diff options
| author | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-01-27 13:05:57 -0800 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-01-27 13:05:57 -0800 |
| commit | d4f87d82f7cd8c16fb3c04b0969b5ae8c209bf78 (patch) | |
| tree | e15438f8a9f4d9955f4b32e239e7accd33327e60 /old/60518-0.txt | |
| parent | 5410d5c234907dc5ed898420b355b53471dcd168 (diff) | |
Diffstat (limited to 'old/60518-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/60518-0.txt | 14743 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 14743 deletions
diff --git a/old/60518-0.txt b/old/60518-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 135f7da..0000000 --- a/old/60518-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,14743 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg EBook of Military Architecture in England During the -Middle Ages, by Alexander Hamilton Thompson - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most -other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of -the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have -to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. - -Title: Military Architecture in England During the Middle Ages - -Author: Alexander Hamilton Thompson - -Release Date: October 19, 2019 [EBook #60518] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK MILITARY ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND *** - - - - -Produced by MWS, Brian Wilcox and the Online Distributed -Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was -produced from images generously made available by The -Internet Archive/American Libraries.) - - - - - - -Transcriber’s Notes:— - -Italic text is denoted _thus_. - -The spelling, hyphenation, punctuation and accentuation are as the -original, except for apparent typographical errors which have been -corrected. - -Further transcriber’s notes can be found at the end of the book. - - - - - MILITARY ARCHITECTURE IN - ENGLAND DURING THE MIDDLE AGES - -[Illustration: - - _Frontispiece_ - -ROCHESTER: GREAT TOWER.] - - - - - MILITARY ARCHITECTURE - IN ENGLAND DURING THE - MIDDLE AGES - - BY - A. HAMILTON THOMPSON - M.A., F.S.A. - - Illustrated by 200 Photographs, Drawings, and Plans - - HENRY FROWDE - OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS - LONDON, NEW YORK, TORONTO, AND MELBOURNE - 1912 - - - - - _Printed at_ - THE DARIEN PRESS - _Edinburgh_ - - - - -PREFACE - - -Apart from the late Mr G. T. Clark’s _Mediæval Military Architecture_, -published in 1884, the greater portion of which is a series of -monographs dealing with individual castles, there has been no attempt, -until within the last few years, to apply systematic treatment to -this branch of science. Recently, however, more than one book has -been published upon the general subject of the castles of England. -Mr Alfred Harvey has lately given a lucid account of the growth of -the castle, with a valuable essay upon English walled towns; and the -present year has seen the appearance of a book in which Mrs Armitage -has embodied the result of labours of the utmost importance, extending -over many years. In addition to works of a general character, a -number of separate monographs, indispensable to students, have been -published during the last twenty years, in the transactions of various -archæological societies. The contributions of Mr W. H. St John Hope to -the study of castle architecture take a foremost place among these, -with papers such as those by Mr J. Bilson on Gilling castle and by -Mr Harold Sands on Bodiam and the Tower of London; and the late Mr -Cadwallader Bates’ unfinished _Border Holds of Northumberland_ contains -accounts of Warkworth and Bamburgh, as well as of smaller castles and -peles, which must take rank among the classics of the subject. - -In the present volume an attempt is made to trace the growth of the -general principles of medieval fortification, with special reference -to castles, in which, within their limited area, the most complete -illustration of those principles is given. In order to give greater -clearness to the account of their evolution, a prefatory chapter deals -generally with earlier types of fortification in Britain, and the -critical period of Saxon and Danish warfare is treated in the second -chapter with some detail. This leads us to the early Norman castle of -earthwork and timber; and the stone fortifications to which this gave -place are introduced by a brief account of the progress of siegecraft -and siege-engines. The Norman castle and its keep or great tower are -then described. The developments of the later part of the twelfth -century and the arrangements of the thirteenth-century castle, with -those of the dwelling-house within its _enceinte_, follow and prepare -the way for the castles of the reign of Edward I. which represent -the highest effort of military planning. In the last two chapters -is related the progress of the transition from the castle to the -fortified manor-house, which followed the introduction of fire-arms -into warfare and preceded the Renaissance period. It will be seen that -the castle is taken as the unit of military architecture throughout; -but illustrations are constantly drawn from walled towns, which are, in -fact, the castles of communities, and in the eleventh chapter extended -allusion is made to the chief features of their plan and defences. - -In speaking of the walled town, however, as the castle of the -community, it must not be forgotten that the castle is, in its origin, -the stronghold of a single owner. That origin is still to some extent -a vexed question; for the well-known theory of Mr G. T. Clark, that -the castle of Norman times was identical with the _burh_ of the Saxon -Chronicle, was accepted as a dogma by the antiquaries of twenty-five to -fifty years ago, and a theory thus established, however precipitately, -is not easily shaken. The patient and thorough work of Mrs Armitage, -which deserves the admiration of every scholar, has done much to -disturb the foundations on which Mr Clark built his hypothesis; and -Mr Neilson, Dr Round, Mr St John Hope, and others, have contributed -their share to the discovery of the real character of the evidence, -and the formulation of a sounder theory. The present writer has -devoted much time to the study of the original authorities for Saxon -and Norman military history, and it is his conviction that the weight -of documentary evidence is entirely upon the side of the views upheld -with so much ability and originality by these recent investigators. At -the same time, the earthworks of early castles still present several -difficult problems; and the discredit into which Mr Clark’s theory -has fallen is a warning against the too confident acceptation of the -conclusions of a more critical age, and against the danger of forcing -exceptions into the service of the rule. - -In the earlier part of this book, some allusion is made to methods -of Roman warfare; and the main points of two of the sieges conducted -by Cæsar and his lieutenants are summarily described. It need hardly -be said, in view of what follows, that the methods of military -architecture in the middle ages have, for the most part, their -exact prototypes in Roman and Byzantine history. The student of the -siege-campaigns of Philip Augustus will be constantly reminded, for -example, of the relation by Ammianus of the exploits of Julian the -Apostate. Too much emphasis cannot be laid on the importance, first, -of the contact of the Northmen who overran England and France with the -traditional expedients of Roman siegecraft, as they existed in the -eastern empire, and secondly, of the influence of the Crusades upon the -development of medieval fortification. The conditions of our military -architecture in the middle ages were naturally governed by the methods -of attack employed by a besieging force. As these had been brought -to a high state of perfection in the east, an advance upon which was -hardly possible, the history of English fortification, from the Norman -conquest to the general adoption of fire-arms in warfare, is that of a -progress towards a system of defence in which western Europe lagged far -behind the older centres of civilisation. - -It is to be noted that, although the architecture of the castle and the -fortifications of towns naturally took its share in the formal progress -of Gothic art, the laws under which it was evolved bear no resemblance -to the principles of construction, in obedience to which the medieval -cathedral assumed its characteristic form. Ribbed vaults, Gothic -mouldings, and traceried windows afford a clue to the dates of the -various parts of a medieval castle, as they do to those of a church; -but they are merely incidental to a type of construction to which the -solid and impregnable wall is all-important. The cases are rare in -which the builders of castles paid much attention to elaborate detail -in the minor parts of their building: their decorative work is used -with the economy and simplicity appropriate to the massive construction -which their fortresses demanded. - -A vast amount of work still remains to be done in the exploration -of our military buildings and the reconstruction of their history; -and, until that is accomplished, no thoroughly satisfactory general -hand-book can be written. Nevertheless, it is hoped that there is room -for books which may serve as general indicators to what has been done, -up to the present time, in this direction. The bibliography which will -be found preceding the text of this volume includes a selected list -of monographs or articles upon individual castles, many of which have -appeared in the transactions of various archaeological societies. -These vary considerably in value; but, taken as a whole, they serve to -enlarge our knowledge of the history and architecture of the buildings -with which they are concerned. - -The author desires to express his thanks, first to his wife, without -whose constant help in the preparation of the book and in the provision -of drawings and plans to illustrate its pages, it could hardly have -been written. Mr Francis Bond, the editor of this series, has aided -the author with unfailing kindness, by reading through the proofs, -making suggestions as to the general form of the book, and arranging -for its adequate illustration. To the following, who have kindly -allowed the use of photographs, special thanks should be returned: Mrs -Jessie Lloyd, the Revs. J. Bailey and G. W. Saunders, and Messrs Harold -Baker, F. Bond, J. P. Gibson, F.S.A., G. J. Gillham, G. Hepworth, P. M. -Johnston, F.S.A., R. Keene, W. Maitland, E. A. and G. R. Reeve, F. R. -Taylor, and G. H. Widdows. The editors of the _Archaeological Journal_ -have sanctioned the use of various plans from the annual programmes -of the Archaeological Institute. Mr A. Hadrian Allcroft and Messrs -Macmillan have given consent to the reproduction of three illustrations -from Mr Allcroft’s _Earthwork of England_. Permission to found the plan -of Chepstow castle on one in the official _Guide_ to that building -was kindly given by his Grace the Duke of Beaufort, through Mr Noel -H. P. Somerset. MM. Camille Enlart and Auguste Picard have permitted -the insertion of a plan of Château-Gaillard, founded on that in M. -Enlart’s _Manuel_. Mr R. Blair, F.S.A., has authorised a similar use of -illustrations founded on those of Dr Bruce’s _Roman Wall_. Thanks are -also due to the editor of the _Yorkshire Archæological Journal_ for the -plan of Sandal castle, and to Mr W. G. Watkins, jun., for his plan of -Lincoln castle. Special acknowledgments are due to Mr Godfrey L. Clark -for his liberality in putting at the disposal of the writer valuable -plans and drawings from his father’s work. The author much regrets that -questions of space and cost have prevented him from taking advantage of -more than a limited number of the generous offers of illustration which -reached him during the preparation of the book for the press. - - - - -TABLE OF CONTENTS - - - CHAPTER PAGE - - PREFACE vii - - BIBLIOGRAPHY xiii - - I. EARLY EARTHWORKS AND ROMAN STATIONS 1 - - II. THE SAXON AND DANISH PERIOD 21 - - III. THE ENGLISH CASTLE AFTER THE CONQUEST 35 - - IV. THE PROGRESS OF ATTACK AND DEFENCE 58 - - V. THE BEGINNING OF THE STONE CASTLE 83 - - VI. THE KEEP OF THE NORMAN CASTLE 110 - - VII. THE PERIOD OF TRANSITION: CYLINDRICAL TOWER-KEEPS 160 - - VIII. THE DWELLING-HOUSE IN THE CASTLE 188 - - IX. CASTLES OF THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY: THE FORTIFICATION - OF THE CURTAIN 212 - - X. THE EDWARDIAN CASTLE AND THE CONCENTRIC PLAN 252 - - XI. MILITARY ARCHITECTURE IN THE LATER MIDDLE - AGES: FORTIFIED TOWNS AND CASTLES 287 - - XII. THE AGE OF TRANSITION: THE FORTIFIED DWELLING-HOUSE 334 - - INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES 369 - - INDEX RERUM 381 - - - - -BIBLIOGRAPHY - - -1. Chief Original Authorities cited. - - ABBO, De Bello Parisiaco libri tres (Migne, _Patrologiae Cursus - Completus_, vol. 131 (1853), pp. 722-62). - - AMIENS, GUY OF. Carmen de Hastingae proelio (Chroniques - Anglo-Normands). Rouen, 1836-40. - - ANGLO-SAXON CHRONICLE, ed. C. Plummer. 2 vols. Oxford, 1892-9. - - ANNA COMNENA. Alexias, ed. A. Reifferscheid. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1884. - - ANNALES BERTINIANI (Annales Francorum, vulgo Bertiniani dicti), - ed. Dom. M. Bouquet, _Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la - France_, vols. vi. (1749), 192-204; vii. (1749), 59-124; viii. - (1752), 26-37. - - ARDRES, LAMBERT OF. Extracts in Bouquet, _Recueil des historiens_, - vols. xi. (1767), 295-307; xiii. (1786), 423-53; xviii. (1822), - 583-8. - - BEDE. Historia Ecclesiastica, ed. C. Plummer. Oxford, 1896. - - BRETON (LE), GUILLAUME. Philippidos libri xii., ed. Bouquet, _Recueil - des historiens_, vol. xvii. (1818), 117-287. - - CAESAR. Commentaries, ed. B. Kübler. 3 vols. Leipzig, 1893-6. - - COLMIEU, JEAN DE, canon of St Martin, Ypres. Vita beati Joannis - Morinorum episcopi (_Acta Sanctorum_, January, vol. iii. 409-17). - - DICETO, RALPH DE. Historical Works (Ymagines Historiarum and - Abbreviationes Chronicorum), ed. W. Stubbs, 2 vols. (Rolls Series, - No. 68). - - DOMESDAY BOOK (Record Commission). 4 vols. Lond., 1816. - - HENRY VIII., LETTERS AND PAPERS, ed. Brewer and Gairdner, vol. iv. - - HOVEDEN, ROGER OF. Chronicle, ed. W. Stubbs. 4 vols. (Rolls Series, - No. 51). - - JOINVILLE, JEAN, SEIGNEUR DE. Histoire de Saint Louis, ed. N. de - Wailly. Paris, 1874 (translation of Chronicle by Sir Frank Marzials, - London, 1908). - - MONTE, ROBERT DE (Robert de Torigny, abbot of Mont-Saint-Michel). - Cronica (continuation of Sigebert of Gemblours), ed. Migne, - _Patrologiae Cursus_, vol. clx., 423-546. - - ORDERICUS VITALIS. Historia Ecclesiastica, ed. A. le Prévost. 5 vols. - Paris, 1838-55. - - PATENT ROLLS, CALENDARS OF, 1216-66, 1271-1364, 1377-1485. 47 vols. - (in progress). - - PETERBOROUGH, BENEDICT OF. Chronicle, ed. W. Stubbs. - 2 vols. (Rolls Series, No. 49). - - PIPE ROLLS. Pipe Roll Society Publications. 27 vols. (in progress). - London, 1884, etc. - - RYMER, THOMAS. Foedera. 20 vols. London, 1704-35. - - STUBBS, WILLIAM, D.D. Select Charters and other Illustrations of - English Constitutional History, 8th edit. Oxford, 1905. - - SUGER. Gesta Ludovici Grossi, ed. A. Molinier. Paris, 1887. - - VEGETIUS. Epitoma Rei Militaris, ed. C. Lang. Leipzig, 1885. - - VETUSTA MONUMENTA, vol. vi. (Bayeux Tapestry). London, 1842. - - VILLEHARDOUIN, GEOFFROI DE. De la Conqueste de Constantinople par - les Barons François associez aux Venitiens, ed. N. de Wailly. Paris, - 1872-4 (trans. Sir Frank Marzials, London, 1908). - - VITRUVIUS. De Architectura, ed. V. Rose. Leipzig, 1899. - - WENDOVER, ROGER OF. Chronica sive Flores Historiarum, ed. H. G. - Hewlett, 3 vols. (Rolls Series, No. 84). - - -2. General. - - ALLCROFT, A. HADRIAN. Earthwork of England. London, 1908. - - ARMITAGE, ELLA S. Anglo-Saxon burhs and early Norman castles (_Proc. - Soc. Antiq. Scotland_, xxxiv. 260-88). - - —— The Early Norman Castles of England (_English Historical Review_, - xix. 209-45 and 417-55). - - —— The Early Norman Castles of the British Isles. London, 1912. - - BRUCE, J. C., LL.D., F.S.A. Hand-book to the Roman Wall, ed. Robert - Blair, F.S.A., 5th edition. London and Newcastle-on-Tyne, 1907. - - CHRISTISON, DAVID, M.D. Early Fortification in Scotland: Motes, - camps, and forts. Edinburgh and London, 1898. - - CLARK, G. T., F.S.A. Mediæval Military Architecture in England. 2 - vols. London, 1884. - - CLEPHAN, R. COLTMAN, F.S.A. An Outline of the History of Gunpowder - and that of the Hand-Gun, from the epoch of the earliest records to - the end of the fifteenth century (_Archaeol. Journal_, lxvi. - 145-70). - - —— The Military Handgun of the sixteenth century (_Archaeol. - Journal_, lxvii. 109-50). - - —— The Ordnance of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries (_Archaeol. - Journal_, lxviii. 49-138). - - CODRINGTON, THOMAS. Roman Roads in Britain. London, 1903. - - D’AUVERGNE, EDMUND B. The Castles of England. London, 1907. - - —— The English Castles, London, 1908. - - DIEULAFOY, M. Le Château-Gaillard et l’architecture militaire au - XIIIᵐᵉ siècle (_Mémoires de l’Académie des Inscriptions_, tom. - xxxvi., part. 1). Paris, 1898. - - ENLART, CAMILLE. Manuel d’Archéologie française, vol. ii. Paris, 1904. - - HARVEY, ALFRED. The Castles and Walled Towns of England. London, 1911. - - HAVERFIELD, Prof. F. J., LL.D., D.Litt., V.P.S.A. The Romanization of - Roman Britain. London, 1905. - - —— Roman Britain (_Cambridge Medieval History_, i. 367-81: see - _ibid._ 666-7 for bibliography of various articles by the same - writer). - - HOCHFELDEN, G. H. KRIEG VON. Geschichte der Militar-Architektur in - Deutschland. Stuttgart, 1859. - - HOPE, W. H. ST JOHN. English fortresses and castles of the tenth and - eleventh centuries (_Archaeol. Journal_, lx. 72-90). - - MACKENZIE, Sir J. D. The Castles of England, their Story and - Structure. 