostium faciendum ad cellarium turris Sarum, 20s.” This entry is of great interest, as entrances from the outside to the basement of keeps were exceptional in the 12th century; but the basement entrance of Colchester keep has every appearance of having been added by Henry I.
[645] William of Malmesbury, Hist. Nov., ii., 91.
[646] In 1152; the writ is given by Benson and Hatcher, p. 32.
[647] “In operatione unius Bretesche in eodem Castro 50s.” Pipe Rolls, 1193-4.
[648] “Virgam et mairemium ad hordiandum castrum.” Close Rolls, i., 198b (1215).
[649] Benson and Hatcher, p. 704.
[650] “Dicunt quod castrum cum burgo Veteris Sarum et dominicus burgus domini Regis pertinent ad coronam cum advocatione cujusdam ecclesiæ quæ modo vacat.” Hundred Rolls, Edward I., cited by Benson and Hatcher, p. 802.
[651] Cited by Benson and Hatcher, p. 802.
[652] D. B., 66a, 1. The value T. R. E. is not, however, very distinctly stated.
[653] “Dicunt Angligenses burgenses de Sciropesberie multum grave sibi esse quod ipsi reddunt totum geldum sicut reddebant T. R. E. quamvis castellum comitis occupaverit 51 masuras et aliæ 50 masuræ sunt wastæ.” D. B., i., 252.
[654] Some writers, such as Mr Kerslake and Mr C. S. Taylor, have supposed Sceargate to mean Shrewsbury.
[655] Mandatum est vicecomiti Salopie quod veterem palum et veterem bretaschiam de vetere fossato ville Salopie faciat habere probos homines ville Salopie ad novum fossatum ejusdem ville, quod fieri fecerant, efforciandum et emendendum. Close Rolls, 1231, p. 508. The honest men of the city are also to have “palum et closturam” from the king’s wood of Lichewood “ad hirucones circa villam Salopie faciendas ad ipsam villam claudendam.” Ibid. Hirucones are the same as heritones or hericias, a defence of stakes on the counterscarp of the ditch.
[656] “In op. castelli de Salopbe in mota 5l.” Pipe Rolls, 19 Henry II., p. 108.
[657] “Dampnum mote castri Salopp’ ad valenciam 60 marcarum, sed non recolligunt totum evenisse propter molendinum abbatis Salopp’, quia 30 annis elapsis mota castri fuit fere deteriorata sicut nunc est.” Hundred Rolls, ii., 80. “Dicunt quod unus magnus turris ligneus (sic) qui ædificatur in castro Salopp’ corruit in terram tempore domini Uriani de S. Petro tunc vicecomitis, et meremium ejus turris tempore suo et temporibus aliorum vicecomitum postea ita consumitur et destruitur quod nihil de illo remansit, in magnum damnum domini Regis et deteriorationem eiusdem castri.” Ibid., p. 105.
[658] Pipe Rolls, 11 Henry II., p. 89; 12 Henry II., p. 59; 14 Henry II., p. 93; 15 Henry II., p. 108; 20 Henry II., p. 108.
[659] Payment to those who dig stone for the castle of Shrewsbury, Close Rolls, i., 622b. This is in 1224. There is also a payment of 50l. for works at the castle in 1223. Ibid., 533b.
[660] Hundred Rolls, ii., 80. A jarola or garuillum is a stockade; apparently derived from a Gallic word for oak, and may thus correspond to an oak paling. See Ducange.
[661] Owen and Blakeway’s History of Shrewsbury, i., 450.
[662] Chronicon de Melsa, R. S. See Preface, p. lxxii.
[663] Yorks Inquisitions (Yorks Rec. Ser.), i., 83.
[664] Rot. Lit. Claus., i., 474b.
[665] Poulson’s History of Holderness, i., 457.
[666] D. B., i., 323b.
[667] Ethelwerd, anno 910.
[668] “Ipse Henricus tenet Cebbeseio. Ad hoc manerium pertinuit terra de Stadford, in qua rex precepit fieri castellum, quod modo est destructum.” D. B., i., 249a.
[669] “Apud Estafort alteram [munitionem] locavit.” Ord. Vit., p. 199.
[670] It should be said that Mr Eyton interprets the passage differently, and takes it to mean that the castle was built on land in the borough of Stafford belonging to the manor of Chebsey. But he himself says that “the site of Stafford Castle, within the liberties, though not within the borough of Stafford, would suggest a royal foundation”; and he believes this castle (the one on the motte) to have been the one garrisoned by Henry I. and made a residence by Henry II. Domesday Studies, p. 21.
[671] Salt. Arch. Soc. Trans., vol. viii., “The Manor of Castre or Stafford,” by Mr Mazzinghi, a paper abounding in valuable information, to which the present writer is greatly indebted.
[672] In the addenda to Mr Eyton’s Domesday of Staffordshire (p. 135) the learned editor says there are two Stafford castles mentioned in Domesday, in two different hundreds. We have carefully searched through the whole Stafford account, and except at Burton and Tutbury, there is no other castle mentioned in Staffordshire but this one at Chebsey.
[673] Dugdale conjectures that Robert was sheriff of Staffordshire. He had large estates round the town of Stafford. Eyton, Staffordshire, p. 61.
[674] Mazzinghi, Salt Arch. Soc. Trans., viii., 6; Eyton, Domesday Studies, p. 20.
[675] Monasticon, vi., 223: “Ecclesiam S. Nicholai in castello de Stafford.”
[676] Ordericus, vii., 12. See also vii., 13, p. 220 (ed. Prévost).
[677] Mazzinghi, Salt Arch. Soc. Trans., viii., 22.
[678] In a charter to Stone Abbey, Salt Collections, vol. ii. That the castle he speaks of was the one outside the town is proved by his references to land “extra burgum.”
[679] The Pipe Roll contains several entries relating to this gaol at Stafford. It is clear from several of the documents given by Mr Mazzinghi that the king’s gaol of Stafford and the king’s gaol of the castle of Stafford are equivalent expressions.
[680] Pipe Rolls, 2 John.
[681] Close Rolls, i., 69.
[682] Constitutional History, i., 272.
[683] Cited in Salt Arch. Soc. Trans., vi., pt. i., 258.
[684] Patent Rolls, 22 Edward iii., cited by Mazzinghi, p. 80.
[685] Salt Arch. Soc. Trans., viii., 122. It was undoubtedly at this time that the oblong stone keep on the motte, which is described in an escheat of Henry VIII.’s reign, was built.
[686] Salt Arch. Coll., viii., 14.
[687] Speed’s Theatre of Britain; Leland, Itin., vii., 26.
[688] The Stafford escheat of Henry VIII.’s reign, which describes the town, also makes no mention of any castle in the town. Mazzinghi, p. 105.
[689] Salt Arch. Trans., viii., 231. The mistake may possibly have arisen from the fact that a fine castellated gateway, shown in W. Smith’s map (Description of England), stood on the south-west wall of the town, close to the spot where Speed’s map marks a Castle Hill.
[690] There must be some error in the first statement of the Stafford revenue in Domesday, which says that the king and earl have 7l. between them, as it is contradicted by the later statement. D. B., i., 246a and 247b, 2.
[691] There were 141 mansiones, T. R. E., “et modo totidem sunt præter 5 quæ propter operationem castelli sunt wastæ.” From a passage in the Domesday of Nottingham it would seem that a mansio was a group of houses.
[692] Gervase of Canterbury, i., 156, R. S.
[693] Peck’s Antiquarian Annals of Stamford; he gives the charter, p. 17.
[694] Cited in Nevinson’s “Notes on the History of Stamford,” Journ. Brit. Arch. Ass., xxxv.
[695] “T. R. E. dabat Stanford 15l.; modo dat ad firmam 50l. De omni consuetudine regis modo dat 28l.”
[696] “Ibi habet Helgot castellum, et 2 carucas in dominio, et 4 servos, et 3 villanos, et 3 bordarios, et 1 Francigenam cum 3½ carucis. Ibi ecclesia et presbyter. T. R. E. valebat 18 solidos; modo 25 solidos. Wastam invenit.” D. B., i., 258b. There are some fragments of Norman work in the church, which is chiefly Early English, doubtless of the same date as the mural tower of the castle.
[697] Stapleton’s Introduction to Rot. Scac. Normanniæ, vol. ii.
[698] It used to be supposed that herring-bone work was a Saxon sign, and this furnished an additional claim to the Saxon origin of this castle; but it is now known that herring-bone work only occurs in the later Saxon work, and is far more common in Norman. See [note], p. 136.
[700] Ordericus, xi., ch. iii.
[701] There are three entries for the works of the turris at Tickhill in the Pipe Rolls of 1178 and 1179, amounting to £123, 12s. 5d.
[702] Pipe Roll, 31 Henry I., 33, 36. Expenses for work at the wall of the castle are mentioned. Ordericus says that Robert Belesme fortified the castle of Blythe at the time of his rebellion in 1101, but he also says that it had belonged to Roger de Busli. Hist. Ecc., iv., 33; xi., 3.
[703] Vicar’s Parliamentary Chronicle, quoted by Hunter, South Yorks, ii., 235.
[704] D. B., i., 319a.
[705] A.-S. C. in anno.
[706] D. B., i., 76.
[707] M. A., iv., 630.
[708] Leland is responsible for this last statement.
[709] D. B., i., 108b.
[710] “Egressus Lundoniæ rex dies aliquot in propinquo loco Bercingio morabatur, dum firmamenta quædam in urbe contra mobilitatem ingentis et feri populi perficerentur.” P. 165. Ordericus is quoting from William of Poitiers. There was formerly a Roman camp at Barking, and the motte which William hastily threw up on its rampart to defend his sojourn still remains. See Victoria History of Essex.
[711] Mr Harold Sands suggests to me that the first fortification may simply have been a bank and palisade across the angle of the Roman wall, with perhaps a wooden keep, and that the great fire in London in 1077 determined William to build a stone keep.
[712] Hearne’s Textus Roffensis, 212. “Idem Gundulfus, ex precepto Regis Willielmi Magni, præesset operi magnæ turris Londoniæ.”
[713] The building of stone keeps was generally spread over several years, as we learn from the Pipe Rolls. Richard I. built his celebrated keep of Chateau Gaillard in one year, but he himself regarded this as an architectural feat. “Estne bella, filia mea de uno anno,” he said in delight.
[714] A.-S. C. in anno.
[715] Round’s History of Colchester, ch. iv.
[716] The keep of Norwich Castle measures 100 × 95 feet; Middleham, 100 × 80; Dover, 95 × 90. These are the largest existing keeps in England, next to the Tower and Colchester. The destroyed keep of Duffield measured 99 × 93 feet; that of Bristol is believed to have been 110 × 95.
[717] The reader will find little help for the structural history of the Tower in most of the works which call themselves Histories of the Tower of London. The plan of these works generally is to skim over the structural history as quickly as possible, perhaps with the help of a few passages from Clark, and to get on to the history of the prisoners in the Tower. For the description in the text, the writer is greatly indebted to Mr Harold Sands, F.S.A., who has made a careful study of the Tower, and whose monograph upon it, it is hoped, will shortly appear.