2 vols. London, 1897. - - NEILSON, GEORGE. The motes in Norman Scotland (_Scottish Review_ xiv. - 209-38). - - OMAN, Prof. C. W. C., F.S.A. A History of the Art of War in the - Middle Ages. London, 1898. - - ORPEN, G. H. Motes and Norman castles in Ireland (_Proc. Royal Soc. - Antiq. Ireland_, xxxvii. 123-52). - - PARKER, J. H., and TURNER, T. HUDSON. Some account of domestic - architecture in England. 3 vols, in 4. Oxford, 1851-9. - - ROUND, J. HORACE, LL.D. The Castles of the Conquest. (_Archaeologia_, - lviii. 313-40). - - —— Feudal England, Historical Studies on the XIth and XIIth Centuries - (new edition). London, 1909. - - SAINT-PAUL, ANTHYME. Histoire Monumentale de la France, 6th edition. - Paris, 1903. - - TURNER, T. HUDSON; _see_ PARKER, J. H. - - VAN MILLINGEN, A. Byzantine Constantinople. London, 1899. - - VIOLLET-LE-DUC, E. Dictionnaire Raisonné de l’Architecture française - du XIᵉ au XVIᵉ Siècle. 10 vols. Paris, 1854, etc. - - —— Essai sur l’architecture militaire au moyen âge. Paris, 1854 - (translated by M. Macdermott, Oxford and London, 1860). - - —— Histoire d’une forteresse. Paris, n.d. - - WARD, W. H. French Châteaux and Gardens in the XVIth Century - (drawings reproduced from Androuet-du-Cerceau). London, 1909. - - WESTROPP, T. J. Irish motes and alleged Norman castles (_Proc. Royal - Soc. Antiq. Ireland_, xiv. 313-45, and xv. 402-6). - - -3. Special Monographs, etc. - - ACTON BURNELL. Hartshorne, C. H., F.S.A. (_Archaeol. Journal_, ii. - 325-38). - - ALNWICK. Clark, _Mediæval Mil. Architecture_, i. 175-85. - - —— Knowles, W. H., F.S.A., F.R.I.B.A. The Gatehouse and Barbican of - Alnwick Castle (_Archaeologia Æliana_, 3rd ser., v. 286-303). - - AMBERLEY. Clarkson, G. A. (_Sussex Arch. Coll._, xvii. 185-339). - - ARUNDEL. Clark, i. 195-203. - - AUCKLAND. Rev. J. F. Hodgson (_Archaeologia Æliana_, xix. 89-92). - - AYDON. Knowles, W. H. (_Archaeologia_, lvi. 78-88). _See_ also Bates, - _Border Holds_. - - BAMBURGH. Bates, _Border Holds_; Clark, G. T. (_Archaeol. Journal_, - xlvi. 93-113). - - BARNARD CASTLE. Clark, i. 204-13. - - BEAUMARIS. Clark, i. 213-17. - - BELSAY. Bates, _Border Holds_. - - —— Middleton, Sir Arthur E., Bart. An account of Belsay castle - (privately printed). Newcastle-on-Tyne, 1910. - - BERKELEY. Clark, i. 228-39. - - BERKHAMPSTEAD. Clark, i. 223-38. - - BERWICK-ON-TWEED. Norman, F. M. (Commander R.N.): Official Guide to - the Fortifications. Berwick, 1907. - - BODIAM. Clark, i. 239-47. - - —— Sands, Harold, F.S.A., in _Sussex Archaeol. Collections_, xlvi. - 114-33. - - BOTHAL. Bates, _Border Holds_. - - BOWES. Clark, i. 259-64. - - BRIDGNORTH. Clark, i. 273-81. - - BRISTOL. Harvey, Alfred, M.B. Bristol, a historical and topographical - account of the city. London, 1906. - - —— (castle). Pritchard, J. E., F.S.A. (_Proceedings of Clifton - Antiquarian Club_, iv. 17-19). - - BRONLLYS. Clark, i. 283-6; _Archaeologia Cambrensis_, 3rd ser., viii. - 81-92. - - BROUGHTON. Lord Saye and Sele (_Berks, Bucks, and Oxon. Archaeol. - Journal_, new ser., vii. 23-5). - - BUILTH. Clark, i. 304-8. - - CAERPHILLY. Clark, i. 315-35. - - CALDICOT. Bellows, J. (_Cotteswold Field Club_, vi. 263-7). - - CALDICOT. Cobb, J. R. (_Clifton Antiq. Club_, iii. 35-40). - - CAMBRIDGE. Hope, W. H. St John (_Camb. Antiq. Soc._, xi. 324-46). - - —— Hughes, Prof. T. M‘Kenny, F.S.A. (_ibid._, ix. 348). - - CARCASSONNE. Viollet-le-Duc, E. La Cité de Carcassonne. Paris, 1858. - - CARDIFF. Clark, i. 336-50; Ward, J., F.S.A. Cardiff castle, its Roman - origin (_Archaeologia_, lvii. 335-52). - - CAREW. Cobb, J. R. (_Archaeologia Cambrensis_, 5th ser., iii. 27-41). - - CARISBROOKE. Beattie, W. (_Journal Archaeol. Assoc._, xi. 193-205). - - —— Stone, P. G., F.S.A. (_Proc. Soc. Antiq._, 2nd ser., xvi. 409-11). - - CARLISLE. Clark, i. 350-8 - - CARNARVON. Clark, i. 309-15. - - —— Hartshorne, C. H. (_Archaeol. Journal_, vii. 237-65: _Archaeologia - Cambrensis_, 3rd ser., i. 242-6). - - CHÂTEAU-GAILLARD. Clark, i. 378-85; Dieulafoy, M., _see_ General - Bibliography. - - CHEPSTOW. Clark, G. T. (_Bristol and Glouc. Archaeol. Soc._, vi. - 51-74). - - —— Wood, J. G., F.S.A. The Lordship, Castle, and Town of Chepstow. - Newport, 1910. - - CHESTER. Cox, E. W. (_Archit., etc., Soc. Chester and North Wales_, - v. 239-76). - - CHILLINGHAM. Bates, _Border Holds_. - - CHIPCHASE. Bates, _Border Holds_. - - —— Knowles, W. H. (_Archaeologia Æliana_, 3rd ser., i. 32-4). - - CHRISTCHURCH. Clark, i. 385-92. - - CILURNUM. An Account of the Roman Antiquities preserved in the Museum - at Chesters, 1903. - - CLUN. Clark, i. 402-9. - - COLCHESTER. Clark, i. 418-31. - - —— The History and Antiquities of Colchester castle. Colchester, - 1882. _See also_ _Archaeol. Journal_, lxiv. 188-191. - - CONISBROUGH. Clark, i. 431-53. - - CONWAY. Clark, i. 453-60. - - —— Hartshorne, C. H. (_Archaeologia Cambrensis_, new ser., v. 1-12). - - CORFE. Blashill, T. (_Journal Archaeol. Assoc._, xxviii. 258-71). - - —— Bond, T. History and Description of Corfe Castle. London and - Bournemouth, 1883. - - —— Clark, i. 461-75. - - COUCY. Clark, i. 476-87. - - —— Lefèvre-Pontalis, E. Le Château de Coucy (with special - bibliography). Paris, n.d. - - —— Viollet-le-Duc, E. Description du Château de Coucy. Paris, n.d. - - DENBIGH. Ayrton, W. (_Chester Archit., etc., Soc._, ii. 49-60). - - DOLWYDDELAN. Barnwell, E. L. (_Archaeologia Cambrensis_, 4th ser., - xiv. 174-5). - - DOMFRONT. Blanchetière, L. Le Donjon ou Château féodal de Domfront - (Orne). Domfront, 1893. - - DOVER. Blashill, T. (_Journal Archaeol. Assoc._, xl. 373-8). - - —— Clark, ii. 4-24. - - DUFFIELD. Cox, J. C., LL.D., F.S.A. (_Derbyshire Archaeol. Soc._, ix. - 118-78). - - DUNSTANBURGH. Bates, _Border Holds_. - - —— Compton, C. H. (_Journal British Archaeol. Assoc._, new ser., ix. - 111-16). - - DURHAM. Clark, ii. 32-5, and _Archaeol. Journal_, xxxix. 1-22. - - —— Gee, H., D.D., F.S.A. (_Proc. Soc. Antiq._, 2nd ser., xx. 17-18, - and _Trans. Durham and Northumb. Archaeol. Soc._). - - EXETER. Clark, ii. 44-7. - - FALAISE. Ruprich-Robert, V. Paris, 1864. - - GILLING. Bilson, J. (_Yorks Archæol. Journal_, xix. 105-92). - - GUILDFORD. Clark, ii. 53-71. - - —— Malden, H. E. (_Surrey Archaeol. Soc._, xvi. 28-34). - - HADDON. Cheetham, F. H. Haddon Hall. London and Manchester, 1904. - - HALLATON. Dibbin, H. A. (_Proc. Soc. Antiq._, 2nd ser., vii. 316-21). - - HARLECH. Chapman, F. G. W. (_Journal British Archaeol. Assoc._ xxxiv. - 159-67). - - —— Clark, ii. 72-81. - - HASTINGS. Clark, ii. 82-88. - - —— Dawson, C., F.S.A. History of Hastings Castle. 2 vols. London, - 1909. - - HAWARDEN. Clark, ii. 88-99. - - HELMSLEY. Clark, ii. 100-8. - - KENILWORTH. Clark, ii. 130-53. - - —— Knowles, E. H. The Castle of Kenilworth. Warwick, 1872. - - KENTISH CASTLES. Sands, Harold. Some Kentish Castles (_Memorials of - Old Kent_, 1907). - - KIDWELLY. Clark, ii. 153-62. - - KNARESBOROUGH. Clark, ii. 168-76. - - LANCASHIRE CASTLES. Fishwick, H. Lancashire castles (_Lancs. and - Chesh. Antiq. Soc._, xix. 45-76). - - LANCASTER. Cox, E. W. (_Hist. Soc. Lancs. and Cheshire_, new ser., - xii. 95-122). - - LANGLEY. Bates, C. J. (_Archaeologia Æliana_, x. 38-56). - - LEEDS. Clark, ii. 176-8. - - —— James, F. V. (_Archaeologia Cantiana_, xxv. pp. xlix-liii). - - LEICESTER. Clark, ii. 182-8. - - —— Thompson, James. Leicester Castle. Leicester, 1859. - - LEWES. Clark (_Sussex Archaeol. Collections_, xxxiv. 57-70). - - LINCOLN. Clark, ii. 189-201. - - —— Sympson, E. Mansel, M.D. Lincoln, a historical and topographical - account of the city. London, 1906. - - LLANSTEPHAN. Williams, Sir John (_Archaeologia Cambrensis_, 6th ser., - vii. 108-18). - - LONDON, TOWER OF. Clark, ii. 203-72. - - —— Sands, H., F.S.A. (_Memorials of Old London_, London, 1908, vol. - i. 27-65). - - LUDLOW. Clark, ii. 273-90. - - —— Hope, W. H. St John (_Archæologia_, lxi. 258-328). - - LUMLEY. Dodd, J. (_Journal British Archaeol. Assoc._, xxii. 45, 46). - - MANORBIER. Duckett, Sir J. (_Archaeologia Cambrensis_, 4th ser., xi. - 134-145, 286-91, xiii. 166-73). - - MIDDLEHAM. Clark, ii. 293-300. - - MITFORD. Clark, ii. 300-3. - - MONTGOMERY. Clark, ii. 303-12. - - MONT-ST-MICHEL. Corroyer, E. Description de l’abbaye du - Mont-Saint-Michel et de ses abords. Paris, 1877. - - —— Massé, H. J. L. J. A short history and description ... of Mont S. - Michel. London, 1902. - - NEWARK-ON-TRENT. Blagg, T. M., F.S.A. A Guide to Newark, 2nd ed., - 1911. - - NEWCASTLE-ON-TYNE. Bates, C. J. (_Archaeologia Æliana_, ix. 120-9). - - —— Heslop, R. O., F.S.A. (_ibid._, xxv. 91-105; _Journal of British - Archaeol. Assoc._, new ser., xii. 137-8, 214-5). - - —— The Castle of Newcastle, a short descriptive guide. Newcastle, - 1906 (4th ed.). - - NORHAM. Bates, C. J. (_Archaeologia Æliana_, v. 52-5). - - —— Clark, ii. 322-35. - - —— Jerningham, Sir H. E. H. Norham Castle. Edinburgh, 1883. - - NORTHAMPTON. Hartshorne, C. H. (_Archaeol. Journal_, iii. 309-32). - - NORTHUMBRIAN CASTLES. Bates, Cadwallader J. The Border Holds of - Northumberland (_Archaeologia Æliana_ [Newcastle-on-Tyne], xv. - 1-465). - - —— Hartshorne, C. H. Feudal and military antiquities of - Northumberland and the Scottish Borders (_Memoirs of Brit. Archaeol. - Inst._, Newcastle, vol. 2, 1858). - - NORWICH. Hartshorne, A., F.S.A. (_Archaeol. Journal_, xlvi. 260-8). - - —— The Walls of Norwich (report of corporation). Norwich, 1910. - - NOTTINGHAM. Green, Emanuel, F.S.A. (_Archaeol. Journal_, lviii. - 365-97). - - OAKHAM. Hartshorne, C. H. (_Archaeol. Journal_, v. 124-42). - - —— Thompson, A. Hamilton, F.S.A. (_Rutland Magazine_, v. 80-88). - - ODIHAM. Clark, ii. 336-45. - - OLD SARUM. Clark, ii. 447-458. - - —— Hope, W. H. St John, and Hawley, Lt.-Col. W., in _Proc. Soc. - Antiq._, 2nd ser., xxiii. 190-200 and 501-17. - - ORFORD. Hartshorne, C. H. (_Archaeologia_, xxix. 60-9). - - —— Redstone, V. B. (_Trans. Suffolk Archaeol. Inst._, x. 205-30). - - OXFORD. Hartshorne, C. H. (_Archaeol. Journal_, viii. 354-65). - - —— Hope, W. H. St John (_ibid._, lxvii. 363-6). - - —— Lynam, Charles. The Crypts of the Churches of St Peter in the - East, and of St George within the Castle, Oxford (_ibid._, lxviii. - 203-17). - - PEAK CASTLE. Hartshorne, C. H. (_Archaeol. Journ._, v. 207-16). - - —— Hope, W. H. St John (_Derbyshire Archaeol. Soc._, xi. 120-6). - - —— Kirke, Henry (_Derbyshire Archaeol. and Nat. Hist. Soc._, xxviii. - 134-46). - - PEMBROKE. Clark (_Archaeologia Cambrensis_, 3rd series, v. 1-13, - etc.; vi. 1-11, etc.; vii. 185-204). - - —— Cobb, J. R. (_ibid._, 4th series, xiv. 196-220, 264-73). - - PEVENSEY. Clark, ii. 359-67. - - —— Salzmann, L. F. (_Sussex Archaeol. Collections_, xlix. 1-30, etc.). - - PICKERING. Clark, ii. 368-75. - - PONTEFRACT. Clark, ii. 375-88. - - —— Hartshorne, C. H., _Journal British Archaeol. Assoc._, xx. 136-55). - - PORCHESTER. Clark, ii. 388-400. - - PRUDHOE. Bates, _Border Holds_. - - RABY. Scott, O. S., Raby, its Castle and its Lords. Barnard Castle, - 1908. - - RAGLAN. Beattie, W. (_Jour. Archaeol. Assoc._, ix. 215-30). - - —— Bradney, J. A. (_Bristol and Glouc. Archaeol. Soc._, xx. 76-87). - - RICHMOND. Clark (_Yorkshire Archæol. Journal_, ix. 33-54). - - —— Curwen, J. F., (_Cumberland and Westmorland Antiq. and Archaeol. - Soc._, vi. 326-32). - - —— _Yorks Archæol. Journal_, xx. 132-3. - - RISING. Beloe, E. M., F.S.A. (_Norfolk Archaeology_, xii. 164-89). - - —— Clark, i. 364-77. - - ROCHESTER. Beattie, W. (_Journal Archaeol. Assoc._, ix. 215-30). - - —— Clark, ii. 405-23. - - ROCHESTER. Hartshorne, C. H. (_Archaeol. Journal_, xx. 205-23). - - —— Payne, G. (_Archaeologia Cantiana_, xxvii. 177-92). - - ROCKINGHAM. Bigge, H. J. (_Assoc. Archit. Soc. Reports_, xi. 109-18). - - —— Clark, ii. 423-46. - - —— Hartshorne, C. H. (_Archaeol. Journal_, i. 356-78); and privately - printed, Oxford, 1852. - - —— Wise, C. Rockingham Castle and the Watsons. London, 1891. - - SANDAL. Walker, J. W., F.S.A. (_Yorks Archæol. Journal_, xiii. - 154-88). - - SCARBOROUGH. Clark, ii. 458-67. - - —— Stevenson, W. H. (_East Riding Antiq. Soc._, xiv. 13-17). - - SKENFRITH. Bagnall-Oakeley, E. (_Bristol and Glouc. Archaeol. Soc._, - xx. 93-6). - - —— Clark, ii. 467-72. - - SOUTHAMPTON (town walls). Clark, ii. 472-81. - - —— Hope, W. H. St John (_Proc. Soc. Antiq._, 2nd series, xvii. 221-4). - - STOKESAY. De la Touche, G. (_Journal British Archaeol. Assoc._, xxiv. - 238-40). - - —— J. G. D. (_Archaeologia Cambrensis_, xvi. 299-304). - - SUFFOLK CASTLES. Redstone, V. B. Suffolk Castles (_Suffolk Archaeol. - Inst._, xi. 301-19). - - SUSSEX CASTLES. Blaauw, W. H. Royal licences to fortify towns and - houses in Sussex (_Sussex Archaeol. Collections_, xiii. 104-17). - - SWANSEA. Capper, C. (_Archaeologia Cambrensis_, 5th series, iii. - 302-7). - - TAMWORTH. Clark, ii. 481-8. - - TATTERSHALL. Sympson, E. Mansel (_Memorials of Old Lincolnshire_, - 1911, pp. 179-97). - - TICKHILL. Clark, ii. 494-9. - - TRETOWER. Clark, ii. 499-503. - - TUTBURY. Clark, ii. 505-8. - - WARK. Bates, _Border Holds_. - - WARKWORTH. Bates, _Border Holds_. - - WELLS (bishop’s palace). Davis, C. E. (_Journal British Archaeol. - Assoc._, xiii. 177-86). - - WINGFIELD. Cox, J. C. (_Derbyshire Archaeol. Soc._, viii. 65-78). - - —— Edmunds, W. H. Guide to Wingfield Manor. - - YORK. Clark, ii. 534-48 (The Defences of York). - - —— Cooper, T. P. York, The Story of its Walls and Castles. London, - 1904. - - —— —— The Castle of York. London, 1912. - - YORKSHIRE CASTLES. Thompson, A. Hamilton. The Castles of Yorkshire - (_Memorials of Old Yorkshire_, 1909, pp. 236-64). - - - - -MILITARY ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND DURING THE MIDDLE AGES - - - - -CHAPTER I - -EARLY EARTHWORKS AND ROMAN STATIONS - - -The history of military fortification in England begins with those -strongholds which, at vast expense of labour, the early inhabitants -of Britain hewed out of the soil, surrounding defensible positions -with ramparts of earth, divided by deep fosses. The approximate date -of these earthworks can be determined only by excavation, and a vast -amount of work remains to be done in this direction. The number, -however, of those which can be proved to be earlier than the Roman -occupation is very large; and, of this number, a considerable portion, -including some of the most stupendous examples of fortified hill-camps, -may have been the work of neolithic man some two thousand years before -the Christian era. Relative dates in this connection concern us less -than principles of fortification. The hill-camps of pre-Roman Britain -may be divided roughly into two classes. In the first place, there -are those which occupy the summit of a promontory of high land, which -slopes so steeply on all sides but one that artificial defence is -necessary on that side alone. The second class is that of the so-called -“contour forts,” in which the summit of a hill is utilised for the -camp, and encircled by trenches following the contour of the ground. - -[Illustration: Maiden Castle] - -In each case the defences provided by the inhabitants consist of -earthen banks, the materials of which have been dug from the fosses or -ditches which surround their outer face. An earthen bank and fosse, -thrown across the neck of land between the promontory and the plateau -beyond, convert the extremity of the promontory into a fortified -enclosure. Well-known examples of such fortresses are the three camps, -one on the east and two on the west side of the river, which guarded -the valley of the Avon at Clifton. The labour necessary for the -construction of these was naturally far less than that which went to -the making of the great contour fortresses, of which so many splendid -examples remain in Somerset, Wiltshire, Dorset, and in the chalk -districts generally. In these cases, the whole area, or at any rate the -greater part of it, stood in need of entrenchment. There are points -at which the slope is so precipitous that the bank and ditch were -dispensed with, or, as in part of Cissbury camp near Worthing, only a -single bank or ditch was necessary.[1] Also, the steeper the ground, -the less was the labour required in constructing the entrenchments. -But these positions often took the form of enclosures surrounded by -double or triple lines of defence, often of stupendous size. For the -greater part of its extent, the _vallum_ or bank of the oval camp of -Cissbury is double, and along the outer edge of the encircling fosse -is a formidable counterscarp or parapet. Poundbury, which lies on the -high ground west of Dorchester, has a single bank and ditch on its east -and south sides. On the west side the bank is doubled; but the north -side, where the hill falls almost perpendicularly to the Frome, was -left without artificial defence. The superb fortress of Maiden Castle -(2), which crowns an isolated hill, 432 feet high, south of Dorchester, -shows a bewildering complication of plan. The oval central space is -ringed by a number of banks and ditches, which varies from three on the -north side to as many as eight about the western entrance. - -[Illustration: Maiden Castle; plan] - -These early camps form merely the preface to our subject, and attention -need be called only to some general features. Their character, like -that of the medieval town or castle, was strictly defensive. They -were the strongholds of races whose weapons were of a very primitive -description, and could carry to no great range. What their inhabitants -needed was an impregnable fortress, within which they and their herds -could be well sheltered from attack. They belong to a day before siege -operations were possible. To carry them, a determined onset and a -hand-to-hand fight were necessary. Their strength therefore depended -on the complexity of their defences. No enemy could hope to scale the -flanking banks of Maiden Castle, one by one. The entrances to the camp, -at its eastern and western ends (3), were so elaborately concealed -by the overlapping ramparts, that even on a ground-plan they are far -from obvious; and it was almost inevitable that an attacking force, -without a guide acquainted with the ground, would be decoyed into a -_cul-de-sac_ and overwhelmed by the missiles of the defenders on the -ramparts. - -[Illustration: Old Sarum - -(From Mr Hadrian Allcroft’s _Earthwork of England_ by kind permission -of Messrs Macmillan & Co.)] - -The steepness of the bank itself constituted a formidable means of -defence. At Maiden Castle the great northern banks rise to a height -of 60 feet or more. The top of the outer bank of Old Sarum (4) is -106 feet above the level of the ditch below.[2] In many cases, and -probably in all, the inner bank was crowned by a stockade, consisting -of a series of upright stakes, between and round which was twined an -impenetrable hedge of thorns. The plateau or berm which was sometimes -left behind the parapet of the bank, where there was more than a single -bank and ditch, was a valuable asset to the defenders of prehistoric -strongholds, forming an advance post from which they were able to wield -their missiles freely; while sometimes the summit of one or more of the -outer banks was made for the same purpose into a broad platform, which -allowed greater freedom of movement. The parapet or counterscarp of -the outer ditch was probably defended by a stockade, and it is known -that in some cases sharpened stakes or stones were fixed firmly in the -bottom of the ditches. - -[Illustration: Bury Ditches] - -The impregnable character of the _enceinte_ was thus ensured. But -further skill was necessary to defend the entrances of the camp. Of -these there was usually more than one, and these were necessarily -formed by cuttings through the banks. As in the case of Maiden Castle, -the path of entry could be converted into a labyrinth by multiplying -the banks and ditches. Every inch of this circuitous path is guarded -by tall ramparts: there are seven or eight points in its course at -which fatal error was possible, and one at any rate where an attacking -army could hardly fail to rush securely upon destruction. The eastern -entrance is so guarded by transverse banks that the path is almost -equally difficult to find. It was seldom, however, that entrances were -so elaborately protected. At Old Sarum the western entrance is covered -by a semicircular outwork, on the flanks of which are the two inlets to -the passage through the outer _vallum_. On the east side the entrance -is through a narrow passage which runs for some distance between the -parapet of the outer ditch and an outwork, and is at right angles -to the actual passage through the bank. The most common method of -defending the entrance was to make a diagonal path, usually from right -to left, through the banks. Each bank would thus overlap the next: the -summits above the path would be broadened out into platforms, capable -of occupation by bodies of defenders; and the right flank of the -enemy, unprotected by shields, would be exposed to their missiles. The -entrance, however, might be substantially protected by giving an inward -curve to the inner bank on each side of the path; and this is a plan -very frequently employed.[3] Where outworks were specially constructed, -their form differs considerably: we have seen them employed in two ways -at Old Sarum—as a kind of horn-work thrown out in front of a passage, -and as a spur projecting at right angles in front of an entrance. In -both cases an absolutely straight approach is precluded. Occasionally, -where an approximately direct approach was permitted, it is guarded on -one side by a spur thrown out at right angles to the bank. At Blackbury -castle, an early earthwork in south Devon, the main entrance has a -straight approach guarded on either side by a triangular outwork, which -is formed by a most ingenious arrangement of banks and by prolongations -of the main ditch (7). At the actual entrance the main bank is curved -outwards, with broad platforms at the top. The hollow interiors of the -outworks might serve as guard-houses, or the attacking force could -be driven into them from the gateway of the fort, and penned in a -position from which escape was impossible. Sometimes hollows were made -in the bank or in a projecting outwork near the gateway to serve as -guard-houses. On either side of the main entrance, the bank was often -slightly raised. At least one instance is known in which the main gate -was concealed by making a break in another part of the rampart, and -raising the bank on either side. The enemy, making for this point, -would miss the real entrance, and run the risk of losing his life in a -_cul-de-sac_ purposely constructed within the rampart. - -[Illustration: Blackbury Castle - -(From Mr Hadrian Allcroft’s _Earthwork of England_ by kind permission -of Messrs Macmillan & Co.)] - -In these fortresses, the defences of which were due to instinctive -skill in the face of constant danger, it is impossible not to recognise -how many of the most scientific features of medieval fortification -were anticipated. The concentric plan of Caerphilly castle (270), with -its easy provisions of egress, and its difficulty of access; the spurs -which guard the approaches to Beaumaris (277) and Conway castles; the -barbicans which form so prominent a defence of Alnwick castle (243), -and the gateways of York have prototypes, of which their engineers were -probably unconscious, in the huge earthworks of prehistoric Britain. -Through a long interval, in which military art pursued a very gradual -evolution, the wheel came full circle. The devices of the earthwork -builders were translated into stone with far greater economy of labour. - -Although the most conspicuous examples of early earthwork are found in -hill fortresses, camps were not confined to hilly sites, nor were their -defences always composed of earthwork. There are districts where the -hard nature of the soil forbade the construction of earthen banks and -fosses; and consequently there are many camps which are surrounded by -walls of rough uncemented stone, originally kept in place by facings -and bondings of larger and smoother stones.[4] These camps are usually -not large. They occur very commonly in the north of England: a good -example is that known as the Castles, in the valley of the Bedburn, -seven or eight miles west of Bishop Auckland. The enclosure, situated -on a boggy slope, is surrounded by shapeless masses of _débris_, the -ruins of the dry-built ring wall, which has lost its facing and so -has fallen to pieces. Stone was also used in the ramparts of some of -the camps on the rocky hills of Somerset, as in the camps on either -side of the Avon at Clifton. The great fortress of Worlebury, above -Weston-super-Mare, was surrounded by an immense wall of uncemented -stone, brought to great thickness by building several walls, each with -its own set of facing stones, up against each other. On its eastern -front, separated from the main rampart by a deep ditch, cut in the -solid rock, was another wall of stone; and this again was protected by -a series of outer earthworks (9). Dolebury, at the western extremity -of the Mendips, is surrounded by a double wall of loose limestone.[5] -In these cases, as in the Welsh strongholds of Penmaenmawr and Tre’r -Ceiri, geological conditions made the earthen bank an impossibility, -and the stone of the neighbourhood took its place. - -[Illustration: Worlebury - -(From Mr Hadrian Allcroft’s _Earthwork of England_, by kind permission -of Messrs Macmillan & Co.)] - -It has often been argued that these prehistoric fortresses were merely -places of refuge, to which, in time of war, the dwellers in the levels -below betook themselves and their flocks. But it is much more probable -that they were the permanent habitations of communities, not merely -camps, but fixed settlements, chosen for habitation on account of their -strong position, and gradually fortified by labour which may have been -the work, in the more elaborate examples, of many generations. The -need of permanent protection for themselves and their flocks and herds -seems to have been felt by the early inhabitants of Britain to such an -extent that their regular settlements naturally took the semblance -of fortified camps. This is very evident in the case of those camps -which are found in positions where the natural advantages are very -small—positions which might be chosen by people in search of an abode, -but would hardly be chosen merely as a refuge. Camps in these positions -are never so imposing as those which crown hill-tops: the labour of -excavating the ditches and heaping up the banks was not aided by the -natural slope of a hill, and the earthworks, being slighter and nearer -the more recent haunts of men, are more liable to destruction. But the -defensive nature of such settlements is unmistakable. - -The Roman invaders brought to England new methods of military -construction and the tradition of an architecture of dressed and -cemented stone. Their whole system of warfare was far in advance of -that pursued by the British tribes. They had developed the art of -siege to a high pitch. Their operations in open field were orderly and -scientific. Their walled strongholds were constructed with a view which -took into account, not only the mere strength of the ramparts, but -also the capacity of the defenders to man them. Men, not fortresses, -were the main asset of Roman warfare; and consequently their earthwork -was far less imposing than that of the Britons of the prehistoric age. -Their camps and permanent stations were usually surrounded by a single -fosse of no great depth: the rare cases in which traces remain of more -than a single fosse are camps upon the exposed northern frontier of -Roman Britain, where the onrush of the barbarian enemy was stayed by -a series of trenches, either covered with brushwood or filled with -sharp stones or stakes. Camps were hastily constructed of earthwork; -bank, ditch, and parapet playing their part. But where a camp became -a permanent station a stone wall took the place of the earthen bank. -The most important relic of the Roman occupation in Britain, the great -frontier wall from the Tyne to the Solway, was preceded by a _vallum_ -of turf, a temporary defence which was superseded by permanent masonry. - -No system of connected operations can be traced between prehistoric -forts. Each of these was probably an isolated stronghold. Roman -stations, on the other hand, were military posts manned by detachments -of one army, and connected by strategic roads. This is seen very -clearly in the case of the great wall already mentioned. The wall can -be traced for about 73 miles, from Wallsend (Segedunum) on the Tyne -to Bowness on the Solway. It is built in the usual Roman method, with -a core of cemented rubble between ashlar facings. Its breadth varies -between 7 and 9½ feet: the height appears to have been originally -from 16 to 18 feet.[6] Its northern face is defended by a ditch, marked -_a_ in the section below; but, as it follows the highest ground in its -course, and runs for some distance along the edge of basaltic cliffs -which dip northward, the ditch at these points becomes unnecessary and -is dispensed with. There were twenty-three stations in its length, -each garrisoned by a cohort of infantry or squadron of cavalry, chosen -from the Roman auxiliary troops of Gauls, Spaniards, Moors, &c.[7] -These were connected by a paved military road (_c_) along the south -side of the wall. At distances of a Roman mile from one another were -placed rectangular forts, now known as mile-castles, built against -the wall upon its south side; and the interval between each of these -was strengthened further by turrets, apparently two in number, which -also projected southward, but encroached slightly upon the thickness -of the wall. The south side of the military road was defended by an -earthen _vallum_, marked _d_,[8] the course of which is not directly -parallel to the wall, but is in places as much as half a mile distant, -keeping to lower ground where the wall prefers the summit of the basalt -ridge. This bank has a ditch (_e_) on its southern side, divided from -it by a level space or berm: the ditch has a southern parapet (_f_), -and another bank beyond (_g_). In certain places the ditch has also a -northern parapet; but the general arrangement of the earthen ramparts -is as described. Of the controversy as to the relative date of the wall -and its flanking earthworks nothing need be said here. Its military -purpose is abundantly clear. It provided not only a strong means of -defence against the attacks of the northern tribes, but a base of -operations for offensive warfare. Each of the stations and mile-castles -has a northern gateway in addition to its other entrances; and two of -the Roman roads which met the wall at intervals from the south passed -through it on their way to the Scottish border. - -[Illustration: Section of Roman Wall and _Vallum_.] - -The object of the great system of Roman roads was purely military.[9] -Along these broad paved “streets” the troops from the various stations -could be mobilised with great quickness. They kept as a rule to high -ground, choosing a convenient ridge, like that which runs from end to -end of Lincolnshire, and preserving as straight a line as possible. -The most important stations were placed at the crossing of rivers or -at the junction of roads. In the early days of the Roman occupation, -the operations of the army were directed entirely against the native -tribes. No system of coast defence was adopted. The necessity for -this came later, when Britain, under Roman dominion, was attacked by -bodies of Saxon pirates. A chain of fortresses was then constructed -along what was known as the Saxon shore, from Branodunum (Brancaster) -in north Norfolk to Portus Adurni in Sussex or Hampshire. The remains -of the walls of Gariannonum (Burgh Castle in Suffolk), Rutupiae -(Richborough in Kent), Anderida (Pevensey in Sussex), and Portus Magnus -(Porchester in Hampshire), are, next to the great wall, perhaps the -most interesting relics of the Roman epoch which we possess. The forts -of the Saxon shore were placed, for the most part, at the mouths of -estuaries, for which the foreign pirates would naturally make. - -[Illustration: Cilurnum] - -In several cases a Roman station was founded on the site of a British -settlement. It was, however, more compact in plan, and occupied only -a portion of the site. The earthworks defending the west side of the -settlement which preceded Camulodunum (Colchester) are two to three -miles beyond the Roman wall of the city, which occupied merely the -north-east angle of a very large and straggling enclosure. The original -Roman station at Lincoln may be taken as a typical example of a walled -town of this epoch.[10] It was a rectangular enclosure, with its longer -axis from east to west, occupying the south-west angle of the high -ridge above the valley of the Witham. In each of the four walls was a -gateway. The inner arch and the postern, with part of the side walls, -of the northern gateway still remain, and of the southern gateway there -are still substantial fragments; the line of the street which led from -one to the other is still fairly, though not accurately, preserved. -The positions of the east and west gateways are known: the line of the -street from the east gate to the centre of the city was deflected in -the middle ages, but its continuation to the west gate is represented -by the course of a street, much widened in modern times. Close to the -meeting of the four streets was the market-place or _forum_. This, in -the early days of Roman Lincoln, was the _praetorium_, or military -headquarters of the camp. But the legion quartered at Lincoln was -removed to York, as it seems, in the time of Vespasian, and the city -settled down to a civil and commercial existence. Round the _forum_ -were clustered the chief public buildings of the city, and the -foundations of a large colonnaded building are still to be seen below -the present ground level. At Gloucester, Chichester, and Chester, the -course of the four main streets has been little, if at all, disturbed, -and their present meeting-place nearly represents the centre of the -Roman city. The arrangements of the _forum_ of a Romano-British town -have been made out very clearly by the excavations at Calleva Atrebatum -(Silchester) in Hampshire.