[719] Many of the larger keeps contain rooms quite spacious enough to have served as banqueting halls, and it is a point of some difficulty whether they were built to be used as such. But as late as the 14th century, Piers Ploughman rebukes the new custom which was growing up of the noble and his family taking their meals in private, and leaving the hall to their retainers. Every castle seems to have had a hall in the bailey.
[720] Mr Sands says the main floors are not of too great a span to carry any ordinary weight.
[721] The keep of Pevensey Castle, the basement of which has been recently uncovered, has no less than four apsidal projections, one of which rests on the solid base of a Roman mural tower. But this keep is quite an exceptional building. See Excavations at Pevensey, Second Report, by H. Sands.
[722] Mr Sands has conjectured that the third floor may be an addition, and that the second storey was originally open up to the roof and not communicating with the mural passage except by stairs. This was actually the case at Bamborough keep, and at Newcastle and Rochester the mural gallery opens into the upper part of the second storey by inner windows.
[723] Until the end of the 12th century the roofs of keeps were gabled and not flat, but probably there was usually a parapet walk for sentinels or archers.
[724] Parts of these walls, running N. and S. have been found very near the E. side of the Tower. No trace of the Roman wall has been found S. of the Tower, but in Lower Thames Street lines have been found which, if produced, would lead straight to the S. wall of the inner bailey. Communicated by Mr Harold Sands.
[725] I have to thank Mr Harold Sands for kindly revising this account of the Tower.
[726] “Ibi habet comes unum castrum et mercatum, reddentes 101s.” D. B., i., 122.
[727] It must be remembered that round arches, in castle architecture, are by no means a certain sign of date. Of course the first castle on this motte must have been of wood.
[728] Ord. Vit., ii., 222 (Prévost).
[729] “Henricus de Ferrers habet castellum de Toteberie. In burgo circa castellum sunt 42 homines de mercato suo tantum viventes.” D. B., i., 248b.
[730] Shaw’s History of Staffordshire, i., 49.
[731] Quoted in Beauties of England and Wales, Staffordshire, p. 1129.
[732] Diceto, i., 384. The castle was then besieged on Henry’s behalf by the vassal prince of South Wales, the Lord Rhys.
[733] The foundation charter is in Mon. Ang., iii., 393.
[734] A.-S. C.
[735] William of Poitiers calls it an oppidum, [p. 141].
[736] Hedges, History of Wallingford.
[737] “The Towne of Portsmuth is murid from the Est Tower a forowgh lenght with a Mudde Waulle armid with Tymbre.” Itin., iii., 113.
[738] “In burgo de Walingeford habuit Rex Edwardus 8 virgatas terræ; et in his erant 276 hagæ reddentes 11 libras de gablo.... Pro castello sunt 8 destructæ.” D. B., i., 56. If we divide these 276 haughs by the 114 acres enclosed by the town rampart, we get an average of about 1 rood 26 perches for each haugh; multiply this by 8 (the number destroyed for the castle) and we get an area of 3 acres, which is about the average area of an early Norman castle.
[739] Hedges, History of Wallingford, i., 139.
[740] Camden speaks of the motte as being in the middle of the castle, but this is a mistake.
[741] Such is the account in Hedges’ History of Wallingford, p. 139, but it sounds odd. It is to be inferred from the same source that the fragment of a round building which stands on the top of the motte must be modern; it is thick enough to be ancient.
[742] Close Rolls, i., anno 1223.
[743] D. B., i., 56.
[744] “Abbas de Couentreu habet 36 masuras, et 4 sunt wastæ propter situm castelli.” D. B., i., 238a.
[745] “Hæ masuræ pertinent ad terras quas ipsi barones tenent extra burgum, et ibi appreciatæ sunt.” D. B., i., 238.
[746] Maitland, Domesday Book and Beyond, p. 189.
[747] Ordericus, p. 184. “Rex itaque castellum apud Guarevicum condidit, et Henrico Rogerii de Bello Monte filio ad servandum tradidit.” Mr Freeman remarks that no authentic records connect Thurkil of Warwick with Warwick Castle. N. C., iv., 781.
[748] N. C., iv., 190.
[749] In operatione unius domus in mota de Warwick et unius bretaschie 5l. 7s. 11d. Pipe Rolls, 20 Henry II. As domus is a word very commonly used for a keep, it is probable this expenditure refers to a wooden keep.
[750] From information received from Mr Harold Sands. There appears to be no foundation whatever for the curious ground plan given by Parker.
[752] “Willelmus comes fecit illud castellum in wasta terra quæ vocatur Mereston.” D. B., i., 183.
[753] Mon. Ang., vi., 349.
[754] This keep rests on a broad extension of the earthen rampart, similar to what is still to be seen in the mottes of Devizes, Burton-in-Lonsdale, and William Hill, Middleham.
[755] Ordericus says: “Intra mœnia Guentæ, opibus et munimine nobilis urbis et mari contiguæ, validam arcem construxit, ibique Willelmum Osberni filium in exercitu suo precipuum reliquit.” II., 166. The intra mœnia is not to be taken literally, any more than the mari contiguæ. It is strange that Mr Freeman should have mistaken Guenta for Norwich, since under 1067 Ordericus translates the Winchester of the A.-S. C. by Guenta.
[756] “De isto manerio testatur comitatus quod injuste accepit [abbas] pro excambio domus regis, quia domus erat regis.” D. B., i., 43a, 1.
[757] Ibid., i., 43a, 2.
[758] “Sicut rex Willielmus pater meus ei dedit in excambium pro terra illa in qua ædificavit aulam suam in urbe Winton.” Mon. Ang., ii., 444.
[759] “Pars erat in dominio et pars de dominio abbatis; hoc totum est post occupatum in domo regis.” P. 534. This passage throws light on the fraud of the abbot of Hyde, referred to above.
[760] “Extra portam de Vuest ... ibi juxta fuit quidam vicus; fuit diffactus quando rex fecit facere suum fossatum.” P. 535.
[761] Arch. Inst., Winchester volume, p. 51.
[762] It should also be said that the word domus is frequently used for a keep in chronicles and ancient documents of the 11th and 12th centuries.
[763] The line of the more ancient roof gable can be traced in the north wall, and there is a vestige of a Norman doorway in the east wall.
[764] History of Winchester, ii., 210.
[765] Henry of Blois, Bishop of Winchester and brother of King Stephen, pulled down the royal palace close to the cathedral, which presumably was the old Saxon palace, and used the materials to build Wolvesey Castle. See Malmesbury, “De Vitis Sex Episcoporum,” Anglia Sacra, ii., 421. He could hardly have dared to do this if the palace had still been used by the Norman kings.
[766] History of Winchester, ii., 210. See [Fig. 37].
[767] Ibid., p. 195. It is difficult, now that the area has been levelled, to say exactly where this motte stood. Woodward says that the keep stood in the N.E. corner; but he probably alludes to a mural tower whose foundations can still be seen, near the County Hall. History of Hampshire, i., 295-304.
[768] Turner, History of Domestic Architecture. He cites from the Liberate Roll, 35 Henry II., an order for the repair of the ditch between the great tower and the bailey.
[769] “Radulfus filius Seifrid tenet de rege Clivor. Heraldus comes tenuit. Tunc se defendebat pro 5 hidis, modo pro 4½ hidis, et castellum de Windesores est in dimidia hida.” D. B., i., 62b. The Abingdon History also mentions the foundation of Windsor Castle and gives some interesting details about castle guard. “Tunc Walingaforde et Oxenforde et Wildesore, cæterisque locis, castella pro regno servando compacta. Unde huic abbatiæ militum excubias apud ipsum Wildesore oppidum habendas regis imperio jussum.” II., 3, R. S.
[770] Leland, iv., 1, 37. See also Tighe’s Annals of Windsor, pp. 1-6. Until recently there was a farmhouse surrounded by a moat at Old Windsor, which was believed to mark the site of Edward’s regia domus.
[771] Edward’s grant of Windsor to Westminster is in Cod. Dip., iv., 227. Domesday does not mention the rights of the church, but says the manor of Windsor was held of the crown T. R. E. and T. R. W. Camden gives William’s charter of exchange with the convent of Westminster. Britannia, i., 151.
[772] This is stated in the charter given by Camden.
[773] In 1 virgata terræ quam Willelmus fil. Walteri habet in escambio pro terra sua quæ capta est ad burgum. P. 721.
[774] The Red Book of the Exchequer, which contains an abstract of the missing Pipe Roll of 1 Henry II., has an entry of 12s. paid to Richard de Clifwar for the exchange of his land, and regular payments are made later. There was another enlargement of the bailey in Henry III.’s reign, but the second bailey was then existing. See Close Rolls, i., 531b.
[775] “In operatione muri circa castellum 11l. 10s. 4d. Summa denariorum quos idem Ricardus [de Luci] misit in operatione predicta de ballia 128l. 9s.” Pipe Roll, 20 Henry II., p. 116.
[776] Tighe’s Annals of Windsor, p. 21.
[777] There is a singular entry in the Pipe Roll of 7 Richard I., “pro fossato prosternando quod fuit inter motam et domos regis,” clearly the ditch between the motte and the bailey. Mr Hope informs me that this can only refer to the northern part of the ditch, as the eastern portion was only filled up in 1824. Mr Hope thinks that the castle area has always included the lower bailey. I regret that Mr Hope’s History of Windsor Castle did not appear in time to be used in this work.
[778] Fœdera, vol. i.
[779] Pipe Rolls, 30 Henry II.
[780] D. B., i., 62b, 2; 56b, 2.
[781] Roger of Wendover, in anno.
[782] Walter and Cradock’s History of Wisbeach, pp. 270-278.
[783] Morris’ Troubles of our Catholic Forefathers, p. 223. This keep was one built by Bishop Morton in 1471.
[784] Birch’s Cartularium, ii., 222.
[785] Ursus erat vicecomes Wigorniæ a rege constitutus, qui in ipsis pœne faucis monachorum castellum construxit, adeo ut fossatum cœmiterii partem decideret. Gesta Pontif., p. 253.
[786] “Castrum Wigorniæ nobis redditum est, tanquam jus noster, usquam motam turris.” Annales de Wigornia, R. S., p. 407. “Rex Johanni Marescallo salutem: Mandamus vobis quod sine dilatione faciatis habere venerabili patri nostro domino Wigorniensi episcopo ballium castri nostri Wigorniæ, quod est jus ecclesiæ suæ; retenta ad opus nostrum mota ejusdem castri.” Patent Rolls, 1 Henry III., p. 46.
[787] Annales de Wigornia, p. 375.
[788] “In reparatione turris Wigorniæ 8l.” Red Book of Exchequer, ii., 656.
[789] “Precipimus tibi quod per visum liberorum et legalium hominum facias parari portam castri Wigorniæ, quæ nunc est lignea, lapideam, et bonam et pulchram.” Rot. de Liberate, p. 93, 1204.