[11] It was a closed rectangle, entered by -a gateway and surrounded by public buildings, in front of which were -colonnades; one side at Silchester was occupied by a great basilica, -which served the purposes of a hall of justice and mercantile exchange. - -[Illustration: Borcovicus] - -The stations on the Roman wall were of a more purely military character -than the towns which have been mentioned. They have the general -characteristic of a rectangular plan, with the angles rounded off, and -with a gateway, flanked by guard-houses, in each of the four sides. In -the two largest stations, however, Amboglanna (Birdoswald) and Cilurnum -(Chesters), there were, in addition to the main gateways, two smaller -gateways in the east and west walls respectively.[12] The walls of -the stations are generally 5 feet thick, and are built, like the wall -itself, of a core of cemented rubble, with facings of dressed stone. -The main gateways have a double passage, divided by a longitudinal -wall, which is pierced by a narrow passage in the centre. Their inner -and outer openings were spanned by arches, and closed by gates which -were hung on iron pivots fixed in the jamb of each opening next the -wall. At Borcovicus (Housesteads) there was no dividing wall through -the passage between the outer and inner openings of the gateway; but -each of these openings is composed of two arches, divided by a square -pier (15).[13] Each gateway had a stone sill, raised above the level -of the stone pavement. The interior passage was flanked by rectangular -guard-houses. The gateways of Borcovicus show interesting signs of -reconstruction, which point to the fact that, not long after its -construction, the station was seized by an enemy. At a subsequent time, -its Roman occupants reduced the width of the gateways by walling up -one half of the double openings. This was done apparently at different -times, the east gateway bearing signs of being treated in this way -at an earlier period than the others. The west gateway was walled up -with great ingenuity. Of its outer entrances, the northern, and of its -inner entrances, the southern, were blocked; so that a foe, choosing -this face of the station for attack, had to press his way through an -elbow-shaped, instead of a straight passage. - -[Illustration: Borcovicus; West Gateway] - -[Illustration: Pevensey] - -The wall of a Roman station, between the gateways, was often flanked -by a series of towers, each projecting from the wall in the form of -a semicircle or rather more than a semicircle. This was the case -in some of the large Gallo-Roman cities, like Autun.[14] While the -rounded form of these towers made them difficult to undermine or -batter down, their summits served as standing-ground for the large -_ballistae_ or catapults, from which javelins or stones could be -hurled upon the attacking force. Their projection at regular intervals -made it possible for the defenders to command the whole line of wall -between each pair of towers; so that the besiegers’ attack would -necessarily be concentrated upon the towers themselves. At Pevensey -(16), where the enclosure of the station is almost oval, and not, as -usual, rectangular, in shape, there are remains of twelve solid round -towers, including those which flank the south-western gateway. At -Burgh Castle there are four towers in the east wall, two of which are -angle-towers.[15] Owing to the scarcity of good building stone in the -district, the walls at Burgh Castle are unfaced, and are built of flint -with bonding courses of tiles; only the upper portions of the towers -were bonded into the walls. A bed of concrete, with a platform of oak -planks above, formed the foundation of the towers.[16] The angles of -the wall of Roman York were strengthened by large polygonal towers. A -large portion of one of these, a magnificent example of Roman masonry, -remains; it formed the north-western angle of the city, and was hollow, -with an internal as well as an external projection (17). No outward -projections appear to occur upon the Roman wall or in the walls of -its stations. The “mile-castles,” as already noted, are built against -the inner side of the wall. At Cilurnum (13) and Borcovicus there -are foundations of square towers against and inside the containing -walls, while the angles of the stations are simply rounded off. The -western part of the north wall of Borcovicus has also been doubled in -thickness, apparently to give a safe foundation for a large catapult -planted on the top of the wall. The thickening was accomplished, at -a date later than the original building, by constructing an inner -wall, and filling up the space between this and the outer rampart with -clay. At Cilurnum, which appears to have been in existence before the -great frontier wall was made, the original east and west gateways were -left on the north side of the wall, which intersects the station. -As they were thus insufficiently protected, they were filled up -solid with masses of rubble, and were probably used as platforms for -catapults,[17] smaller gateways being made on the south side of the -wall. - -[Illustration: York; Multangular Tower] - -[Illustration: Borcovicus; Praetorium] - -In the interior of the station, as at Lincoln, York, and Borcovicus, -the main street, or _via principalis_, led directly from the north -to the south gate.[18] The centre of the station, west of the _via -principalis_, was occupied by the _praetorium_, the headquarters -of the commander of the legion, answering to the space where, in a -temporary camp, the tents of the general and his staff were pitched. -As we have seen, the place of the _praetorium_ was taken in commercial -towns by the _forum_. The _praetorium_ at Borcovicus consisted of two -rectangular courts, open to the sky in the centre. The outer court, -with its main entrance facing the eastern street or _via praetoria_, -was surrounded on three sides by a colonnade. A doorway, immediately -opposite the main entrance, opened into the eastern colonnade of the -inner court. This had no northern or southern colonnades, but had -doorways to north and south: its western side was occupied by a line -of five rectangular chambers, the central one of which was the chapel -where the standards, with the other sacred treasures belonging to the -cohort,[19] were kept. The _praetorium_ faced the eastern street of -the station, which led to the east gate or _porta praetoria_. The gate -at the end of the western street was called _porta decumana_.[20] -The remaining buildings of the station consisted of straight blocks, -intersected by lanes: the majority of these buildings would be used as -barracks. It should be noted that, in the planning of a Roman station -or walled town, the _praetorium_ or _forum_ was taken as the central -point: the _via principalis_, in order to run clear from gate to gate, -was thus on one side of an axis of the rectangle, and the north and -south gates[21] were not in the centre of their respective walls. - -It is clear that, as time went on and the power of Rome in Britain -grew weaker, the defensive character of the great wall and that of the -stations which it connected were emphasised at the expense of their -character as bases of active warfare. But it must be repeated that -Roman stations in Britain were not planned to form impregnable shelters -for communities mainly pastoral. They were centres for bodies of -fighting men, linked to each other by a splendid system of roads. The -Roman station at Dorchester, the lines of which are so well preserved -to-day, was founded, not within the ramparts of Maiden Castle or -Poundbury, but on the lower slopes near the passage of the Frome. The -single rampart and single ditch of a Roman town were almost invariable. -Free egress as well as entrance, provisions for attack as well as -defence, were necessary; and, with these objects in view, immense -earthen defences, such as those of Maiden Castle, would be cumbersome. -Bodies of Roman troops, as at Lincoln or Colchester, occasionally -occupied part of the _enceinte_ of a British settlement; but it is very -rarely that, as in the case of Old Sarum, we find a British hill fort -which also probably served as a Roman station. In this instance, the -occupation of the fort was due, doubtless, to its neighbourhood to the -military road: the road would not have been brought out of its way to -include the fort in its course. Roman stations, although they differed -in size, were small and compact, when contrasted with the large and -straggling areas occupied by the British settlers. Suburbs naturally -grew up outside their walls, and sometimes, although not very often, -the walled enclosure was extended to include a growing outer district. -This is supposed by many antiquaries to have happened at Lincoln, where -the original Roman station occupied the summit of the hill north of -the great bend of the Witham, which here turns from its northerly -course due eastward. After the city of Lincoln had settled down to -civil life, practically the whole slope of the hill south of the first -_enceinte_ was included within the city and encircled by a wall. -Part of the east wall of this later enclosure is still visible: the -Stonebow, the medieval south gate of the city, about a hundred yards -from the river and the bridge, appears to be on the site of the later -south gateway of Roman Lincoln.[22] - - - - -CHAPTER II - -THE SAXON AND DANISH PERIOD - - -The Saxon invasions were a rude disturbance to the progress of English -civilisation. The Romanised Britons lay more and more at the mercy of -the invaders, as the soldiery were called away to take part in the last -struggles of the western Empire in Italy. Barbarians from the country -north of the wall, Saxon and Jutish pirates from across the sea, saw -in the monuments of the Roman occupation fair ground for pillage. -It is difficult to estimate the destruction caused by the invaders. -But, apart from the havoc wrought by the Teutonic immigrants and the -northern tribes, it is certain that the walled city of Roman times -did not commend itself as a habitation to the new settlers. The fact -that their settlements flank Roman roads, like Ermine street or the -Fosseway, at distances of a mile or so from the main thoroughfare, -proves little in itself; for the villas of the Roman period, which -probably included, like the _latifundia_ of Italy, a considerable -population of labourers on each estate, lay at some distance from -the main roads. The frequent villages—hams, tuns, and worths—were, -however, a new feature; and the life of each village, for which a -clearing was made in the wooded country-side, was pastoral, not -military. This fact is of importance with regard to the scanty traces -of defensive fortifications constructed during the Saxon occupation. -Here and there natural opportunities prompted the Saxon invaders to -found settlements on sites of Roman cities. The geographical position -of London or Exeter, at the head of a broad estuary, made such places -natural centres of traffic, of high importance to trade routes. On the -other hand, while some of the larger provincial capitals preserved -their life in part, other _urbes_ and the smaller _oppida_, or walled -towns, were left desolate. Pons Aelii, near the east end of the Roman -wall, was abandoned until in the tenth century a small monastery was -founded on the site, and the cluster of houses which gathered round it -received the name of Muncanceaster (Monkchester). The place, however, -did not recover its importance or become a permanent settlement -until the Conqueror founded there his New Castle on the Tyne, which -became the nucleus of the city of the middle ages and modern times. -The military stations of the Saxon shore were ruined and abandoned. -We know of the sack of Anderida in 492 A.D.: the walls of the station -were left standing, but the later settlement of Pevensey grew up in -the open country outside the walls. Richborough, Othona at the mouth -of the Blackwater, Burgh Castle, sheltered no new settlements: the new -villages or towns, Sandwich, Bradwell, Burgh, were all at a distance -from the Roman walls or outside their area. Othona (Ythanceaster) was -deserted when Cedd made it a missionary centre in the seventh century; -and the little church, which exists to-day and may have been Cedd’s own -church, was built across the site of the east gate of the station. In -Leicester, which became an important Danish centre, the topography of -the Roman station was much disturbed, and the church of St Nicholas, -the nave of which is probably a little earlier than the Norman -conquest, was built within the walls directly in front of the blocked -west gate of the city. Towns like Chester, Gloucester, or Chichester, -which have preserved the line of their Roman streets with little -alteration, are rare; and the continuity of plan does not necessarily -prove that there was a similar continuity in the life of the places. -On the contrary, the present lay-out of either town shows four streets -meeting at an open space or Carfax in the centre of the city: no trace -remains above ground of the closed _forum_, which at Silchester and -Corstopitum formed the centre of the plan and directed the course of -the streets. Silchester, laid waste by Saxon invaders, has shared the -fate of Anderida, Othona, and many other once prosperous Romano-British -towns. - -In French history there was no such interruption as the Saxon invasion -caused in our own. The consequence is that the chief provincial -capitals of to-day, the centres of local government and religion, are -and always have been cities of Roman origin, which, although their -Latin name has not always been kept, preserve the names of the Gallic -tribes amid which they were founded. Reims, Paris, Amiens, Beauvais, -Bourges, Le Mans, Tours, Rouen, Sens, Troyes, Chartres, cities which -have taken a most prominent place in French history, and contain -the most noble monuments of French religious architecture, have an -unbroken history from Roman times and even earlier. The cathedrals -of Christianised Gaul rose in the centre of the cities: outside the -walls, as time went on, rose abbeys like those of Saint-Ouen at -Rouen, Saint-Taurin at Evreux, La Couture and Le Pré at Le Mans. The -fortresses of the eleventh and twelfth centuries, like the older -castle of Rouen, were founded in a corner of the city, possibly on -the site of the Roman _arx_ or citadel, of which we have substantial -remains in the abandoned Roman station of Jublains (Naeodunum -Diablintum). In time the city grew, extending into suburbs far -outside the original walls: a suburb sprang up round the neighbouring -monastery. The circuit of the walls was extended beyond their old -limit. The eastern Roman wall might be broken down, as at Le Mans, -where the cathedral was in a corner of the city, to make way for the -thirteenth-century quire of the principal church:[23] the defences of -the city were here transferred to a new outer ring of wall, the line of -which can be seen on the bank of the Sarthe. Within the present extent -of such cities the plan of the Roman station can frequently be traced: -whatever the vicissitudes of the place may have been, no year has -passed in which the chatter of the Vieux-Marché has been silent, or the -Grande-Rue has been untrodden daily by busy footsteps. But in English -towns of corresponding importance the case is different. If the cities -were preserved from pillage, traces of Christianity and civilisation -were obliterated. If York kept its position as an inhabited town, -its population must have been small and poor: the Anglian sovereigns -of Northumbria dwelt, not in the old Roman capital, but at country -settlements like Goodmanham. The history of York begins again with the -mission of Paulinus and the foundation of the first Saxon cathedral -there. We also hear of Lincoln in connection with Paulinus, who -consecrated a church there; and this city, like York, was large and -important at the time of the Conquest. But, in both these cases, the -Anglian invasion first, and the Danish invasion later, caused a serious -disturbance to civic and religious life. Although there is evidence -that the Saxon bishops who ruled at Dorchester (Oxon.) in the tenth -and eleventh centuries looked upon Lincoln as the real seat of their -authority, it did not recover its position as an ecclesiastical capital -until a Norman bishop raised his cathedral in the south-eastern corner -of the hill city. Even then the cathedral stood, not with its front to -the _via principalis_, as at Le Mans, nor with its face to the _forum_, -as at Coutances, but in an enclosure of its own, apart from the main -life of the city. When we think of the great ecclesiastical centres of -England, there are some names which recall the Roman occupation; but -of these Chichester, Exeter, Lincoln, did not become sees of bishops -until the time of the Norman conquest; Chester, although regarded -as one seat of their authority by the medieval bishops of Lichfield, -was never the real capital of their diocese. Bath and Old Sarum were -given episcopal rank by Norman prelates. The true Saxon cathedral -towns were villages of post-Roman origin—Lichfield, Wells, Sherborne, -Durham, Ripon, Elmham, Thetford. The fact is significant; for, upon the -continent of Europe, the ecclesiastical importance of a city was the -result of its prominent position as the civil metropolis of a district. -The choice of these obscure villages for the sees of Saxon prelates -is a testimony to the practical abandonment of Roman cities by the -invaders. - -As a matter of fact, the Saxons trusted little to walls: their -strength, after they had settled in the country, lay neither in -earthwork, nor in stonework, but in the boundary of wood or marsh -that extended round their settlements. Consequently, during