[790] Green’s History of Worcester, i., 19.
[791] Allies’ Antiquities of Worcestershire, p. 15. His words strictly apply to “the lofty mound called the keep, with its ditches, etc.,” but probably the whole area was not more than 4 acres.
[792] See the documents cited by Mr Round in his Geoffrey de Mandeville, [Appendix O], and the Pipe Rolls of 1173. “In reparatione Mote et Gaiole de Wirecestra, £35, 13s. 8d.”
[793] Gentleman’s Magazine, i., 36, 1834. See Haverfield, “Romano-British Worcester,” Victoria County History of Worcestershire, vol. i.
[794] D. B., i., 172.
[795] It is needless to remark that baile is the Norman word for an enclosure or courtyard; Low Latin ballia; sometimes believed to be derived from baculus, a stick.
[796] Ordericus, ii., 188 (edition Prévost).
[797] Norman Conquest, iv., 270. Mr Freeman has worked out the course of events connected with the building and destruction of the castles with his usual lucidity. But he never grasped the real significance of mottes, though he emphatically maintained that the native English did not build castles.
[798] “Ethelstanus Castrum quod olim Dani in Eboraco obfirmaverant ad solum diruit, ne esset quo se tutari perfidia posset.” Gesta Regum, ii., 134.
[799] Widdrington, Analecta Eboracensia, p. 120. It was this suburb which Alan, Earl of Richmond gave to the Abbey of St Mary at York, which he had founded. “Ecclesiam sancti Olavii in quâ capud abbatiæ in honorem sanctæ Mariæ melius constitutum est, et burgum in quo ecclesia sita est.” Mon. Ang., iii., 547. For the addition of new boroughs to old ones see ante, [p. 174], under Norwich. Although Athelstan destroyed the fortifications of this borough, they were evidently renewed when the Danish earls took up their residence there, for when Earl Alan persuaded the monks from Whitby to settle there one inducement which he offered was the fortification of the site, “loci munitionem.” Mon. Ang., iii., 545.
[800] In Eboraco civitate T. R. E. præter scyram archiepiscopi fuerunt 6 scyræ; una ex his est wasta in castellis. D. B., i., 298.
[801] Notes on Clifford’s Tower, by George Benson and H. Platnauer, published by the York Philosophical Society.
[802] “Thone castel tobræcon and towurpan.” A.-S. C. See Freeman, N. C., iv., 270.
[803] “In operatione turris de Euerwick, 15l. 7s. 3d.” Pipe Roll, 19 Henry II., vol. xix., 2. We assume that William’s second keep lasted till Henry II.’s reign.
[804] Benedict of Peterborough, ii., 107.
[805] “In operatione castri 28l. 13s. 9d.” Pipe Roll, 3 Richard I. Under the year 1193, after relating the tragedy of the Jews at York Castle, Hoveden says: “Deinde idem cancellarius [William de Longchamp] tradidit Osberto de Lunchamp, fratri suo, comitatum Eboracensem in custodia, et precepit firmari castellum in veteri castellario quod Rex Willelmus Rufus ibi construxerat.” III., 34, R. S. The expression vetus castellarium would lead us to think of the Old Baile, which certainly had this name from an early period; and Hoveden, being a Yorkshireman as well as a very accurate writer, was probably aware of the difference between the two castles. But if he meant the Old Baile, then both the castles were restored at about the same time. “Rufus” must be a slip, unless there was some rebuilding in Rufus’ reign of which we do not know.
[806] Messrs Benson and Platnauer are of the former opinion. “The existence of a second layer of timber seems to show that the fortification destroyed was rebuilt in wood.” Notes on Clifford’s Tower, p. 2.
[807] “Pro mairemio castri Ebor. prostrato per ventum colligendo, 2s.” Pipe Roll, 19 Henry III. It is, of course, a conjecture that this accident happened to the keep; but the keep would be the part most exposed to the wind, and the scattering of the timber, so that it had to be collected, is just what would happen if a timber structure were blown off a motte.
[808] As the writer was the first to publish this statement, it will be well to give the evidence on which it rests. The keep of York is clearly Early English in style, and of an early phase of the style. It is, however, evident to every one who has carefully compared our dated keeps, that castle architecture always lags behind church architecture in style-development, and must be judged by different standards. We should therefore be prepared to find this and most other keeps to be of later date than their architecture would suggest. Moreover, the expenditure entered to York Castle in the reigns of Henry II., Richard I., and John, is quite insufficient to cover the cost of a stone keep. The Pipe Rolls of Henry III.’s reign decide the matter, as they show the sums which he expended annually on this castle. It is true they never mention the turris, but always the castrum; we must also admit that the turris and castrum are often distinguished in the writs, even as late as Edward III.’s reign. (Close Rolls, 1334.) On the other hand extensive acquaintance with the Pipe Rolls proves that though the mediæval scribe may have an occasional fit of accuracy, he is generally very loose in his use of words, and his distinctions must never be pressed. Take, for instance, the case of Orford, where the word used in the Pipe Rolls is always castellum, but it certainly refers to the keep, as there are no other buildings at Orford. Other instances might be given in which the word castellum clearly applies to the keep. It should be mentioned that in 1204 John gave an order for stone for the castle (Close Rolls, i., 4b), but the amounts on the bill for it in the Pipe Rolls show that it was not used for any extensive building operations.
[809] “Mandatum est Galterio de Cumpton forestario de Gauteris quod ad pontem et domos castri Eboraci et breccas palicii ejusdem castri reparandos et emendandos Vicecomitem Eboraci mæremium habere faciat in foresta de Gauteris per visum, etc.” Close Rolls, ii., 61b.
[810] Order to expend up to 6 marks in repairing the wooden peel about the keep of York Castle, which peel is now fallen down. Cal. of Close Rolls, 17 Edward II., 25.
[811] Cal. of Close Rolls, 1313-1318, 262. Mota is wrongly translated moat.
[812] See Mr Cooper’s York: The Story of its Walls and Castles. During Messrs Benson and Platnauer’s excavations, a prehistoric crouching burial was found in the ground below the motte, 4 feet 6 inches under the present level. This raises the question whether William utilised an existing prehistoric barrow for the nucleus of his motte.
[813] D. B., i., 298a.
[814] York: The Story of its Walls and Castles, by T. P. Cooper, p. 222.
[815] See the passage from Hoveden already quoted, ante, [p. 245].
[816] Drake’s Eboracum, App. xliv.
[817] See Mr Cooper’s York: The Story of its Walls and Castles, which contains a mass of new material from documentary sources, and sheds quite unexpected light on the history of the York fortifications. I am indebted to Mr Cooper’s courtesy for some of the extracts cited above relating to York Castle.
[818] Cooper’s York, chapters ii. and iv. 100l. was spent by the sheriff in fortifying the walls of York in the sixth year of Henry III. After this there are repeated grants for murage in the same and the following reign. There are some Early English buttresses in the walls, but the majority are later. No part of the walls contains Norman work.
[819] The details of this evidence, which consist mainly in (1) a structural difference in the extended rampart; (2) a subsidence in the ground marking the old line of the city ditch, will be found in Mr Cooper’s work, p. 224.
[820] “Locum in Eboraco qui dicitur Vetus Ballium, primo spissis et longis 18 pedum tabulis, secundo lapideo muro fortiter includebat.” T. Stubbs, in Raine’s Historians of the Church of York, ii., 417, R. S.
[821] “The plotte of this castelle is now caullid the Olde Baile, and the area and diches of it do manifestley appere.” Itin., i., 60.
[822] See the plan in Mr Cooper’s York, p. 217.
[823] “In the Wales of the Laws, the social system is tribal.” Owen Edwards, Wales, p. 39.
[824] Vinogradoff, Growth of the Manor, pp. 15-16.
[825] Pennant’s Tour in Wales, Rhys’ edition, ii., 234.
[826] Ancient Laws and Institutes of Wales, pp. 238, 94. The MS. of the Leges Wallicæ is not earlier than the 13th century. The other editions of the Laws are even later. See Wade Evans, Welsh Mediæval Law, for the most recent criticism of the Laws of Howel Dda.
[827] The Leges Wallicæ say: “Villani regis debent facere novem domos ad opus regis; scilicet, aulam, cameram, coquinam, penu (capellam), stabulum, kynorty (stabulum canum), horreum, odyn (siccarium) et latrinam.” P. 791.
[828] The word Din or Dinas, so often used for a fort in Wales, is cognate with the German Zaun, Anglo-Saxon tun, and means a fenced place. Neither it nor the Irish form dun have any connection with the Anglo-Saxon dun, a hill. See J. E. Lloyd, Welsh Place-names, “Y Cymmrodor,” xi., 24.
[829] It is doubtful whether Deheubarth ever included the small independent states of Gwent, Brecknock, and Glamorgan.
[830] “Wales and the Coming of the Normans,” Cymmrodorion Trans., 1899.
[831] There is an earthwork near Portskewet, a semicircular cliff camp with three ramparts and two ditches. It is scarcely likely that this can be Harold’s work, as Roman bricks are said to have been found there. Willet’s Monmouthshire, p. 244. Athelstan had made the Wye the frontier of Wales. Malmesbury, ii., 134.
[832] See A.-S. C., anno 1097, and compare the entry for 1096 with the account in the Brut for 1093, which shows that the Norman castles had been restored, after being for the most part demolished by the Welsh.
[833] The Brut y Tywysogion, or Story of the Princes, exists in no MS. older than the 14th century. It and the Annales Cambriæ have been disgracefully edited for the Rolls Series, and the topographical student will find no help from these editions. See Mr Phillimore’s criticism of them, in Y Cymmrodor, vol. xi. The Aberpergwm MS. of the Brut, known also as the Gwentian Chronicle, has been printed in the Archæologia Cambrensis for 1864; it contains a great deal of additional information, but as Mr Phillimore observes, so much of it is forgery that none of it can be trusted when unsupported.
[834] The barbarity on both sides was frightful, but in the case of the Welsh, it was often their own countrymen, and even near relations, who were the victims. And so little patriotism existed then in Wales that the Normans could always find allies amongst some of the Welsh chieftains. Patriotism, however, is a virtue of more recent growth than the 11th century.
[835] There is, however, no contemporary evidence for the existence of the Marcher lordships before the end of the 12th century. See Duckett “On the Marches of Wales,” Arch. Camb., 1881.
[836] The districts of Cyfeiliog and Arwystli, in the centre of Wales, were also reckoned in Gwynedd.
[837] “Wales and the Coming of the Normans,” Cymmrodorion Trans., 1899.
[838] In the descriptions of castles in this chapter, those which have not been specially visited for this work are marked with an asterisk. Those which have been visited by others than the writer are marked with initials: D. H. M. being Mr D. H. Montgomerie, F.S.A.; B. T. S., Mr Basil T. Stallybrass; and H. W., the Rev. Herbert White, M.A. This plan will be followed in the three succeeding chapters.
[839] “Hugo comes tenet de rege Roelent (Rhuddlan). Ibi T. R. E. jacebat Englefield, et tota erat wasta. Edwinus comes tenebat. Quando Hugo comes recipit similiter erat wasta. Modo habet in dominio medietatem castelli quod Roelent vocatur, et caput est hujus terræ.... Robertus de Roelent tenet de Hugone comite medietatem ejusdem castelli et burgi, in quo habet ipse Robertus 10 burgenses et medietatem ecclesiæ. Ibi est novus burgus et in eo 10 burgenses.... In ipso manerio est factum noviter castellum similiter Roeland appellatum.” D. B., i., 269a, 1.
[840] Ayloffe’s Rotuli Walliæ, p. 75. “De providendo indempnitati magistri Ricardi Bernard, Personæ Ecclesiæ de Rothelan’, in recompensionem terræ suæ occupatæ ad placeam castri de Rothelan’ elargandam.”
[841] Tut or Toot Hill means “look-out” hill; the name is not unfrequently given to abandoned mottes. The word is still used locally. Cf. Christison, Early Fortifications in Scotland, p. 16.
[842] Such presentations of abandoned castle sites, and of old wooden castles, to the church, were not uncommon. We have seen how the site of Montacute Castle was given to the Cluniac monks (ante, [p. 170]). Thicket Priory, in Yorkshire, occupied the site of the castle of Wheldrake; and William de Albini gave the site and materials of the old castle of Buckenham, in Norfolk, to the new castle which he founded there. The materials, but not the site, of the wooden castle of Montferrand were given in Stephen’s reign to Meaux Abbey, and served to build some of the monastic offices. Chron. de Melsa, i., 106.
[843] “Fines suos dilatavit, et in monte Dagannoth, qui mari contiguus est, fortissimum castellum condidit.” Ordericus, iii., 284 (edition Prévost). The verb condere is never used except for a new foundation.
[844] The Brut says that in the year 823 the Saxons destroyed the Castle of Deganwy. This is one of the only two instances in which the word castell is used in this Welsh chronicle before the coming of the Normans. As the MS. is not earlier than the 14th century it would be idle to claim this as a proof of the existence of a castle at this period. Castell, in Welsh, is believed to have come straight from the Latin, and was applied to any kind of fortress. Lloyd, Welsh Place-names, “Y Cymmrodor,” xi., 28.
[845] The “new castle of Aberconwy” mentioned by the Brut in 1211, undoubtedly means this new stone castle built by the earl at Deganwy, as the castle of Conway did not then exist.
[846] See Pennant, ii., 151; and Arch. Camb., 1891, p. 321.
[847] Brut of Tywysogion, 1145.
[848] Published with a Latin translation in Arch. Camb., 1866. “He built castles in various places, after the manner of the French, in order that he might better hold the country.”
[849] The Brut also mentions the castle of Aberlleinog, and says it was built in 1096; rebuilt would have been more correct, as the “Life of Griffith ap Cynan” shows that it was built by the Earl of Chester, and burnt by Griffith, before the expedition of 1096 (really 1098), when Hugh, Earl of Shrewsbury, met with his death on the shore near this castle, from an arrow shot by King Magnus Barefoot, who came to the help of the Welsh.
[850] Mr Hartshorne in his paper on Carnarvon Castle (Arch. Journ., vii.) cites a document stating that a wall 18 perches long had been begun round the moat [possibly motam; original not given]. He also cites from the Pipe Rolls an item for wages to carriers of earth dug out of the castle.
[851] This ruined wall runs in a straight line through the wood on the ridge to the east of the town; at one place it turns at right angles; at the back of the golf pavilion is a portion still erect, showing that it was a dry built wall of very ordinary character.
[852] Roman masonry has been exposed in the bank of the station.
[853] Life of Griffith ap Cynan; Brut, 1111.
[854] Arch. Camb., iv., series 296 and 911.
[855] The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle dates this expedition in 1114, and says that Henry caused castles to be built in Wales. The Brut mentions the large tribute, 1111.
[856] Brut, 1149. Madoc ap Meredith, with the assistance of Ranulf, Earl of Chester, prepared to rise against Owen Gwynedd, son of Griffith ap Cynan.
[857] D. B., i., 255a. Professor Lloyd says, “Maelor Saesneg, Cydewain, Ceri, and Arwystli came under Norman authority, and paid renders of money or kine in token of subjection.” “Wales and the Coming of the Normans,” Cymmrodor. Trans., 1899.
[858] Ibid.
[859] See [page 130].
[860] Brut, under 1107. The castle is called Dingeraint by this chronicler.
[861] “Ipse comes construxit castrum Muntgumeri vocatum.” D. B., i., 254.
[862] Montgomery Collections, x., 56.
[863] Close Rolls, i., 558b.
[864] “Firmiter precipimus omnibus illis qui motas habent in valle de Muntgumeri quod sine dilatione motas suas bonis bretaschiis firmari faciant ad securitatem et defensionem suam et partium illarum.” Close Rolls, ii., 42.
[865] Mr Davies Pryce has suggested that the Hen Domen, a very perfect motte and bailey within a mile of the present castle of Montgomery was the original castle of Montgomery, and that the one built by Henry III. was on a new site. This of course is quite possible, but I do not see that there is sufficient evidence for it. See Eng. Hist. Rev., xx., 709.
[866] Brut y Tywysogion.
[867] Itin., vii., 16.
[868] Pipe Rolls, 1158-1164. It should be noted that the Brut does not claim the battle of Crogen as a Welsh victory.
[869] Lyttleton’s History of Henry II.
[870] Pennant thought he saw vestiges of a castle “in the foundations of a wall opposite the ruins” [of the abbey]; but his accuracy is not unimpeachable.
[871] Pipe Rolls, 1211-1213. “For the money expended in rescuing the castles of Haliwell and Madrael, £100.”
[872] Itin., p. 67. Toulmin Smith’s edition of Welsh portion.
[873] D. B., i., 255a.
[874] Life of Griffith.
[875] Pipe Roll, 1159-1160. £4, 3s. 4d. paid to Roger de Powys “ad custodiam castelli de Dernio”; “In munitione turris de Dermant £6, 4s. 0d.” It cannot be doubted that these two names mean the same place.
[876] Arch. Camb., iv., 1887.
[877] At the time of the Survey the manor of Gresford (Gretford) was divided between Hugh, Osbern, and Rainald. Osbern had 6½ hides and a mill grinding the corn of his court (curiæ suæ). This probably is a reference to this castle. D. B., i., 268. It was waste T. R. E. but is now worth £3, 5s. 0d.
[878] “On the Town of Holt,” by A. N. Palmer, Arch. Camb., 1907.
[879] Beauties of England and Wales, North Wales, p. 589. I am glad to find that Mr Palmer, in the new edition of his Ancient Tenures of Land in the Marches of Wales, confirms the identifications which I have made of these two last castles, pp. 108, 116, 118.
[880] Arch. Camb., 5th ser., iv., 352. Camden’s statement that this castle was founded in Edward I.’s reign shows that he was unacquainted with the Pipe Rolls.
[881] Pipe Rolls, 1164-1165, and 1167-1168.
[882] Pipe Rolls, 1212-1213.
[883] “Sur l’ewe de Keyroc,” History of Fulk Fitz Warine, edited by T. Wright for Warton Club.
[884] Victoria County History of Lancashire, i., 369.
[885] England under the Normans and Angevins.
[886] “Ad recutienda castella de Haliwell et Madrael £100.” Pipe Rolls, 1212-1213.
[887] Wade Evans, Welsh Mediæval Law, vol. xii.
[888] It has in fact every appearance of a Roman camp.
[889] Brut, 1211.
[890] The castle of Hawarden, which is only about 2¼ miles from that of Euloe, is not mentioned in any records before 1215; but it is believed to have been a castle of the Norman lords of Mold. It also is on a motte.
[891] I am indebted for this identification to the kindness of Mr A. N. Palmer of Wrexham.
[892] D. B., i., 254. The manor is called Gal. It had been waste T. R. E., but was now worth 40s.
[893] Pipe Roll (unpublished), 1212-1213.
[894] Whereas there is no rock in the ditch of the neighbouring motte of Tomen y Rhodwydd. Pennant (and others following him) most inaccurately describe Tomen y Rhodwydd as two artificial mounts, whereas there is only one, with the usual embanked court. See [Appendix K].
[895] “The Maer dref [which Vardra represents] may be described as the home farm of the chieftain.” Rhys and Brynmor Jones, The Welsh People, p. 401.
[896] Ordericus, ii., 218, 219 (edition Prévost).
[897] Brut y Tywysogion, 1091.
[898] Brut, 1071. “The French ravage Ceredigion (Cardigan) and Dyfed”; 1072, “The French devastated Ceredigion a second time.”
[899] A.-S. C., 1081. “This year the king led an army into Wales, and there he set free many hundred persons”—doubtless, as Mr Freeman remarks, captives taken previously by the Welsh. The Brut treats this expedition as merely a pilgrimage to St David’s!
[900] “Then the French came into Dyfed and Ceredigion, which they have still retained, and fortified the castles, and seized upon all the land of the Britons.” Brut, 1091 = 1093.
[901] Powell’s History of Wales professes to be founded on that of Caradoc, a Welsh monk of the 12th century; but it is impossible to say how much of it is Caradoc, and how much Powell, or Wynne, his augmentor.
[902] Brut, 1107.
[903] “In the Brut, Ystrad Towy does not only mean the vale of Towy, but a very large district, embracing most of Carmarthenshire and part of Glamorganshire.” Welsh Historical Documents, by Egerton Phillimore, in Cymmrodor, vol. xi.
[904] Brut, 1092.
[905] Lloyd, “Wales and the Coming of the Normans,” Cymmrodor. Trans., 1899: refers to Marchegay, Chartes du Prieurie de Monmouth.
[906] Brut, 1143.
[907] The date given is 1080, but as the dates in the Brut at this period are uniformly two years too early, we alter them accordingly throughout this chapter.
[908] Now more often called the Aberpergwm Brut, from the place where the MS. is preserved.
[909] See Freeman, Norman Conquest, v., 820; William Rufus, ii., 79; and Prof. Tout, in Y Cymmerodor, ix., 208. For this reason we do not use the list of castles given in this chronicle, but confine ourselves to those mentioned in the more trustworthy Brut y Tywysogion.
[910] The same MS. says, under the year 1099, “Harry Beaumont came to Gower, against the sons of Caradog ap Jestin, and won many of their lands, and built the castle of Abertawy (Swansea) and the castle of Aberllychor (Loughor), and the castle of Llanrhidian (Weobley), and the castle of Penrhys (Penrice), and established himself there, and brought Saxons from Somerset there, where they obtained lands; and the greatest usurpation of all the Frenchmen was his in Gower.”
[911] “Primus hoc castrum Arnulphus de Mongumeri sub Anglorum rege Henrico primo ex virgis et cespite, tenue satis et exile construxit.” Itin. Cambriæ, R. S., 89.
[912] Quoted from Duchesne in Mon. Ang., vol. vi.