the six -centuries and a half between the final departure of the Roman legions -and the Norman conquest, the history of military construction in -England is very obscure. Work in stone, which can be distinguished as -Saxon, is practically confined to churches. Such fortifications of this -long period as can be identified are entirely in earthwork. In only a -few cases we hear of a stone wall of _enceinte_ being built, or an old -Roman town wall being repaired. Further, it may safely be said that -these fortifications, at any rate until the end of the period, whether -their builders were Saxons or Danes, were intended to protect, not -private individuals, but a community. Of the private citadel or castle -we hear nothing until the period immediately before the Conquest, and -then it is heard of only as a foreign importation. - -The most formidable earthworks of the Saxon period are the great dykes -known as Wansdyke and Offa’s dyke, with the subsidiary works of the -Bokerley dyke and Wat’s dyke. Offa’s dyke, which ran from the Dee in -the north to the Wye in the south, with a ditch along its western side, -and the parallel line of Wat’s dyke,[24] are generally acknowledged -to have formed the boundary line between the Mercian kingdom of Offa -(757-96) and the territory of the conquered Britons. The object and -date of Wansdyke and the Bokerley dyke is not so clear. The Wansdyke -ran from the Bristol Channel near Portishead, across north Somerset and -along the downs south and south-west of Bath, passed through Wiltshire, -north of Devizes and south of Marlborough, and, leaving Wiltshire east -of Savernake park, turned southwards in the direction of Andover. The -Bokerley dyke, in its present state, is only some four miles long, and -forms the boundary between Wilts and Dorset, on the road from Salisbury -to Cranborne. In both cases the ditch is upon the north or north-east -side of the bank or dyke, which is clear proof that the defence was -provided against attack from that quarter. The Wansdyke is obviously -a late Roman or post-Roman work, for it encroaches in places upon the -adjacent Roman road. The system on which it is planned resembles that -of the Roman wall, in that its course includes a series of forts, -presumably of earlier date. The conclusion which seems irresistible -is that propounded by the late General Pitt-Rivers, that the Wansdyke -was raised by the Roman Britons, to defend their last refuge in the -south-west against the invading Saxons. If this is really the case, -one can only wonder at the energy of despair which constructed this -huge rampart, and at the uselessness of its builders’ attempt to ward -off an invasion from the inland country alone. Ceawlin’s victory at -Dyrham in 577 brought Gloucester, Cirencester, and Bath into the hands -of the Saxons, and cut off the communication between the Britons of -the south-west and those of Wales. Whatever part the Wansdyke, on the -hills north of which the battle was fought, may have played during the -century before the fight at Dyrham, its history must have closed with -Ceawlin’s conquest. - -The first work of fortification by the Teutonic invaders, of which -we have any account, is the royal city of Bebbanburh or Bamburgh in -Northumberland, which Ida (547-59), king of Northumbria, called after -his wife Bebba. This, says the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle,[25] was first -girt by a hedge, and afterwards—probably long after the days of Ida—by -a wall. One of the most noble of English castles stands upon the -basaltic rock of Bamburgh, and its walls embrace the site of Ida’s -capital. But the later stronghold must not be confounded with the -earlier. The _burh_ of Ida, which Penda sought to burn in 651,[26] -was not the private castle which William Rufus afterwards besieged. -The name of Bebbanburh is significant. _Burh_ or _burg_ was a term -applied by Saxons to fortified places. Cissbury in Sussex, Badbury and -Poundbury in Dorset, Battlesbury and Scratchbury in Wilts, Cadbury, -Dolebury, and Worlebury in Somerset, are early camps to which Saxons -gave the name of _burh_. Searobyrig, the later Salisbury, was the -name given by them to the great fortress of Old Sarum. Peterborough -and Bury St Edmunds bear names derived from _burh_ and its dative -_byrig_, and were towns enclosed by a rampart.[27] And, although, by -a not very satisfactory method of argument, the Saxon _burh_ has been -taken very generally as the prototype of the castle, the very cases on -which this argument chiefly rests show that the _burh_ was a fortified -town, and not the fortress of an individual lord. It is true that, at -any rate until the time of Alfred the Great, the word _burh_ implies -a fortified house as well as a fortified collection of dwellings; but -the _burhs_ of which we read in connection with the Danish wars were -towns and villages. The term is equivalent to the Roman _oppidum_, the -French _bourg_, or the German _burg_. The first of the Saxon emperors, -Henry the Fowler, made the founding of _burhs_ a leading part of his -policy:[28] Merseburg, Brandenburg, Würzburg, all bear the familiar -suffix. And, had not a later age chosen perversely to call the greatest -of our prehistoric camps Maiden Castle, we should have had a Maidenbury -of our own to show, far more ancient than the German Magdeburg.[29] - -Some uncertainty attaches to the rare remains of fortifications -of _burhs_ “wrought” by Saxons and Danes. It would seem that they -cannot have been very strong. The defences consisted of the usual -earthen bank with a stockade on the top and an outer ditch; but one -may safely assume that the strength of the defence lay mainly in the -actual stockade, and that the bank and ditch never reached formidable -proportions. Thelwall, near Warrington, takes its name from the wooden -stockade, the wall of thills or upright palisades with which Edward the -Elder surrounded the village in 923.[30] There are exceptional cases -in which we hear of a stone wall; but in these instances the _burh_ -was a Roman city or station, and the wall was a Roman wall. This may -be fairly assumed with regard to the wall of Edward the Elder’s _burh_ -at Towcester (921). It was certainly the case at Colchester, where the -Danish defenders were worsted in the same year by the _fyrd_ of Kent -and Essex. When Alfred the Great “repaired Lundenburh” in 886,[31] he -undoubtedly made good the weak places in the stone wall which the -Romans had made round their city of London. - -The _burh_, the fortified stronghold of a Saxon community, comes into -prominence as the result of the Danish invasions of the ninth century. -The method of the invaders was in almost every case the same. Seamen -before everything else, they sought in their long ships the estuaries -of rivers, and proceeded to penetrate inland as far as the stream -would take them. From a base of operations, preferably an island in -the river, where they could harbour their boats safely, they rode into -the surrounding country, burning and pillaging. In 835, allied with -the Britons of Cornwall, they came up the Tamar, and fought a battle -with Egbert at Hingston down, west of Tavistock, in which they suffered -defeat.[32] In 843, they effected their first permanent settlement -in France, on the island of Noirmoutier, south of the estuary of the -Loire: they invaded the banks of the river, sacking Nantes and killing -the bishop, and, after their summer campaign was over, settled down -to build houses for winter quarters on their island.[33] Each of the -great French rivers was infested during the next few years by bands of -northern pirates. Northmen in 845 sailed up the Garonne to Toulouse, -and up the Seine to Paris, where destruction was avoided only by -buying them off. Towns which lay near the rivers or sea coast were -invariably sacked. Sometimes the pirates, growing bolder, left their -ships and rode for some distance inland. In 851, starting from Rouen, -they pillaged Beauvais. In 855, after burning Angers, they took to -the land and sacked Poitiers. In both cases, however, their return -journey was successfully cut off by a French army. In 856 the Danes of -the Seine made their winter quarters at Jeufosse, on the bend of the -river between Vernon and Mantes, and within no great distance of Paris. -Within the next few years, they established themselves in strong posts -at Oissel, above Rouen, and at Melun, above Paris. The greater part of -the last sixteen years of Charles the Bald (_d._ 877) was occupied in -defending Paris against their annual forays, repairing the bridges they -had destroyed, and so cutting off their return from expeditions up the -Marne and Oise. But, although they were constantly checked, they always -returned. They abandoned the siege of Paris in 885-6, but only after -Charles the Fat had paid them off. The last great invasion of France by -the Northmen was in 911, when, by the treaty of Saint-Clair-sur-Epte, -Charles the Simple ceded the duchy of Normandy to Rollo. - -The actual settlement of the Northmen in England began in 851, eight -years after the occupation of Noirmoutier. They wintered in Thanet, and -sailed thence up the Stour and Thames, taking Canterbury and London. -As in France, their landward excursions from their boats were less -successful, and they were seriously beaten by Æthelwulf at Ockley in -Surrey. But failure did not hinder them from returning. As in France, -the system of buying off their attacks was adopted—a ready inducement -to repeated plunder. In 887 they were in the Humber, and dealt a final -blow to the decaying power of Northumbria at York. Next year they -invaded Mercia up the Trent, and established themselves at Nottingham. -The years 870 and 871 were remarkable for their land operations. The -defeat of the East Anglian king Edmund in Suffolk laid Mercia and -Lindsey open to their ravages, and so established their power in what -was to become the Danelaw; while in 871, within reach of the Danish -camp on the Thames at Reading, occurred the great series of battles -in Berkshire and Wiltshire, in which Alfred’s bravery was proved. The -details of Alfred’s defence of Wessex against the Northmen are well -known: the compromise effected at Wedmore in 878 preserved the south of -England to Englishmen, but established the Danes north of a line which -may roughly be represented by the course of the Welland, Soar, upper -Trent, and Mersey. - -England, however, had to endure a long intestine warfare for years -after the death of Alfred. The strenuous efforts of his children, -Edward the Elder and Æthelflæd, prevented the men of the Danelaw from -extending their power southwards. But the Northmen used persevering -tactics, and not merely the enemy within, but fresh invasions from -without, disturbed the peace of the monarchs of Wessex during the later -part of the tenth century. After the disastrous reign of Ethelred the -Redeless came a period of Danish rule over the whole of England; while -the reigns of the last Saxon kings formed the prelude to the final -invasion of the Northmen, the Norman conquest. - -The most interesting feature, from a military point of view, of the -contest between Wessex and the Danelaw, is the systematic defence of -the Midland rivers by _burhs_ during the reign of Edward the Elder, -either by himself or his sister Æthelflæd. Æthelflæd, who fixed -her chief residence at Tamworth, on the edge of Staffordshire and -Warwickshire, ruled over Mercia, and fortified her frontier between -909 and her death in 921. Her brother died in 925: his activity in -constructing _burhs_ began about 913. Of the construction of these -fortresses two phrases are used: their builders either “wrought” or -“timbered” them. Both words probably mean the same thing: the town -or village to be fortified was enclosed within the usual wooden -stockade.[34] The identity of a few of the _burhs_ is uncertain; but -the remainder may be classified as follows: (1) _Burhs_ wrought by -Æthelflæd on the river banks of her frontier: these include Runcorn and -possibly Warburton on the Mersey, Bridgnorth and possibly Shrewsbury -on the Severn, Tamworth and Stafford on tributaries of the Trent, and -Warwick on the Avon. (2) Frontier _burhs_ taken by Æthelflæd from the -Danes were Derby and Leicester, both on tributaries of the Trent. -(3) Eddisbury in Cheshire, an early hill fortress, was the site of -one of Æthelflæd’s _burhs_: here the inference is that the existing -hill fort was palisaded by her orders, and garrisoned as a camp of -refuge. Of Edward’s _burhs_, Witham and Maldon on the Essex Blackwater, -of which some probable traces remain, belong to class (1), as also -does Thelwall, his fortified post on the Mersey. To class (2) belong -Colchester, Huntingdon, and Tempsford, the first on the Colne, the -two latter on the Great Ouse. None of Edward’s works bear any analogy -to class (3), unless his last _burh_, Bakewell in Derbyshire, may be -taken into account. But (4) Bakewell represents a push northward along -a hostile border, and may be claimed, with Towcester, as belonging -to a fourth class of _burh_, unconnected with a navigable river, but -providing a constant menace to the enemy. (5) Towcester may, however, -also be classed with Colchester as a Roman _burh_ with stone walls. -A sixth class of _burh_ was riverine, like class (1), but with this -difference, that it was double. There was one _burh_ on one side, the -other on the opposite side of the river. The cases are Hertford on -the Lea, Buckingham and Bedford on the Ouse, Stamford on the Welland, -and Nottingham on the Trent. At Hertford and Buckingham both _burhs_ -were the work of Edward. At Bedford, Stamford, and Nottingham, the -northern _burh_ was in the hands of the enemy, and Edward took it by -converting the southern suburb into a fortified and garrisoned post. -His proceedings were exactly analogous to those of Charles the Bald in -862. He gained control of the navigable rivers by placing garrisons on -both their banks; the natural places which he chose were the existing -towns on the river, and the garrison, as at Nottingham, was formed out -of the inhabitants. - -Some of these _burhs_, as we have seen, were in the occupation of the -Northmen; and at a later date, when the frontier of the west Saxon -kingdom had been pushed back, and English kings were again placed on -the defensive, Lincoln, Nottingham, Derby, Stamford, and Leicester -became known as the five _burhs_, the centre of Danish power in the -Midlands. There is no reason to suppose that there was any essential -difference between the _burhs_ of Danes and Saxons—that the _burh_ -which Æthelflæd took at Derby was in any way different from her own -_burh_ at Tamworth. When the Danes first landed on a river bank or -island and beached their ships, they constructed what is called in the -Chronicle a _geweorc_, _i.e._, a thing wrought. This probably consisted -of a slight bank and ditch enclosing the landward side of their -position. Where they raised permanent dwellings within the _enceinte_, -the _burh_ grew out of the _geweorc_, just as a Roman station developed -out of a mere camp. However, it is unsafe to push the phraseology -of the Chronicle too far, or to fasten a too technical meaning upon -its words; and the fact remains that the term _geweorc_ may be very -well applied to a wrought _burh_. The Danish _burhs_ at Huntingdon -and Tempsford, the landmarks of their progress up the Ouse to recover -Bedford in 921, are called indiscriminately _burh_ and _geweorc_. - -[Illustration: Map of Saxon and Danish Burhs - -[The line from the Mersey to the Wash roughly indicates the Danish -frontier.]] - -Many of the _burhs_ wrought or taken during the Danish war became, -after the Norman conquest, sites of castles; and the presence of a -Norman castle at such places has led to the still popular inference -that the castle simply usurped the earthworks of the earlier -stronghold, and that therefore the _burh_ was equivalent to the later -castle.[35] It is not surprising that all the five places where we hear -of a _burh_ on either side of the river should have been chosen for -the foundation of later castles. But the castle earthworks of Hertford -and Bedford, the castles of which there is record at Buckingham and -Stamford, were private strongholds which formed part of the defences of -one of the _burhs_, but were not identical with either. The Conqueror’s -castle of Nottingham, greatly transformed in its present state, looked -down from its sandstone cliff upon the northern _burh_ where Edward -welded together Englishman and Dane in one common work of defence and -bond of citizenship.