[913] See Mr Cobbe’s paper on Pembroke Castle in Arch. Camb., 1883, where reasons are given for thinking that the present ward was originally, and even up to 1300, the whole castle.
[914] A motte-castle of earth and wood was certainly not regarded as “a weak and slender defence” in the time of Giraldus.
[915] Brut y Tywysogion, 1095.
[916] Bridgeman’s Hist. of South Wales, 17.
[917] Arch. Camb., 3rd ser., v., a paper on Newport Castle, in which the writer says that there are two mottes at Llanhyfer, the larger one ditched round. The Ordnance Map only shows one.
[918] Brut y Tywysogion, 1146.
[919] Patent Rolls of Henry III., 255; Fœdera, i., 161.
[920] Brut y Tywysogion, 1192.
[921] Bridgeman says that Narberth was given to Stephen Perrot by Arnulf de Montgomeri, but gives no authority for this statement.
[922] Brut, 1171.
[923] Ibid., 1107. “Earl Gilbert built a castle at Dingeraint, where Earl Roger had before founded a castle.”
[924] The castle of Aberrheiddiol is probably the name of the present castle of Aberystwyth when it was first built, as Lewis Morris says that the river Rheiddiol formerly entered the sea near that point. Quoted by Meyrick, History of Cardigan, p. 488.
[925] Brut, 1107.
[926] Brut, 1113.
[927] Ibid., 1135.
[928] Ibid., 1135, 1157, 1199, 1203, 1207.
[929] Meyrick’s Hist. of Cardigan, p. 293. Dinerth is not the same as Llanrhystyd, though Lewis (Top. Dict. Wales) says it is; the two places have separate mention in Brut, 1157. Mr Clark mentions the motte. M. M. A., i., 115.
[930] Brut, 1135.
[931] Meyrick’s Hist. of Cardigan, p. 232.
[932] Brut, 1157.
[933] Beauties of England and Wales, Cardigan, p. 502.
[934] Brut, under 1113.
[935] In the Rolls edition of the Brut this castle is called Llanstephan, but the context makes it probable that Lampeter is meant; the Annales Cambriæ say “the castle of Stephen.”
[936] Beauties of England and Wales, p. 492.
[937] Brut, 1216.
[938] Arch. Journ., xxviii., 293.
[939] Brut, 1094.
[940] Desc. Camb., i., 10.
[941] Brut, 1094.
[942] Ibid., p. 110. There is a farmhouse called Rhyd y Gors about a mile lower down than Carmarthen, and on the opposite side are some embankments; but I am assured by Mr Spurrell of Carmarthen that these are only river-embankments. Rhyd y Gors means the ford of the bog; there is no ford at this spot, but there was one at Carmarthen.
[943] See Arch. Camb., 1907, pp. 237-8.
[944] See Round’s Ancient Charters, p. 9, Pipe Roll Series, vol. x.
[945] Brut, 1113.
[946] The first mention of the castle of Llanstephan is in the Brut, 1147, if, as has been assumed above, the mention in 1136 refers to Stephen’s castle at Lampeter, as the Annales Cambriæ say.
[947] The motte of Conisburgh in Yorkshire is a very similar case known to the writer; it measures 280 × 150 feet. Such very large mottes could rarely be artificial, but were formed by entrenching and scarping a natural hill.
[948] Brut, 1256. See Arch. Camb., 1907, p. 214, for Col. Morgan’s remarks on this castle.
[949] The name Gueith tineuur is found in the Book of Llandaff, p. 78 (Life of St Dubricius), but it seems doubtful whether this should be taken to prove the existence of some “work” at Dinevor in the 6th century. See Wade-Evans, Welsh Mediæval Law, p. 337-8.
[950] Brut, 1145. “Cadell ap Griffith took the castle of Dinweiler, which had been erected by Earl Gilbert.”
[951] Gwentian Chronicle.
[952] The statement of Donovan (Excursions Through South Wales), that the castle stands on an artificial mount is quite incorrect.
[953] The Rolls edition of the Brut gives the corrupt reading Aber Cavwy for the castle of “Robert the Crook-handed,” but a variant MS. gives Aber Korram, and it is clear from the Gwentian Chronicle and Powell (p. 145) that Abercorran is meant.
[954] Brut, 1152.
[955] See paper by Mr D. C. Evans, Arch. Camb., 1907, p. 224.
[956] The first mention known to the writer is in 1285.
[957] Arch. Camb., 3rd ser., v., 346.
[958] Annales Cambriæ, 1205; Brut, 1207, 1208. The Annales call it the castle of Luchewein.
[959] Beauties of England and Wales, “Caermarthen,” pp. 192, 309.
[960] Mon. Ang., iii., 244.
[961] This motte is mentioned in a charter of Roger, Earl of Hereford, Bernard’s grandson, in which he confirms to the monks of St John “molendinum meum situm super Hodeni sub pede mote castelli.” Arch. Camb., 1883, p. 144.
[962] The dates in the Brut are now one year too early. Under 1209 it says, “Gelart seneschal of Gloucester fortified (cadarnhaaod) the castle of Builth.” We can never be certain whether the word which is translated fortified, whether from the Welsh or from the Latin firmare, means built originally or rebuilt.
[963] Beauties of England and Wales, “Brecknockshire,” p. 153.
[964] Brut, in anno. The Mortimers were the heirs of the De Braoses and the Neufmarchés.
[965] Annales Cambriæ, 1260. This may, however, be merely a figure of speech.
[966] Order to cause Roger Mortimer, so soon as the castle of Built shall be closed with a wall, whereby it will be necessary to remove the bretasches, to have the best bretasche of the king’s gift. Cal. of Close Rolls, Ed. I., i., 527.
[967] See Clark, M. M. A., i., 307.
[968] Round, Ancient Charters, No. 6.
[969] Itin., v., 74.
[970] Arch. Camb., N. S., v., 23-28.
[971] “Wales and the Coming of the Normans,” by Professor Lloyd, in Cymmrodorion Transactions, 1899.
[972] Marchegay, Chartes du Prieurie de Monmouth, cited by Professor Lloyd, as above.
[973] Brut, 1143.
[974] Not to be confounded with the castle of Clun in Shropshire.
[975] Annales Cambriæ and Annales de Margam. See plan in Arch. Camb., 4th ser., vi., 251.
[976] Annales Cambriæ.
[977] Really Ty-yn-yr Bwlch, the house in the pass. Not to be confounded with Tenby in Pembrokeshire.
[978] Cal. of Close Rolls, Ed. II., iii., 415, 643.
[979] See “Cardiff Castle: its Roman Origin,” by John Ward, Archæologia, lvii., 335.
[980] See “Cardiff Castle: its Roman Origin,” by John Ward, Archæologia, lvii., 335.
[981] Mr Clark thought the shell wall on the motte was Norman, and the tower Perp. But the wall of the shell has some undoubtedly Perp. windows. The Gwentian Chronicle says that Robert of Gloucester surrounded the town of Cardiff with a wall, anno 1111.
[982] See Gray’s Buried City of Kenfig, where there are interesting photographs. The remains appear to be those of a shell.
[983] Annales de Margam, 1232.
[984] Gray’s Buried City of Kenfig, pp. 59, 150.
[985] This information is confirmed by Mr Tennant, town clerk of Aberavon.
[986] See Francis’ Neath and its Abbey, where the charter of De Granville is given. It is only preserved in an Inspeximus of 1468.
[987] M. M. A., i., 112.
[988] Ruperra is not quite one mile from the river Rhymney. There is another site which may possibly be that of Castle Remni: Castleton, which is nearly 2 miles from the river, but is on the main road from Cardiff to Newport. “It was formerly a place of strength and was probably built or occupied by the Normans for the purpose of retaining their conquest of Wentlwg. The only remains are a barrow in the garden of Mr Philipps, which is supposed to have been the site of the citadel, and a stone barn, once a chapel.” Coxe’s Monmouthshire, i., 63.
[989] It is right to say that Colonel Morgan in his admirable Survey of East Gower (a model of what an antiquarian survey ought to be) does not connect this mound with the old castle which is mentioned, as well as the new castle, in Cromwell’s Survey of Gower. But even the old castle seems to have been Edwardian (see the plan, p. 85), so it is quite possible there were three successive castles in Swansea.
[990] Brut, 1113.
[991] Morgan’s Survey of East Gower, p. 24.
[992] Colonel Morgan’s Survey of East Gower.
[993] Lewis’s Topographical Dictionary.
[994] The passage of the river Lune in Lancashire is similarly defended by the mottes of Melling and Arkholme.
[995] The dates given are those of the Brut, and probably two years too early.
[996] Meyrick’s History of Cardigan, p. 146.
[997] Meyrick’s History of Cardigan, p. 146.
[998] Lewis’s Topographical Dictionary.
[999] We do not include the castles which the Welsh rebuilt. Thus in 1194 we are told that Rhys built the castle of Kidwelly, which he certainly only rebuilt.
[1000] Malcolm Canmore himself had passed nearly fourteen years in England. Fordun, iv., 45.
[1001] Burton remarks: “To the Lowland Scot, as well as to the Saxon, the Norman was what a clever man, highly educated and trained in the great world of politics, is to the same man who has spent his days in a village.” History of Scotland, i., 353.
[1002] Dr Round has brought to light the significant fact that King David took his chancellor straight from the English chancery, where he had been a clerk. This first chancellor of Scotland was the founder of the great Comyn family. The Ancestor, 10, 108.
[1003] Fordun, Annalia, vol. iv.
[1004] It is tempting to connect the extraordinary preponderance of mottes, as shown by Dr Christison’s map, in the shires which made up ancient Galloway (Wigton, Kirkcudbright, and Dumfries) with the savage resistance offered by Galloway, which may have made it necessary for all the Norman under-tenants to fortify themselves, each in his own motte-castle. It is wiser, however, to delay such speculations until we have the more exact information as to the number of mottes in Scotland, which it is hoped will be furnished when the Royal Commission on Historical Monuments has finished its work. But this work will not be complete unless special attention is paid to the earthworks which now form part of stone castles, and which are too often overlooked, even by antiquaries. The New Statistical Account certainly raises the suspicion that there are many more mottes north of the Forth than are recognised in the map alluded to. In one district we are told that “almost every farm had its knap.” “Forfarshire,” p. 326.
[1005] Cited by Fordun, v., 43.
[1006] Benedict of Peterborough, i., 68, R. S.
[1007] Fordun, v., 26. Bower in one of his interpolations to Fordun’s Annals, tells how a Highlander named Gillescop burnt certain wooden castles (quasdam munitiones ligneas) in Moray. Skene’s Fordun, ii., 435.
[1008] That Fordun should speak of the castra and municipia of Macduff is not surprising, seeing that he wrote in the 14th century, when a noble without a castle was a thing unthinkable.
[1009] Burton actually thought that the Normans built no castles in Scotland in the 12th century. Messrs MacGibbon and Ross remark that there is not one example of civil or military architecture of the 12th century, while there are so many fine specimens of ecclesiastical. Castellated Architecture of Scotland, i., 63. It is just to add that when speaking of the castles of William the Lion, they say: “It is highly probable that these and other castles of the 13th century were of the primeval kind, consisting of palisaded earthen mounds and ditches.” Ibid., iii. 6.