[36] But even were it not self-evident that the -_burh_ is identical with the _burgus_ or _burgum_ of Domesday and the -“borough” whose organisation plays so large a part in English history, -there is one fact which makes its identification with the castle -impossible. At Hertford, Buckingham, Bedford, Stamford, Nottingham, -there were two _burhs_, but there never has been more than one castle. -When the Conqueror wrought a castle on either side of the river at -York, he did not repeat Edward the Elder’s tactics literally: he -applied them to a form of fortification of which Edward knew nothing. -If the test by which the Norman castle is identified with the Saxon -_burh_ fails in these instances, we are obviously forbidden to make the -identification in the cases of single _burhs_ like Warwick or Tamworth. -The great earthen mount and curtain wall which stand in the south-west -corner of Tamworth, beside the Tame, are not the remains of Æthelflæd’s -_burh_, although it is not improbable that they were raised on the site -of her dwelling-house. Her _burh_ is the town of Tamworth itself; and -although her wall of palisades is gone, there are still traces of the -ditch with which, in the eighth century, Offa had ringed the _burh_ -about. - -[Illustration: Earthwork at Tempsford.] - -There is no trace of any _arx_ or citadel within these enclosures. -Their defenders were the citizens. In France, for reasons sufficiently -indicated, the art of fortification was more advanced. Roman traditions -survived there without that abrupt break which the historical -continuity of England had suffered. No fortress of stone and wood, such -as that which Charles the Bald, in 869, built within the _enceinte_ -of the abbey of St Denis, is heard of in Saxon England. The state of -society in which, as early as 864, Charles found it necessary, by the -edict of Pistes, to forbid his vassals to raise private fortresses -without royal authority, did not exist in England, and was only -beginning to exist there two centuries later. In both centuries we -have to deal with the same invaders, but with defenders whose state of -social development was quite different. Although the private fortress -or castle was introduced into England by the Normans, and although -the type of earthwork associated with it was developed to its highest -extent by Northmen, not only in Normandy and England, but also in -Denmark, it is nevertheless probable that the earliest development -of that form of earthwork took place on Frankish soil. The Danish -_geweorc_ or _burh_, where it can be traced with any certainty—and this -is in very few cases—supplied accommodation for the force, and probably -a harbour for its vessels, but no private stronghold belonging to a -prominent leader. The earthwork called Gannock’s castle (32), close -to the Ouse near Tempsford, is sometimes supposed to be the _geweorc_ -wrought by the Danes in 921. In plan, it very closely resembles a -rather small mount-and-bailey castle of the usual early Norman type, -and could have accommodated only a very small body of defenders. But -the point in which it differs from the ordinary mount-and-bailey -plan—the smallness of the mount, which is a mere thickening of the -earthen bank, and the absence of a moat round its base—may show that -here the Danes anticipated their Norman successors with a plan with -which some of them may have gained acquaintance during marauding -expeditions in France. This, however, is mere conjecture, and the -utility of such a fortress for the immediate purposes of the Danes may -well be questioned.[37] Of the private dwellings of the Danish leaders, -and how far they may have approximated to the later type of the castle, -we know nothing. St Mary’s abbey at York is on the site of Galmanho, -the residence of the Danish earls outside the western wall of the -Roman city, but nothing of its earthworks remain. If they were at all -considerable, like those of a mount-and-bailey castle of Norman times, -it seems strange that no trace of them should be left. - -The details of the doings of the Danish army, during the reign of -Ethelred the Redeless (979-1016), are recorded at great length in -the Chronicle. They show the old tactics, familiar for two hundred -years: the long ships are brought to the nearest point convenient -for a campaign of pillage; there the “army is a-horsed,” and they -ride at their will inland, lighting their “war-beacons,” the blazing -villages of the country-side, as they go. Year after year records -its tale of disaster, until the partition of England in 1016 between -Cnut and Edmund Ironside. The whole story of river and land warfare, -of plundering and burning, of the paying of Danegeld as a temporary -sop to the army, is in no way different from the record of the -Danish operations in France during the ninth century. In France the -Danish conquest was quicker, because the invaders had to deal from -the beginning with a worn-out civilisation: the partition of France, -owing to the superiority of the Danes to their opponents, was effected -within seventy years of their first settlement. The power of Normandy, -however, was checked by the rise of the Capetian dynasty in the later -part of the tenth century: the Northmen were kept strictly to their -Danelaw, and their subsequent expansion took place, not in France, but -in England. On the other hand, in England, the Danish invaders of the -ninth century had to contend with the rising power of Wessex and a race -younger and more vigorous than the contemporary Gauls of Neustria. -Their inroads were therefore checked and their conquest was delayed -until the house of Wessex had run its natural course, and Englishmen -and Danes had had time to be practically amalgamated into one nation. -The glory of Wessex ceases with Edmund Ironside, the glory of the Danes -with Cnut. Before Cnut died, the child William already had succeeded to -his father’s duchy of Normandy, and thirty-one years after the death of -Cnut, William was king of England, and, for all practical purposes, the -inroads of the Northmen from Scandinavia were over. - - - - -CHAPTER III - -THE ENGLISH CASTLE AFTER THE CONQUEST - - -A castle is a private fortress, built by an individual lord as a -military stronghold, and also as an occasional residence. In England -at the time of the Norman conquest, this type of military work was -known as _castel_, a word which is obviously the same as the Latin -_castellum_. _Castrum_, _munitio_, and _municipium_ are names which -are frequently given to it by chroniclers of the eleventh and twelfth -centuries. Its existence was the direct result of the consolidation of -the feudal system. The lord separated his dwelling from those of his -vassals: he defended it against the attacks of other individual lords -who naturally would seek to aggrandise themselves at his expense: he -also needed a stronghold which might be impregnable on occasion against -those vassals themselves, and might be a perpetual reminder to them of -their subject position. The castle rose within or as an addition to -the _burh_, the independent stronghold of one person within the walled -or stockaded town of the many. Thus, at one and the same time, it -protected and overawed the _burh_. Or it rose by itself, like the Peak -castle in Derbyshire, on a spot where no _burh_ existed, and so in many -cases drew a small community to seek its protection. - -An unlimited number of castles implies an unlimited number of -independent magnates, uncontrolled by a supreme authority, and each -ready to fly at the other’s throat. The feudal lord, however, was the -king’s man, and his castle was therefore theoretically the king’s. -We have already noticed the edict of Pistes (864), which ordered the -destruction of all castles built without royal licence; and, save in -periods of total anarchy, legislation of this type, safeguarding feudal -order, was in operation during the middle ages wherever the feudal -system was at the base of the constitution. The king was _de jure_, if -not _de facto_, the owner of the castles of his realm. - -The castle or private fortress was a feature in French social life -and warfare from at any rate the middle of the ninth century. But in -England it was certainly an unfamiliar and almost as certainly an -unknown feature, until the middle of the eleventh century. Danish -pirates who up to this time had visited England, had come from the -north and east, and passed on to France. There, in contact with the -feudal system as it existed under the later Carolingian monarchs, they -may have learned the use of the private fortress. At any rate when the -Northmen came back upon England from their continental duchy, they -brought with them the fully organised social system of the Continent, -and its most powerful symbol, the castle. - -[Illustration: Harold’s _aula_, from Bayeux Tapestry] - -We have seen that, throughout the Saxon and Danish period, the -_burh_, the home of the community, formed the unit, if the expression -may be used, of military defence by fortification. The English or -Danish nobleman lived, it may safely be assumed, in houses like -the two-storied house in the Bayeux tapestry, where Harold and his -friends are feasting on the upper floor, while the ground floor -apparently forms a cellar or store-room (36).[38] It is possible that -such a house, the prototype of the larger medieval dwelling-house, -may sometimes have been protected by its encircling thorn hedge -or palisade; but it was not a castle. In the eleventh and twelfth -centuries, a castle meant to an Englishman a special type of fortress, -of a construction and plan of a character more or less fixed. The -loose phraseology which, in later times, applied the title of castle -indiscriminately to prehistoric camps and medieval manor-houses, was -not yet customary. - -The first castles on English soil appear to have been raised by Norman -favourites of Edward the Confessor before the Conquest, and to have -excited alarm among the English population. In 1048 some foreigners or -“Welshmen,” as the English called them, encroached on the territory of -Sweyn Godwinsson in Herefordshire, constructed a _castel_—the first -mention of such a thing in the Chronicle—and wrought harm to all the -country round. That they were Frenchmen appears from the events of -1052: one of Godwin’s demands to the king at Gloucester was that “the -Frenchmen of the castle” should be given up, and in the same year -“the Frenchmen of the castle” helped to defend the borders against a -Welsh inroad. The very fact that the Frenchmen’s stronghold was known -as “_the_ castle” proves that it was at any rate an unfamiliar type -of fortress. But, if it was the first, others were soon constructed. -When Godwin returned from his outlawry in 1052, and forced himself -back into Edward’s good graces, the Frenchmen in London left the city. -The archbishop of Canterbury, Robert of Jumièges, made his way to -the east coast: some fled westward to Pentecost’s castle, which is -probably identical with the Herefordshire fortress, others northward -to Robert’s castle, which is now identified with Clavering in Essex. -The Herefordshire castle is supposed to have been at Ewias Harold, some -twelve miles south of Hereford, where there is still the great mount of -a Norman stronghold on the north-west side of the village.[39] - -[Illustration: Hastings Castle: from Bayeux Tapestry] - -These two may not have been the only castles in England before the -Conquest. The reference to Arundel in Domesday Book, for example, seems -to imply an origin almost as early for the castle there.[40] Ordericus -Vitalis speaks of Dover as though there were already a castle there, -when William the Conqueror stormed the town after Hastings.[41] But -Ordericus is our authority for the important and explicit statement -that, in 1068, “the fortresses, which the Gauls call _castella_, had -been very few in the provinces of England; and on this account the -English, although warlike and daring, had nevertheless shown themselves -too feeble to withstand their enemies.”[42] A statement of this kind -at once disposes of the theory that the _burhs_ of the Danish wars -were castles; it could hardly be argued that such _burhs_ were very -few, or that the English had not taken advantage of them. As a matter -of fact, when William came to England, his military policy consisted -in the founding of castles, and many of these in places which had -been and were _burhs_, where, if the _burh_ and castle were one and -the same thing, the foundation of a castle was quite unnecessary. -_Arcem condidit_, _castellum construxit_, _munitionem firmavit_, are -terms used over and over again to describe the making of these new -strongholds. To William, the strength of a monarch lay in the castles -which he controlled; in warfare the castle formed his natural base -of operations. His first work on landing at Hastings was to throw up -a castle (38). Harold, on the other hand, although, as the Bayeux -tapestry shows us, he had seen something of castles and siege warfare -in William’s company, trusted for his defence to the shield-wall of his -men, and the protection of the banks and ditches of an old earthwork -in advance of his position. In 1067, after his coronation, William -stayed at Barking, close to the walls of London, while the city, the -Lundenburh whose walls Alfred had restored, was being overawed by -the construction of certain _firmamenta_—one of them, no doubt, the -White Tower, the other probably Baynard’s castle, near the present -Blackfriars.[43] Again, we find him at Winchester, building a strong -fortress within the walls of the city—a castle within a _burh_. - -William’s operations in 1068 and 1069 were of great military -importance. In 1068 he quelled the resistance of Exeter. The city -was still surrounded by its Roman walls, to which the inhabitants -now added new battlements and towers. They manned the rampart walks -and the projections of the wall,[44] which for eighteen days William -endeavoured to undermine. When at last the keys of the city were -surrendered to him, his first work was to choose within the walls a -place where a castle might be raised; and, on departing, he left, -as at Winchester, a constable in charge of the castle, the king’s -lieutenant charged with the task of keeping the _burh_ under. From -Exeter a rebellion in the north called William to York. The insurgents, -an irregular band of freebooters, had thrown up defences in remote -places in woods and by the mouths of rivers; some were harboured in the -larger towns, which they kept in a state of fortification. As William -travelled northwards, he founded castles at Warwick and Nottingham. -He constructed a fortress in the city of York, and on his way home -founded castles at Lincoln, Huntingdon, and Cambridge. No sooner had -he left York than the rebels again began to stir; a movement was made -on behalf of the ætheling Edgar, and Danish aid was called in. William -Malet, the governor of York castle, was hard pressed by the enemy. The -Conqueror came to his relief, and, as a result of this visit, founded -a second castle in York. Both castles, however, were of little use -when the Danes came. The garrison of one or both rashly advanced to -fight the invaders within the city itself, and were massacred. It is a -significant fact that the castles were left open and deserted; neither -the men of York nor the Danes had any use for them. When William came -north again on his campaign of vengeance he repaired both the castles. -Shortly after, on his expedition to Wales, he founded castles at -Chester and Shrewsbury.[45] - -[Illustration: Lincoln; Plan] - -What do we find to-day at these places where William founded his first -English castles? At Hastings, on the cliff which divides the old town -from the modern watering-place, there are important remains of a later -stone castle within lines of earthwork which are, no doubt, William’s. -The mount remains at the north-east corner of the enclosure: the later -curtain wall has been carried up its side and over it. The present -remains of the castle of Winchester are later than William’s day. At -Exeter the gatehouse and much of the adjacent masonry of the castle are -unquestionably of a very early “Norman” date. In London we have the -White tower, probably much extended from William’s early plan, and not -completed till his son’s reign. But the stone fortresses of London and -Exeter were exceptional. When we come to his northern castles, we find -that at Warwick, York, Lincoln, Huntingdon, Cambridge, and Shrewsbury, -the plan of the castle consists of a bailey or enclosed space,[46] with -a tall mount on the line of its outer defences, and on a side or at an -angle of the _enceinte_ remote from the main entrance. At Nottingham -the plan of the early castle is not so easy to make out. But, in -the other cases, although, at various dates during the middle ages, -additions were made in stone, the nucleus of the plan is a collection -of earthworks, which takes this form—a _motte_ or mount with a bailey -attached. At Lincoln there are two mounts. At York there are two -castles, one on either side of the river, but each with its mount. On -the mount of the castle north-east of the river is a later stone keep; -the mount of the south-western castle has never carried stonework, and -its bailey is now almost filled up with modern houses. - -The presence of the double castle at York has been a great temptation -to those who would identify the castle with the _burh_. The -fortification of both banks of the river is, on the face of it, so like -the system adopted by Edward the Elder, that the York castles have been -often quoted as _burhs_ of Edward the Elder’s date, and it has been -concluded that similar earthworks must have existed at Nottingham, -Stamford, and so on. This idea is quite untenable. Had William followed -the example of Edward and Æthelflæd, he would simply have repaired or -renewed the defences of the two divisions of the _burh_ at York.[47] -But what he had to provide against was the spirit of rebellion in the -_burh_ itself, as well as the possible use of the water-way by Danish -pirates. Which castle he first founded at York we do not know. On the -tongue of land which runs out between the Ouse and Foss, outside the -_burh_, and between it and the river approach to the city, one castle -rose. The other, a fortress known in later times as the Old Baile, was -possibly from the beginning partly within the ramparts of the southern -_burh_. Later, at any rate, the city wall was built across the foot -of the outer side of its mount, and enclosed the bailey on two sides. -Elsewhere, the distinction between William’s castles and the _burhs_ -within which they rose is very noticeable. At Lincoln the castle filled -up an angle of the Roman city. At Cambridge, the mount rises on the -highest point of a large enclosure—the original _burh_—surrounded by -earthworks of early date. Further, if any documentary proof is needed -of anything so self-evident as the distinct nature of the castle and -the _burh_, Domesday is clear upon the point. Apart from the evidence -which it gives us with respect to the borough or _burh_, it speaks in -one place of the _burgum circa castellum_—the _burh_ about the castle. -The case in point is the castle of Tutbury in Staffordshire, a fine -example of the mount-and-bailey stronghold.[48] One important feature -here is that the castle, very large in area, and with a ditch of great -depth on two sides, was apparently raised on the site of an early -hill-fort or _burh_, and that the actual _burh_ about the castle, the -modern village of Tutbury, has grown up under its protection on the -slope towards the Dove. - -[Illustration: Berkhampstead] - -The castle, then, was a Norman importation into England. It was a -stronghold with a definite plan, so that the word _castel_ had no -vague meaning to English ears. It is found in many cases in close -proximity to a _burh_, or fortified dwelling of a community; but it -was a royal stronghold, in charge of an individual, and its intention -was at once to protect and to keep the _burh_ in subjection. Or, -again, it may occupy, as at Tutbury or Conisbrough, the whole site -of an early _burh_; but in such cases the character of the _burh_ is -entirely changed by the presence of the castle, and the dwelling-place -of the community is shifted to the outskirts of the enclosure. At -York, Lincoln, and other places where a castle was constructed within -part of a _burh_, Domesday tells us that the site was _vastata in -castellis_—_i.e._, that houses were taken down to make room for the new -earthworks. - -A figure of eight, with the lower portion elongated and widened to form -the bailey, may be taken as the normal form of the castle plan. Often, -as at Berkhampstead (42), where the mount and bailey were surrounded by -a broad wet ditch and outer earthworks, the bailey is much the larger -portion of the figure on plan; and it was only in small and unimportant -strongholds that the bailey formed, as at Mexborough, a mere forecourt -to the mount. At Alnwick (115) the mount stood as part of the outer -defences of the enclosure, on the slope to the river; but it was so -placed that it divided a western or outer from an eastern or inner ward -or bailey, and almost filled up the space between them. The arrangement -at Berkeley (186) is somewhat similar. If the larger mount at Lincoln -(40) were removed to the centre of the present enclosure, and the lines -of the curtain-wall returned inwards to meet it, the plan of Alnwick -would be obtained. Possibly, however, both at Alnwick and Berkeley, the -outer ward may form an extension of the earlier plan, or may have been -merely a covering platform, like the outer earthworks at Hastings. The -later stone defences have obscured the original designs in both cases. - -[Illustration: Clun; Plan] - -Although the plan followed fixed and familiar lines, there were no -fixed dimensions to the castle. The mount was intended to bear the -strong tower or donjon: within the bailey were the ordinary lodgings -of the garrison, and such domestic buildings as might be needed. -The bailey, which inclined, on the whole, to be oval in form, was -surrounded by a low earthen bank, outside which was a dry ditch of -more or less depth, with a parapet or counterscarp on the further -side. The mount was surrounded by its own ditch, which was joined at -two points by the main ditch on the side next the bailey. The entrance -to the castle was at the end of the bailey, opposite the mount. These -dispositions might vary: the mount might be within the enclosure, even, -as at Pickering, in its centre, and the position of the entrance might -be different, if the site required it. There might be more than one -bailey, and these might be set side by side, divided by an intermediate -ditch, as on the fairly level site at Clun (43), or end on end, as on -the ridge at Montgomery, or a small bailey might project as a kind of -outwork common to mount and bailey alike.[49] The usual arrangement, -however, was as described. The mount might be of any height, of -enormous proportions, as at Thetford, or of more modest size, as at -Brecon or Trecastle. It was usually entirely artificial; but positions -were sometimes chosen in which the ground afforded natural help. The -mount, for example, at Hedingham in Essex, on the levelled top of -which the later square donjon was built, appears to be partly natural; -while the great mount at Mount Bures, not many miles away, is wholly -artificial. The bailey, again, might vary much in size. It might have -a very large area, as at Lincoln and Tutbury, a moderate area, as at -Warkworth (49) or Durham (199); or it might be small and compact, as -at Trecastle (44). There are many cases, as at Clifford’s hill, near -Northampton, where the mount is found by itself: in such instances, the -bailey may have disappeared as the result of local cultivation, and -only the more important part of the earthworks may have been left. But -it is also probable that here and there the fortified mount with the -tower on its summit would be all that was needed, and that the absence -of a large garrison would render a bailey unnecessary. The size of the -bailey, in any case, would depend upon the importance of the position -and the size of the garrison required. - -[Illustration: Trecastle; Plan] - -[Illustration: Castle of Rennes: from Bayeux Tapestry] - -The mount, at any rate, was the essential feature of this type of -fortress. The Bayeux tapestry gives us pictures of some of these -mounts, the fidelity of which is demonstrated by the remains which -we possess of such castles, and by some pieces of documentary -evidence (38). Two points are noticeable: (1) The mounts portrayed -are all either in Normandy and Brittany, or, like the _castellum_ at -“Hestengaceaster,” are the work of Norman hands. (2) The fortifications -shown in connection with these mounts are of timber, not stone. The -accuracy of the tapestry is not absolutely photographic, but the -workers knew well the type of structure which they wanted to represent. -Their work, in fact, whether the castle represented be Dol or Dinan -or Bayeux or Hastings, gives us a repeated picture of the recognised -type of castle mount. And the two points just noted lead us to the -conclusions, (1) that the castle was foreign to England and Englishmen, -and (2) that the time-honoured notion that the Englishman raised the -earthworks,[50] and the Norman built stone castles upon them is open -to objection, the fact being that the stone castle was an exception in -Normandy itself. The picture of the Breton castle of Dinan (46) shows, -as in a section, a large pudding-shaped mount surrounded by a ditch, -with a low bank of earth on the side towards the bailey. On the top of -the mount is a tower, clearly of timber. Round the edge of the mount, -encircling the tower, is a stockade formed of uprights with stout -hurdles between—a work to which Cæsar’s description of his breastworks -at Alesia might well be applied.[51] Access to the mount is gained by -a steep ladder, probably formed of planks with projecting pieces of -wood nailed to them for foot-holds, which spans the ditch, and has its -foot within the bailey. The mount itself—and this may be proved by many -surviving examples—is too steep to be scaled with any ease; and the -ladder, although affording the defenders an excellent communication -with the bailey, is hardly to be climbed with impunity by the opposing -force. The ladder ends in a wooden platform at the edge of the mount, -which serves as a _propugnaculum_ for the garrison, in front of the -stockade. In the picture of the construction of the castle at Hastings, -a timber tower and stockade are in course of erection. The pioneers are -busy digging earth from the fosse for their nearly completed mount, and -compacting the surface with blows from the flat of their spades (38). - -[Illustration: Castle of Dinan: from Bayeux Tapestry] - -In France the mount was usually known as the _motte_ from the turf of -which it was composed, and the occurrence of the word Lamotte as part -of a place-name is as tell-tale as a name like Mount Bures in England. -But a common name for the _motte_, employed by medieval writers, was -the Latin _dunio_ or _domgio_, a debased form of the word _dominio_. -This became in French _donjon_, and in English _dungeon_. The _motte_ -at Canterbury is still known by the corrupted name of the Dane John. -The mount, the symbol of the dominion of the feudal lord, and the -centre of his _dominium_ or demesne, bore his strong tower; and to this -tower the name of the mount was transferred. When the tower on the -mount was superseded by the heavy and lofty rectangular or cylindrical -tower of later times, the new tower kept the old name. By a strange -transference of meaning, our English _dungeon_, frequently applied -to the chief tower of a castle until the seventeenth century, became -connected with the vaults or store-rooms in the basement of such a -tower, and now reminds us less of the dominion of the castle builders -than of the cruelty with which they are supposed to have exercised that -dominion. - -[Illustration: Colchester Castle: great tower or keep.] - -It may safely be assumed that the very large majority of castles of -the eleventh and early twelfth century were constructed on this plan. -There were exceptions, and certainly several English castles have -stonework of the period of the Conquest. London and Colchester (47) -had rectangular donjons from the first. At Richmond (93) the stonework -of part of the curtain and of the lower part of the rectangular -tower-keep is unquestionably of the eleventh century, when the castle -was constructed by Alan of Brittany. In several other places, in the -curtain at Tamworth (48) and in part of the curtain at Lincoln, there -is eleventh century stonework. But more will be said of these cases -later. It is enough to say here that, in most cases, stonework forms -a late Norman or Plantagenet addition to early Norman earthwork. At -Newcastle part of the early mount remained, side by side with the -late twelfth century tower-keep, until within the last hundred years. -Warkworth, most instructive of English castles, preserves the base of -its mount and the area of its original bailey: the mount bears a strong -tower-house of the early fifteenth century; on the line of the bank of -the bailey is a stone curtain of about the year 1200; within the area -is a series of elaborate and beautiful buildings of two or three dates -(49). Warkworth is the epitome of the history of the castle, from its -Norman origin to its practical identification, in the later middle -ages, with the large manor house; and to Warkworth we shall return more -than once. - -[Illustration: Tamworth; Eleventh Century Stonework] - -[Illustration: Warkworth; Plan] - -There are exceptional cases in which two mounts occur. At Lincoln (40), -the smaller mount is at the south-east corner of the enclosure, and -probably may have carried the original donjon. The larger mount, of -formidable height and steepness, is west of the centre of the south -side. Both mounts, as is usual, are half within and half without the -line of the rampart. The stone curtain-wall has been brought up their -sides, and the larger mount is crowned by a stone “shell” keep of the -late twelfth century. The provision of this second mount was possibly -due to the exposed position of the castle, which formed the outer -defence of the city on the west and south-west, and needed its greatest -strength on that side. At Pontefract and Lewes, again, there were two -mounts, one at each end of the enclosure. At both places, the later -stone keep was built in connection with the western mount, at the end -nearest the town and the slope of the ridge on which it was built. -The sites are rather similar, and, in either case, the eastern mount -overlooked the river-valley defended by the castle. It is not certain -that two mounts ever formed part of an original plan. The natural -tendency would be to throw up the mount at first on the side nearer -the valley, where the slope was steeper, and the labour required in -construction would be less. An attack, however, on the town and castle -would come most naturally from the higher ground to the west, which -commanded the castle and its defences. A new mount would, in process -of time, be constructed on this side, and the old mount would become -of secondary importance. At Lewes (50), where the slope of the hill is -abrupt, the western mount rises from a higher level, and commands a -much wider stretch of country than the mount at the north-east angle of -the enclosure. At Lincoln, where an enemy’s force had no advantage of -higher ground, the larger mount simply occupies the most advantageous -position, protecting the most exposed side of the enclosure, and -commanding one of the most extensive views in England. The foot of one -mount is little more than two hundred feet distant from the foot of the -other; while, at Lewes and Pontefract, the length of the whole bailey -lay between the mounts. Thus, while it is possible that, at Lewes and -Pontefract, both mounts may be original, with the idea of strengthening -the enclosure at either end with a donjon, two original mounts at -Lincoln would not have this excuse; and we may infer that, at some -date later than the foundation of Lincoln castle, the Norman lords -of the fortress threw up a new mount at a point from which the slope -of the hill and the approaches from the valley of the Trent could be -commanded more thoroughly. - -[Illustration: Lewes; Plan] - -[Illustration: Builth; Plan] - -The provision of more than one bailey, as at Clun (43), where two small -baileys, separated by ditches, cover the south and west sides of the -mount, was due, partly to the irregular nature of the site, and partly -to the need for the multiplication of defences. Such an arrangement, -inconvenient in time of peace, would be a considerable advantage in -case of siege, when each bailey would provide a separate difficulty -to the assailants, and a separate rallying point to the defenders. At -Builth (50), where the whole area of the castle earthworks is small, -and the ditches of mount and bailey are of considerable strength, the -main bailey is a narrow segmental platform covering the south side of -the mount. On the west side of the mount is a smaller and narrower -platform, between which and the main bailey is a broad ditch, forming -a cross-cut or traverse between the ditches of the mount and bailey. -As the enclosure is very nearly circular, with the mount north-west -of the centre, this second platform is somewhat squeezed into the -space, and the ditch between it and the counterscarp which runs -continuously round both mount and bailey is very narrow. In the more -usual instances, where the mount and its ditch form a regular circle, -which intersects with the bailey and its ditch, a secondary platform, -as has been noted, occurs outside the line of both ditches, and is -surrounded by a ditch of its own, communicating with both. This is the -case with the very symmetrical example of a mount-and-bailey castle -at Mexborough, at Lilbourne in Northants, Hallaton in Leicestershire -(51), and other cases. Here the secondary platform is an excrescence on -one side of the meeting of the two circles. Such platforms were mere -outworks where additional defence was necessary; it is possible that -on them stone-throwing engines might be planted by the defenders, as -the narrowness of the ditch would at these points bring the assailants -more nearly within range than at any other point within the enclosure. -Such engines would encumber the larger bailey, which would necessarily -be kept as clear as possible for the operations of the main body of the -garrison. - -[Illustration: Hallaton; Plan] - -The mount-and-bailey castle has been derived by some from a Teutonic -origin,[52] but it is difficult to trace it with any certainty at -an early period outside France and Normandy. There are many remains -of these castles in Normandy itself. The famous castle of Domfront -(Orne), founded originally by Guillaume Talvas (_d._ 1030), ancestor -of the house of Bellême, possibly took this form: as at Newcastle, a -rectangular tower of stone took the place, in the twelfth century, of -the tower on the mount.[53] The writer of a monograph on the castle of -Domfront enumerates five such mounts which exist or are known to have -existed within the local _arrondissement_.[54] Two, at Sept-Forges and -Lucé, remain intact, covered by plantations of trees. At Sept-Forges -the church and castle were side by side, as may still be seen at Earls -Barton in Northamptonshire.