[1010] Mote is the word used in Scotland, as in the north of England, Pembrokeshire, and Ireland, for the Norman motte. As the word is still a living word in Scotland, its original sense has been partly lost, and it seems to be now applied to some defensive works which are not mottes at all. But the true motes of Scotland entirely resemble the mottes of France and England.
[1011] Scottish Review, xxxii., 232.
[1012] Scottish Review, xxxii., 232.
[1013] Ibid., p. 236.
[1014] This list is mainly compiled from Chalmers’ Caledonia, vol. i., book iv., ch. i. The letter C. refers to Dr Christison’s Early Fortifications in Scotland; N., to Mr Neilson’s paper in the Scottish Review, 1898; O.M., to the 25-inch Ordnance Map; G., to the Gazetteer of Scotland. It is a matter of great regret to the writer that she has been unable to do any personal visitation of the Scottish castles, except in the cases of Roxburgh and Jedburgh. It is therefore impossible to be absolutely certain that all the hillocks mentioned in this list are true mottes, or whether all of them still exist.
[1015] Registrum Magni Sigilli, quoted by Christison, p. 19.
[1016] A plan is given by Mr Coles in “the Motes, Forts, and Doons of Kirkcudbright.” Soc. Ant. Scot., 1891-1892.
[1017] M‘Ferlie, Lands and Their Owners in Galloway, ii., 47.
[1018] This description, taken from the Gazetteer, seems clear, but Mr Neilson tells me the site is more probably Woody Castle, which is styled a manor in the 15th century. The N. S. A. says: “There is the site of an ancient castle close to the town, on a mound of considerable height, called the Castle Hill, which is surrounded by a deep moat.” “Dumfries,” p. 383.
[1019] Annals, ii., 196, cited in Douglas’s History of the Border Counties, 173.
[1020] Round, in The Ancestor, 10, 108.
[1021] Dr Christison distinctly marks one on his map, but Mr Coles says there is no trace of one, though the name Marl Mount is preserved. Soc. Ant. Scot., 1892, p. 108.
[1022] See the Aberdeen volume, p. 1092.
[1023] See Grose’s picture, which is confirmed by Dr Ross.
[1024] The name Tom-a-mhoid is derived by some writers from the Gaelic Tom, a tumulus (Welsh Tomen) and moid, a meeting. Is there such a word for a meeting in Gaelic? If there is, it must be derived from Anglo-Saxon mot or gemot. But there is no need to go to Gaelic for this word, as it is clear from the Registrum Magni Sigilli that moit was a common version of mote, and meant a castle hill, the mota or mons castri, as it is often called.
[1025] Chalmers, Caledonia, iii., 864. Sir Archibald Lawrie, however, regards it as doubtful whether Arkel was the ancestor of the earls of Lennox. Early Scottish Charters, p. 327.
[1026] M‘Ferlie, Lands and Their Owners in Galloway, ii., 140-141.
[1027] See plan in MacGibbon and Ross, Castellated Architecture, iv., 341.
[1028] The name Maccus is undoubtedly the same as Magnus, a Latin adjective much affected as a proper name by the Norwegians of the 11th and 12th centuries.
[1029] Lawrie, Early Scottish Charters, p. 273.
[1030] MacGibbon and Ross, i., 279.
[1031] Proceedings of Soc. Ant. Scotland, xxxi., and N. S. A.
[1032] See Armstrong’s History of Liddesdale, cited by MacGibbon and Ross, i., 523.
[1033] Round, The Ancestor, No. 11, 130.
[1034] Benedict of Peterborough, i., 67. See Mr Neilson’s papers in the Dumfries Standard, June 28, 1899. Mr Neilson remarks: “It may well be that the original castle of Dumfries was one of Malcolm IV.’s forts, and that the mote of Troqueer, at the other side of a ford of the river, was the first little strength of the series by which the Norman grip of the province was sought to be maintained.”
[1035] “Mottes, Forts, and Doons of Kirkcudbright,” Soc. Ant. Scot., xxv., 1890.
[1036] The Annals of the Four Masters mention the building of three castles (caisteol) in Connaught in 1125, and the Annals of Ulster say that Tirlagh O’Connor built a castle (caislen) at Athlone in 1129. What the nature of these castles was it is now impossible to say, but there are no mottes at the three places mentioned in Connaught (Dunlo, Galway, and Coloony). The caislen at Athlone was not recognised by the Normans as a castle of their sort, as John built his castle on a new site, on land obtained from the church. Sweetman’s Cal., p. 80.
[1037] The meagre entries in the various Irish Annals may often come from contemporary sources, but as none of their MSS. are older than the 14th century, they do not stand on the same level as the two authorities above mentioned.
[1038] “Hibernicus enim populus castella non curat; silvis namque pro castris, paludibus utitur pro fossatis.” Top. Hib., 182, R. S., vol. v. In the same passage he speaks of the “fossa infinita, alta nimis, rotunda quoque, et pleraque triplicia; castella etiam murata, et adhuc integra, vacua tarnen et deserta,” which he ascribes to the Northmen. This passage has been gravely adduced as an argument in favour of the prehistoric existence of mottes! as though a round ditch necessarily implied a round hill within it! Giraldus was probably alluding to the round embankments or raths, of which such immense numbers are still to be found in Ireland. By the “walled castles” he probably meant the stone enclosures or cashels which are also so numerous in Ireland. In the time of Giraldus the word castellum, though it had become the proper word for a private castle, had not quite lost its original sense of a fortified enclosure of any kind, as we know from the phrases “the castle and tower” or “the castle and motte” not infrequent in documents of the 12th century (see Round’s Geoffrey de Mandeville, Appendix O, [p. 328]). We may add that Giraldus’ attribution of these prehistoric remains to Thorgils, the Norwegian, only shows that their origin was unknown in his day.
[1039] See Expug. Hib., 383, 397, 398.
[1040] I am informed that the “Crith Gablach,” which gives a minute description of one of these halls, is a very late document, and by no means to be trusted.
[1041] Vide the Irish Annals, passim.
[1042] There is another story, preserved in Hanmer’s Chronicle, that the Irish chief Mac Mahon levelled two castles given to him by John de Courcy, saying he had promised to hold not stones but land.
[1043] Joyce’s Irish Names of Places, p. 290.
[1044] See J. E. Lloyd, Cymmrodor, xi., 24; Skeat’s English Dictionary, “town.” In the “Dindsenchas of Erin,” edited by O’Beirne Crowe, Journ. R. S. A. I., 1872-1873, phrases occur, such as “the dun was open,” “she went back into the dun,” which show clearly that the dun was an enclosure. In several passages dun and cathair are interchanged.
[1045] Joyce, Irish Names of Places, p. 273.
[1046] Annals of the Four Masters, 1166.
[1047] See Orpen, “Motes and Norman Castles in Ireland,” in Journ. R. S. A. I., xxxvii., 143-147.
[1048] Sweetman’s Calendar of Documents relating to Ireland, i., 412.
[1049] That a motte-castle of earth and wood seemed to Giraldus quite an adequate castle is proved by the fact that numbers of the castles which he mentions have never had any stone defences. It may be a mere coincidence, but it is worth noting, that there are no mottes now at any of the places which Giraldus mentions as exilia municipia, Pembroke, Dundunnolf, Down City, and Carrick.
[1050] This word must not be understood to mean that this new type of castle was Edward’s invention, nor even that he was the first to introduce it into Europe from Palestine; it was used by the Hohenstauffen emperors as early as 1224. See Köhler, Entwickelung des Kriegswesen, iii., 475.
[1051] Newcastle, Worcester, Gloucester, and Bristol are instances.
[1052] Rhuddlan is an instance of this.
[1053] Book of Rights, p. 203.
[1054] It must be admitted that in the most recent and most learned edition of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle the topographical identifications are quite on a level with O’Donovan’s.
[1055] The Annals have not been used, partly because in their present form they are not contemporary, and partly because the difficulties of identifying many of the castles they mention appeared insuperable.
[1056] See especially two papers on “Motes and Norman Castles in Ireland,” in English Historical Review, vol. xxii., pp. 228, 240. Mr Orpen has further enriched this subject by a number of papers in the Journ. R. S. A. I., to which reference will be made subsequently.
[1057] The only castles still unidentified are Aq’i, Kilmehal, Rokerel, and Inchleder.
[1058] It should be stated that the great majority of the castles in this list have been visited for the writer by Mr Basil T. Stallybrass, who has a large acquaintance with English earthworks, as well as a competent knowledge of the history of architecture. The rest have been visited by the writer herself, except in a few cases where the information given in Lewis’s Topographical Dictionary or other sources was sufficient. The castles personally visited are initialled.
[1059] Annals of Loch Cè.
[1060] Orpen, Eng. Hist. Rev., xxii., 249.
[1061] Orpen, Eng. Hist. Rev., xxii., 450, citing from MS. Annals of Innisfallen.
[1062] The poetical list enumerates the places which were “of the right of Cashel in its power.” The prose version, which may be assumed to be later, is entitled “Do phortaibh righ Caisil,” which O’Donovan translates “of the seats of the king of Cashel.” But can one small king have had sixty-one different abodes? Professor Bury says “The Book of Rights still awaits a critical investigation.” Life of St Patrick, p. 69.
[1063] Ibid., p. 449. See Westropp, Trans. R. I. A., xxvi. (c), p. 146. Mr Orpen informs me that the Black Book of Limerick contains a charter of William de Burgo which mentions “Ecclesia de Escluana alias Kilkyde.” No. cxxxv.
[1064] Journ. R. S. A. I., 1898, 155; and 1904, 354.
[1065] Eng. Hist. Rev., xxii., 452.
[1066] Butler’s Notices of the Castle of Trim, p. 13.
[1067] Eng. Hist. Rev., xxii., 458.
[1068] Eng. Hist. Rev., xxii., 441.
[1069] “Exile municipium,” Giraldus, 345. See Eng. Hist. Rev., xx., 717.
[1070] Annals of Ulster, 1177.
[1071] See Orpen, “Motes and Castles in County Louth,” Journ. R. S. A. I., xxxviii., 249. The town walls are later than the castle, and were built up to it.
[1072] Cited by Westropp, Journ. R. S. A. I., 1904, paper on “Irish Motes and Early Norman Castles.”
[1073] Annals of Ulster, 1186.
[1074] Round, Cal. of Doc. preserved in France, i., 105, 107.
[1075] “On the Ancient Forts of Ireland,” Trans. R. I. A., 1902.
[1076] Orpen, “The Castle of Raymond le Gros at Fodredunolan,” Journ. R. S. A. I., 1906.
[1077] Annals of Innisfallen.
[1078] Orpen, Eng. Hist. Rev., xxii., 449.
[1079] “On some Caves in the Slieve na Cailliagh District,” by E. C. Rotheram, Proc. R. I. A., 3rd ser., vol. iii. Mr Rotheram remarks that the passages in the motte of Killallon, and that of Moat near Oldcastle, seem as if they were not built by the same people as those who constructed the passages at Slieve na Cailliagh.
[1080] Annals of Ulster.
[1081] Annals of Loch Cè.
[1082] Orpen, Eng. Hist. Rev., xxii., 448.
[1083] Ibid., p. 242.
[1084] Annals of Ulster. See Orpen, Eng. Hist. Rev., xxii., 443.
[1085] Annals of Ulster.
[1086] Annals of the Four Masters, vol. iii. See Orpen, Journ. R. S. A. I., vol. xxxix., 1909.
[1087] Orpen, Eng. Hist. Rev., xxii., 448. A place called Graffan is mentioned in the Book of Rights, and on the strength of this mere mention it has been argued that the motte is a prehistoric work. Trans. R. I. A., vol. xxxi., 1902.
[1088] Mr Orpen.
[1089] Giraldus’ words are: “Castrum Lechliniæ, super nobilem Beruæ fluvium, a latere Ossiriæ, trans Odronam in loco natura munito.” V., 352. See Eng. Hist. Rev., xxii., 245.
[1090] See Orpen, Eng. Hist. Rev., xxii., 456, and Journ. R. S. A. I., xxxvii., 140.
[1091] Orpen, “Motes and Norman Castles in County Louth,” Journ. R. S. A. I., xxxviii., 241, from which paper the notice above is largely taken.
[1092] Eng. Hist. Rev., xxii., 242.
[1093] The castle is casually mentioned by Giraldus, v., 100, and the date of its erection is not given.
[1094] As far as the writer’s experience goes, terraces are only found on mottes which have at some time been incorporated in private gardens or grounds.
[1095] Journ. R. S. A. I., vol. xxxix., 1909.
[1096] Piers, Collect. de Rebus Hib., cited by Orpen.
[1097] Mr Orpen says: “The castle was ‘constructed anew’ in the sixth and seventh years of Edward I., when £700 was expended.” Irish Pipe Rolls, 8 Edward I., cited in Eng. Hist. Rev., xxii., 454.
[1098] Line 3178.
[1099] The annular bailey, with the motte in the centre, is a most unusual arrangement, and certainly suggests the idea that the motte was placed in an existing Irish rath.
[1100] See [Appendix M].
[1101] Annals of Loch Cè.
[1102] Giraldus, v., 313.
[1103] This keep has a square turret on each of its faces instead of at the angles. A similar plan is found at Warkworth, and Castle Rushen, Isle of Man.
[1104] Orpen, Eng. Hist. Rev., xxii., 248.
[1105] Figured in The Tomb of Ollamh Fodhla, by E. A. Conwell, 1873.
[1106] Gir., i., 255, 277.
[1107] Eng. Hist. Rev., xxii., 457.
[1108] In five cases the mottes are now destroyed.
[1109] The dates of the building of numbers of these castles are given in the Annals of Ulster and the Annals of Loch Cè.
[1110] Cal. of Pat. Rolls, 1232-1247.
[1111] The tower at Malling was supposed to be an early Norman keep by Mr G. T. Clark (M. M. A., ii., 251), but it has recently been shown that it is purely an ecclesiastical building.
[1112] The only stone castles of early date in France which the writer has been able to visit are those of Langeais, Plessis Grimoult, Breteuil, and Le Mans. The two latter are too ruinous to furnish data.
[1113] Given in D’Achery’s Spicilegium, iii., 232.
[1114] This can be positively stated of Baugé, Montrichard, Montboyau, St Florent-le-Vieil, Chateaufort, and Chérament. M. de Salies thinks the motte of Bazonneau, about 500 metres from the ruins of the castle of Montbazon, is the original castle of Fulk Nerra. Histoire de Fulk Nerra, 57. About the other castles the writer has not been able to obtain any information.
[1115] See Halphen, Comté d’Anjou au xiième Siècle, 153.
[1116] The building of Langeais was begun in 994. Chron. St Florent, and Richerius, 274.
[1117] It somewhat shakes one’s confidence in De Caumont’s accuracy that in the sketch which he gives of this keep (Abécédaire, ii., 409) he altogether omits this doorway.
[1118] Measurements were impossible without a ladder.
[1119] It is well known that William the Conqueror left large treasures at his death.
[1120] The keep of Colchester is immensely larger than any keep in existence. Mr Round thinks it was probably built to defend the eastern counties against Danish invasions. Hist. of Colchester Castle, p. 32. Its immense size seems to show that it was intended for a large garrison.
[1121] Cours d’Antiquités Monumentales, v., 152, and Abécédaire, ii., 413-431. De Caumont says of the keep of Colchester, “il me parait d’une antiquité moins certaine que celui de Guildford, et on pourrait le croire du douzième siècle” (p. 205), a remark which considerably shakes one’s confidence in his architectural judgment.
[1122] As only the foundations of Pevensey are left, it gives little help in determining the character of early keeps. It had no basement entrance, and the forebuilding is evidently later than the keep.
[1123] The Tower had once a forebuilding, which is clearly shown in Hollar’s etching of 1646, and other ancient drawings. Mr Harold Sands, who has made a special study of the Tower, believes it to have been a late 12th-century addition.
[1124] Tiles are not used in the Tower, but some of the older arches of the arcade on the top floor have voussoirs of rag, evidently continuing the tradition of tiles. Most of the arches at Colchester are headed with tiles.
[1125] The room supposed to be the chapel in Bamborough keep has a round apse, but with no external projection, being formed in the thickness of the wall. The keep of Pevensey has three extraordinary apse-like projections of solid masonry attached to its foundations. See Mr Harold Sands’ Report of Excavations at Pevensey.
[1126] “In the course of the 12th century, the base of the walls was thickened into a plinth, in order better to resist the battering ram.” (Manuel d’Archæologie Française, ii., 463.) The keep of Pevensey has a battering plinth which is clearly original, and which throws doubt either on this theory of the plinth, or on the age of the building.
[1127] It is well known that blocks of huge size are employed in Anglo-Saxon architecture, but generally only as quoins or first courses. See Baldwin Brown, The Arts in Early England, ii., 326.
[1128] Baldwin Brown, “Statistics of Saxon Churches,” Builder, Sept. 1900.
[1129] Mr Round gives ground for thinking that this keep was built between 1080 and 1085. Colchester Castle, p. 32.
[1130] Piper’s Burgenkunde, p. 85.
[1131] Schulz, Das Hofische Leben zur Zeit der Minnesinger, i., 59. Grose writes of Bamborough Castle: “The only fireplace in it was a grate in the middle of a large room, where some stones in the middle of the floor are burned red.” He gives no authority. Antiquities of England and Wales, iv., 57.
[1132] “The type of castle created in the 10th century persisted till the Renascence.” Enlart, Manuel d’Archæologie, ii., 516.
[1133] See [Appendix N].
[1134] Enlart, Manuel d’Archæologie, ii., 516. “Jusqu’au milieu du xiiième siècle, et dans les exemples les plus simples des époques qui suivent, le donjon est bien près de constituer à lui seul tout le château.”
[1135] Abriss der Burgenkunde, 50-60.
[1136] Entwickelung des Kriegswesen, iii., 352 and 428. No continental writers are entirely to be trusted about English castles; they generally get their information from Clark, and it is generally wrong.
[1137] This of course explains why the castle of London is always called The Tower; it was originally the only tower in the fortress.
[1138] The Close Rolls mention palicia or stockades at the castles of Norwich, York, Devizes, Oxford, Sarum, Fotheringay, Hereford, Mountsorel, and Dover.
[1139] Close Rolls, i., 195a and 389.
[1140] See Chapter VI., [p. 89], and [Appendix O].
[1141] Piper states that the evidence of remains proves that the lower storey was a prison. But these remains probably belong to a later date, when the donjon had been abandoned as a residence, and was becoming the dungeon to which prisoners were committed. The top storey of the keep was often used in early times as a prison for important offenders, such as Conan of Rouen, William, the brother of Duke Richard II., and Ranulf Flambard.
[1142] See [Appendix P].
[1143] At Conisburgh and Orford castles there are ovens on the roofs, showing that the cooking was carried on there; these are keeps of Henry II.’s time.
[1144] De Caumont says these remains are on a motte, a strange statement, as they are only a foot or two above the surrounding level.
[1145] No stone castles in England are known to have been built by William Rufus; he built Carlisle Castle, but probably only in wood. As we have seen, several Welsh castles were built in his time, but all in earth and timber.
[1146] Built by Archbishop William of Corbeuil. Gervase of Canterbury, R. S., ii., 382.
[1147] Robert de Torigny, also called Robert de Monte, was Abbot of Mont St Michael during the lifetime of Henry II., and was a favoured courtier whose means of obtaining information were specially good. French writers are in the habit of discounting his statements, because they do not recognise the almost universal precedence of a wooden castle to the stone building, which when it is recognised, completely alters the perspective of castle dates. See [Appendix Q].
[1148] The keep of Caen, which was square, was demolished in 1793. De Caumont, Cours d’Antiquités, v., 231. The keep of Alençon is also destroyed. There are fragments of castles at Argentan, Exmes, and St Jean-le-Thomas. The keep of Vernon or Vernonnet is embedded in a factory. Guide Joanne, p. 6.
[1149] The writer has also visited Vire and Le Mans, but even if the walls of the keep of Vire, of which only two sides remain, were the work of Henry I., the details, such as the corbelled lintel, the window benches, and the loop in the basement for a crossbow, point to a later period. At Le Mans, to the north of the cathedral, is a fragment of an ancient tower, built of the rudest rubble, with small quoins of ashlar; this may be the keep built by William I., which Wace says was of stone and lime (p. 234, Andresen’s edition). It is difficult to examine, being built up with cottages. Domfront, like Langeais, is only a fragment, consisting of two walls and some foundations.
[1150] Dictionnaire de l’Architecture.
[1151] M. M. A., i., 186.
[1152] In speaking of Falaise, of course we only mean the great square keep, and not the Little Donjon attached to it at a later period, nor the fine round keep added by Talbot in the 15th century.
[1153] Small spaces, such as the chapel, passages, and mural chambers, are vaulted in most keeps.
[1154] Colchester keep has only two storeys now, but Mr Round argues that it must have had three, as a stairway leads upward from the second floor, in the N.W. tower, and some fragments of window cases remain as evidence. Colchester Castle, p. 92.
[1155] The Tower and Colchester keep both have wells, which are seldom wanting in any keep. There was no appearance of a well at Langeais, but excavation might possibly reveal one.
[1156] The first castle at Corfe was built by William’s half-brother, Robert, Count of Mortain. The keep of Corfe is sometimes attributed to him, but when we compare its masonry with that of the early hall or chapel in the middle bailey, we shall see that this date is most unlikely. Norwich was always a royal castle.
[1157] Part of the basement of Norwich keep has pillars, from which it has been assumed that it was vaulted; but no trace of vaulting is to be seen.
[1158] The only decoration at Corfe keep is in the oratory, which being at a vast height in one of the ruined walls is inaccessible to the ordinary visitor. Corfe was so much pulled about by Sir Christopher Hatton in Elizabeth’s reign, and is now so ruinous, that many features are obscure. Norwich has suffered greatly from restorations, and from re-casing.
[1159] In 1184 Henry II. paid “for re-roofing the tower of Gisors.” Rotuli Scacc. Normanniæ, i., 72.
[1160] It should be remembered that rude work is not invariably a sign of age; it may only show haste, or poverty of resources. It should also be mentioned that in the Exchequer Rolls of Normandy there is an entry of £650 in 1184 for several works at Gisors, including “the wall round the motte” (murum circa motam). Possibly this may refer to a wall round the foot of the motte, which seems still to exist. The shell wall of Gisors should be compared with that of Lincoln, which is probably of the first half of the 12th century.
[1161] No decagonal tower of Henry I.’s work is known to exist; all his tower keeps are square.
[1162] Bower, Scotichronicon, v., 42. This passage was first pointed out by Mr George Neilson in Notes and Queries, 8th ser., viii., 321. The keep of Carlisle has been so much pulled about as to obscure most of its features. The present entrance to the basement is not original.
[1163] M. M. A., i., 353.
[1164] Unfortunately the greater part of these valuable Rolls is still unpublished. The Pipe Roll Society is issuing a volume every year, and this year (1910) has reached the 28th Henry II.
[1165] The keeps of Richmond and Bowes were only finished by Henry II.; Richmond was begun by Earl Conan, who died in 1170, when Henry appears to have taken up the work. Bowes was another of Earl Conan’s castles. Tickhill is now destroyed to the foundations, but it is clear that it was a tower. The writer has examined all the keeps mentioned in this list. It will be noticed that most of the towers took many years to build.
[1166] Henry built one shell keep of rubble and rag, that of Berkeley Castle, which is not mentioned in the Pipe Rolls, having been built before his accession. It is noteworthy that he did not build it for himself, but for his ally, Robert Fitz Hardinge.
[1167] The basement storey of Chester keep (the only part which now remains) is also vaulted, but this can scarcely be Henry’s work, for though he spent £102 on this castle in 1159, it must have been begun by Ranulf, Earl of Chester, in Stephen’s reign. Moreover, it is doubtful whether the vaulting, which is covered by whitewash, is really ancient.
[1168] Leland says of Wark, “the dongeon is made of foure howses hight,” but probably he included the basement.
[1169] The earliest instance of a portcullis groove with which the writer is acquainted is in the basement entrance of Colchester. It is obvious to anyone who carefully examines this entrance and the great stair to the left of it that they are additions of a later time than William’s work. The details seem to point to Henry I.’s reign. The keep of Rochester has also a portcullis groove which seems to be a later addition.
[1170] King, paper on Canterbury Castle in Archæologia, vi., 298. We have not observed in any English keeps (except in this single instance) any of the elaborate plans to entrap the enemy which M. Viollet le Duc describes in his article on Donjons. He was an imaginative writer, and many of his statements should not be accepted without reserve.
[1171] Wark was also an octagonal keep, but there is considerable doubt whether this octagonal building was the work of Henry II., as Lord Dacre wrote to Wolsey in 1519 concerning Wark that “the dongeon is clerely finished,” and mentions that all the storeys but one were vaulted with stone. This makes it almost certain that the castle of Wark was entirely rebuilt at this time, after having been demolished by the Scots in 1460. It is now an utter ruin, and even the foundations of the keep are buried.
[1172] At Thorne, near Doncaster, where the great earls Warenne had a castle, there are the foundations, on a motte, of a keep which seems to resemble that of Orford; it ought to be thoroughly excavated.
[1173] These measurements are from Grose, Antiquities, v., 74.
[1174] See Payne Gallwey, The Crossbow, 309; Köhler, Kriegswesen, iii., 192. The trébuchet is first mentioned at the siege of Piacenza in 1199.
[1175] As far as we can tell, the tops of keeps having generally been ruined or altered, the common arrangement was either a simple gable, or two gables resting on a cross wall, such as all the larger keeps possessed.
[1176] Another consequence of the introduction of an engine of longer range was the widening of castle ditches. We frequently find works on ditches mentioned in John’s accounts.
[1177] Payne Gallwey, The Crossbow, p. 3. We find it used by Louis VI. of France, before 1137. Suger’s Gesta Ludovici, 10 (ed. Molinier). Ten balistarii are mentioned in Domesday Book, but they may have been engineers of the great balista, a siege machine. There is no representation of a crossbow in the Bayeux Tapestry. There are entries in the Pipe Rolls of 6, 8, and 9 Henry II. of payments for arbelast, but these also may refer to the great balista.
[1178] Guill. Brit. Armorici Philippides, Bouquet xvii., line 315.
[1179] The bow brought by Richard from Palestine is believed to have been an improved form of crossbow, made of horn and yew, “light, elastic, and far more powerful than a bow of solid wood.” Payne Gallwey, The Crossbow.
[1180] “Fenestris arcubalistaribus,” Bouquet xvii., 75. The writer has never found a single defensive loophole in any of the keeps of Henry I. or Henry II. Köhler remarks that the loopholes up to this period do not seem to be intended for shooting (Entwickelung des Kriegswesen, iii., 409), and Clark has some similar observations.
[1181] Dictionnaire de l’Architecture, art. “Meurtrière.”
[1182] Meyrick in his Ancient Armour quotes a charter of 1239, in which the French king grants a castle to the Count de Montfort on condition “quod non possumus habere in eodem archeriam nec arbalisteriam,” which Meyrick audaciously translates “any perpendicular loophole for archers, nor any cruciform loophole for crossbowmen.” The quotation is unfortunately given by Sir R. Payne Gallwey without the Latin original. It is at any rate probable that the cruciform loophole was for archers; it does not appear till the time of the long-bow, which was improved and developed by Edward I., who made it the most formidable weapon of English warfare.
[1183] See [Appendix H].
[1184] Entwickelung des Kriegswesen, iii., 417.
[1185] In 1186, the Duke of Burgundy caused the towers and walls of his castle of Chatillon to be “hoarded” (hordiari). This duke had been a companion of Richard’s on the third crusade. William le Breton, Philippides, line 600. Richard’s hurdicia at Chateau Gaillard were two years earlier.
[1186] See Dieulafoy, Le Chateau Gaillard et l’Architecture Militaire au Treizième Siècle, p. 13.
[1187] The best French and German authorities are agreed about this. The holes in which the wooden beams supporting the hurdicia were placed may still be seen in many English castles, and so may the remains of the stone brackets. They would be good indications of date, were it not that hurdicia could so easily be added to a much older building.
[1188] Köhler gives the reign of Frederic Barbarossa (1155-1191) as the time of the first appearance of the round keep in Germany.
[1189] In spite of this, I cannot feel satisfied that the keep of Étampes is of so early a date. The decorative features appear early, but the second and third storeys are both vaulted, which is a late sign. The keep called Clifford’s Tower at York, built by Henry III. 1245 to 1259, is on the same plan as Étampes.
[1190] This keep has been long destroyed.
[1191] Ground entrances occur in several much earlier keeps, as at Colchester (almost certainly an addition of Henry I.’s time), Bamborough (probably Henry II.’s reign), and Richmond, where Earl Conan seems to have used a former entrance gateway to make the basement entrance of his keep. See Milward, Arch. Journ., vol. v.
[1192] Built by Earl Hamelin, half-brother of Henry II., who died in 1201.
[1193] Viollet le Duc, art. “Donjon.”
[1194] The walls of the Tower are from 12 to 15 feet thick at the base; those of Norwich 13; the four walls of Dover respectively, 17, 18, 19, and 21 feet; Carlisle, 15 feet on two sides. (Clark.) William of Worcester tells us that Bristol keep was 25 feet thick at the base! Itin., p. 260.
[1195] See Enlart, Manuel d’Archæologie Française, ii., 526.
[1196] MacGibbon and Ross, Castellated Architecture of Scotland, p. 159.
[1197] This type of castle was probably borrowed from the fortifications of Greek cities, which the Crusaders had observed in the East.
[1198] Conway and Carnarvon consist of two adjoining courts, without any external enclosure but a moat. Flint has a great tower outside the quadrangle, which is sometimes mistakenly called a keep, but its internal arrangements show that it was not so, and it is doubtful whether it was ever roofed over. It was simply a tower to protect the entrance, taking the place of the 13th-century barbican.
[1199] Köhler states that the gatehouse palace is peculiar to England: “only at Perpignan is there anything like it.” Entwickelung des Kriegswesen, iii., 480.
[1200] Köhler mentions the castle of Neu Leiningen as the first example in Germany, built in 1224. Kriegswesen, iii., 475. Frederic II.’s castles were of this type. The castle of Boulogne, finished in 1231, is one of the oldest examples of the keepless type in France. Enlart, Archæologie Française, ii., 534. The Bastille of Paris was a castle of this kind. According to Hartshorne, Barnwell Castle, in Northants, is of the keepless kind, and as the Hundred Rolls state that it was built in 1264, we seem to have here a positive instance of a keepless castle in Henry III.’s reign. Arch. Inst. Newcastle, vol. 1852. And it appears to be certain that Gilbert de Clare, Earl of Gloucester, built the keepless castle of Caerphilly before Edward came to the throne. See Little’s Mediæval Wales, p. 87.
[1201] French archæologists are enthusiastic over the keep of Chateau Gaillard, the scientific construction of the towers of the curtain, the avoidance of “dead angles,” the continuous flanking, etc. See Viollet le Duc, art. “Chateau,” and Dieulafoy, Le Chateau Gaillard.
[1202] This type is extremely rare: Trim, in Ireland, and Castle Rushen, in the Isle of Man, are the only other instances known to the writer. Trim is a square tower with square turrets in the middle of each face; Castle Rushen is on the same plan, but the central part appears to have been an open court.
[1203] Enlart, Archæologie Française, ii., 516.
[1204] Martène’s Thesaurus Anecdotorum, iv., 118. “Nulli licuit in Normannia fossatum facere in planam terram, nisi tale quod de fundo potuisset terram jactare superius sine scabello. Et ibi nulli licuit facere palicium, nisi in una regula; et id sine propugnaculis et alatoriis. Et in rupe et in insula nulli licuit facere fortitudinem, et nulli licuit in Normannia castellum facere.”
[1205] The document which calls itself Leges Henrici Primi, x., 1, declares the “castellatio trium scannorum” to be a right of the king. Scannorum is clearly scamnorum, banks. It is noteworthy that a motte-and-bailey castle is actually a fortification with three banks: one round the top of the motte, one round the edge of the bailey, one on the counterscarp of the ditch.
[1206] See the case of Benhall, Close Rolls, ii., 52b (1225).
[1207] Aldreth and Burton are omitted from this list.
[1208] M. and B. stand for Motte and Bailey; K. and B. for Keep and Bailey; O. for Outside the Town.