[55] At Lucé there are traces of a bailey. -On the other hand, at La Baroche, a large mount seems to have borne the -whole castle: one may compare with this the great mount of Restormel -in Cornwall, which is the natural summit of a hill, artificially -scarped and surrounded by a fosse, like a contour fort of early times. -It is important to notice that on these artificial mounts of southern -Normandy, there appears “no ruin, no trace of construction in masonry.” -The inference is obvious. The buildings which they carried were of -wood, and have yielded to the action of fire or the weather. On no -other hypothesis can the speed with which castles were constructed in -England after the Conquest, or the ease with which they were destroyed, -be explained. William’s subjects in Normandy threw up fortifications -against him with a speed which positively forbids us to imagine that -they procured masons to work in stone. In 1061, Robert, son of Giroie, -one of the powerful nobles of the Alençonnais, joined forces with the -Angevins against William, and fortified his castles of La-Roche-sur-Igé -and Saint-Cénéri. His cousin, Arnold, son of Robert, driven from -the castle of Échauffour, returned secretly and burned it.[56] The -quickness with which the two castles at York were constructed, -destroyed, and repaired, allowed no time for dressing stone. - -The points which our evidence leads us to accept may be recapitulated -as follows:—(1) The castle was a foreign importation into England, of -the period of the Norman conquest. (2) It consisted, in its simplest -form, of a moated mount or _motte_, with a bailey or base-court -attached. (3) Its earliest fortifications were entirely of timber, save -in rare instances. - -We may now examine the evidence which, in default of actual remains, -survives with regard to the timber constructions of these castles -and their use. The tower on the mount first demands our attention. -Apart from the pictures of the Bayeux tapestry, certain early twelfth -century chronicles of northern France have preserved for us accounts -of the main features of this structure and its _enceinte_.[57] Jean -de Colmieu describes the castle of Merchem, close by the church, as -_munitio quedam quam castrum vel municipium dicere possumus_. “It is -the custom,” he says, “with the rich men and nobles of this district, -because they spend their time in enmity and slaughter, and in order -that they may thereby be safer from their enemies, and by their -superior power either conquer their equals or oppress their inferiors, -to heap up a mount of earth as high as they can, and to dig round -it a ditch of some breadth and great depth, and, instead of a wall, -to fortify the topmost edge of the mount round about with a rampart -(_vallo_) very strongly compacted of planks of timber, and having -towers, as far as possible, arranged along its circuit. Within the -rampart they build in the midst a house or a citadel (_arx_) commanding -the whole site. The gate of entry to the place”—the word used is -_villa_, implying a place of habitation rather than a stronghold—“can -be approached only by a bridge, which, rising at first from the outer -lip of the ditch, is gradually raised higher. Supported by uprights in -pairs, or in sets of three, which are fixed beneath it at convenient -intervals, it rises by a graduated slope across the breadth of the -ditch, so that it reaches the mount on a level with its summit and at -its outer edge, and touches the threshold of the enclosure.” It will -be noticed that the moated mount described here had no bailey. It was -also obviously not merely a fortified stronghold, a place of refuge in -time of war, but a definite residence of the local lord. The turrets -round the timber rampart of the mount are mentioned as occasional, not -invariable features of the design. The habitation within the rampart -may be a strong tower or a mere house. The sense of the passage shows -clearly that there was a doorway in the rampart, by which the house was -approached from the bridge. Finally, the description is not applicable -merely to a single castle, but is a generic description of strongholds -in a particular neighbourhood. - -The domestic, apart from the military, character of the building, -is emphasised in the story which follows the description. John of -Warneton, the sainted bishop of Thérouanne (_d._ 1130), was entertained -here, when he came to hold a confirmation in Merchem church. After -the confirmation was over, he went back to the castle to change his -vestments before proceeding to bless the churchyard. As he returned -across the sloping bridge, which at its middle point was about 35 -feet above the ditch, the press of the people who crowded to see the -holy man was so great, and the old enemy, says the chronicler, so -alive to the opportunity, that the bridge broke, and the bishop and -his admirers, amid a terrible noise of falling joists, boards, and -spars, were thrown to the bottom of the ditch. The castle was, in -fact, the private residence of a man who, if he could indulge in the -peaceful pleasure of entertaining his bishop, could not afford to live -in an unfortified house. Private warfare with his neighbours was the -business of his life, and he had to make himself as comfortable as he -could within his palisade. Jean de Colmieu does not tell us whether -the castle stronghold at Merchem took the shape of a tower or not; but -Lambert of Ardres has left a description of the great wooden tower of -three stories which the carpenter Louis de Bourbourg constructed about -1099 for Arnould, lord of Ardres. The elaborateness of its design and -plan is remarkable, and the _motte_ which bore it must have been of -considerable size. The ground-floor contained cellars, store-rooms, -and granaries. The first floor contained the chief living-rooms—the -common hall, the pantry and buttery, the great chamber where Arnould -and his wife slept, with two other rooms, one the sleeping-place of the -body-servants. Out of the great chamber opened a room or recess with a -fire-place, where the folk of the castle were bled, the servants warmed -themselves, or the children were taken in cold weather to be warmed. -One may assume that the great chamber was at the end of the hall -opposite to the pantry and buttery. The kitchen was probably reached, -as in the larger dwelling-houses of later days, by a passage between -these offices: it was on the same floor as the hall, but occupied a -two-storied extension of the donjon on one side.[58] Below the kitchen -were the pig-sty, fowl-house, and other like offices. The third stage -of the donjon contained the bed-chambers of the daughters of the house: -the sons also could sleep on this floor, if they chose, and here slept -the guard of the castle, who relieved one another at intervals in the -work of keeping watch. On the eastern side of the first floor was a -projecting building, called the _logium_ or parlour, and above this -on the top floor was the chapel of the house, “made like in carving -and painting to the tabernacle (_sic_) of Solomon.” Lambert speaks of -the stairways and passages of the donjon, but his description of the -projecting parlour and chapel is not sufficiently explicit, and his -admiration may have magnified the proportions of the building. His -description, however, is of great service when applied to the tower -donjon of stone, the arrangements of which it serves to explain. -Here, again, the fortress was clearly designed as a dwelling house: -the supply of rooms, if it is not exaggerated, was quite remarkable -for the age. The _motte_ or donjon—Lambert gives it these alternative -names—rose in the middle of a marsh, which Arnould converted into a -lake or moat by forming sluices: his mill was near the first sluice. - -No definite description is left of the defences of the bailey in a -castle of this date. There is no doubt, however, that the scarp, -or encircling bank of earth, was protected, like the summit of the -mount, by a hedge or palisade of the traditional type. Such hedges -were the normal defence of any kind of stronghold: the edict of Pistes -ordered the destruction of all unlicensed _castella, firmitates, et -haias_—castles, strong dwellings, and hedges. In 1225 Henry III. -ordered the forester of Galtres to supply the sheriff of Yorkshire -with timber for repairing and making good the breaches of the palisade -(_palicii_) of York castle. The “houses” and “bridge” of the same -castle—that is, the buildings within the bailey, and the drawbridge by -which the bailey was entered across the ditch, were also of timber. As -late as 1324 the stockade on the mount was still of wood, surrounding -the stone donjon of the thirteenth century.[59] This is an interesting -example of the survival, until a late date, of primitive fortification -in a strong and important castle. There is abundant evidence, in fact, -that the Norman engineer put his trust, not in stone, but in his -earthen rampart and its palisades. When, about 1090, the freebooter -Ascelin Goël got possession of the castle of Ivry, he enclosed it “with -ditches and thick hedges.”[60] In 1093, Philip I. of France and Robert -of Normandy took the part of William of Breteuil, the dispossessed lord -of Ivry, and laid siege to the fortified town and castle of Bréval -(Seine-et-Oise). With the aid of a siege engine, constructed by Robert -of Bellême, they were able to destroy the rampart and encircling -hedges.[61] Bréval was in a wooded and remote district, where stone -would have been hard to obtain in any case. The grand necessity, in -places which were in danger of constant attack, was to provide them -with adequate defences which could be constructed in the shortest time -possible. - -Of the nature of the houses within the bailey, little can be said. They -doubtless included shelters for the garrison of the castle, stables for -their horses, and various sheds or store-houses. The hall, or building, -which was the centre of the domestic life of the castle, was, from the -earliest times, the chief building within the circumference of the -bailey. We read of the destruction of the _principalis aula_ of the -castle of Brionne in 1090, by the red-hot darts which were hurled upon -its shingled roof;[62] and stone halls, as at Chepstow and Richmond, -were built before the beginning of the twelfth century. But it is -certain, on the other hand, that the donjon was, now and later, adapted -to domestic as well as purely military uses; and it seems likely -that the owner of the castle, in certain cases, was content with his -dwelling upon the mount, until, at a later date, the strengthening of -the whole enclosure with a stone curtain made it possible for him to -raise a more convenient dwelling house within the more ample space of -the bailey. In the larger castles, however, where there was a strong -permanent garrison, a hall was a necessity for their entertainment. - -Where mount-and-bailey castles are found without a trace of stonework, -it does not follow that they are necessarily of a date immediately -subsequent to the Conquest. Many of these castles, founded by the -Conqueror and his followers, became permanent strongholds, and in due -course of time were fortified with stone walls and towers. Others were -probably founded as an immediate consequence of the Conquest, and were -abandoned in favour of other sites. Thus it has been thought that the -earthworks at Barwick-in-Elmet, near Leeds, were abandoned by Ilbert -de Lacy, when he fixed upon Pontefract as the head of his honour.[63] -Trecastle may have been deserted by Bernard of Newmarch for Brecon, or -it may have been held by a small garrison as the western outpost of his -barony. But it is well known that, for a long time after the Conquest, -in the period of constant strife between the Norman kings and their -barons, a large number of castles came into existence in defiance of -royal edicts. We know that, during the reign of Stephen, when every -man did what was right in his own eyes, an almost incredible number of -unlicensed or “adulterine”[64] castles were constructed. As a result -of the agreement between Stephen and Henry II., many of these were -destroyed, and the number of English castles was materially lessened. -Later on, when the revolt of the Mowbrays against Henry II. took place, -the victory of the king’s party was followed by the destruction of the -Mowbray castles at Thirsk, Kirkby Malzeard, and Kinnard’s Ferry in -the isle of Axholme, and of Bishop Pudsey’s castle at Northallerton. -Of these four castles earthworks or traces of earthworks, but no -stonework, remain. It is reasonable to suppose that the material of -their fortifications was timber. Haste in the construction of castles, -speed in their destruction, during the century following the Conquest, -are easily explained if their works were merely of earth and wood. -And it is thus possible that, when we meet with a mount-and-bailey -fortress, unnamed in history and untouched by medieval stonemasons, it -may be neither on a site chosen and then abandoned by an early Norman -lord, nor a mere outpost of some greater castle, but a stronghold -hastily entrenched and heaped up in time of rebellion, by some noble -of the time of Stephen or Henry II., and dismantled when peace was -restored, and the authority of the sovereign recognised. - - - - -CHAPTER IV - -THE PROGRESS OF ATTACK AND DEFENCE - - -The earthwork fortifications, the progress of which we have traced up -to the Norman conquest, were of a very simple kind. It is obvious that, -in the history of military architecture, any improvement in defence -is the consequence of improved methods of attack. The stone-walled -town of the middle ages, the castle or private citadel, with its -curtain wall and the subdivision of its enclosure into more than one -bailey, succeeded the palisaded earthwork as a natural result of the -development of the art of siege. Against an enemy whose artillery was -comparatively feeble the stockaded enclosure was effective enough: -slingers and bowmen, working at close quarters, might do damage to the -defenders, but the palisade on the bank, divided from the besiegers by -a formidable ditch, was proof against missiles launched against it by -individuals, and could be carried only by a determined rush, or if it -were not sufficiently protected against fire. Modern warfare against -uncivilised tribes has shown that a stronghold defended by a thick -hedge is a serious problem to a besieging force. If, under modern -conditions, the stockade is a barrier to troops equipped with powerful -firearms, the difficulty which it afforded to the early medieval -warrior is obvious. - -The age of firearms, however, which brought the death-blow to medieval -siegecraft, was long in coming; and meanwhile the progress of the -science of attack depended upon the improvement in methods which could -be employed only in close proximity to the besieged stronghold, or -within a very limited range. Engines for hurling stones or javelins -increased in size and strength. Devices were brought into play for -scaling or undermining the defences of the town or castle. The attack -was directed against the defences rather than against the defenders. -A casual stone might do injury to the medieval soldier, or an arrow -might pierce between the joints of his harness; but his armour, which -became more heavy and more carefully protected as the chance of risk -from such missiles increased, made loss of life in the course of a -siege a misfortune rather than an inevitable contingency. His first -anxiety, therefore, was to make the defensive works which sheltered -him impregnable. As the enemy multiplied his designs against the -palisaded enclosure, the palisade gave place to the stone wall; as -the enemy’s means for prosecuting his attempts increased in power, -the wall increased in height and strength; and at last, during the -transitional epoch in which firearms gradually superseded the older and -more primitive weapons of attack, the wall presented to the besieger -a thoroughly guarded front which rendered his medieval siege tactics -obsolete, and called for new developments in his craft. - -The progress of fortification under these conditions will be the -subject of the remaining chapters of this book, with special reference -to the castle, in the defences of which the military engineers of the -middle ages displayed the epitome of their science. Before we proceed, -however, to the growth of the stone-walled castle, some description is -necessary of the improvement in siege-engines and methods of attack by -which its development was governed. It must be kept in mind that the -siegecraft of the middle ages advanced upon lines that were by no means -new. Its engines, its devices for breaking down or scaling walls and -towers, were not new inventions, but relics of Roman military science. -With the decay of the Roman power in western Europe, these materials of -warfare, unknown to the Teutonic conquerors of Britain, had fallen into -disuse. Preserved in the east by the Byzantine empire, the inheritor of -Roman civilisation, they became familiar to the barbarians who overran -Europe in the dark ages; and their revival in the parts of Europe most -remote from the historic centres of Roman influence was due in no small -measure to the adoption of traditional siegecraft by the invading -tribes which had come into conflict with Byzantine strategy. So far as -England is concerned, the first advance in the art of attack was the -direct result of the Norman conquest; while subsequent improvement in -western Europe generally was primarily due to the knowledge of eastern -warfare gained during the Crusades. A slight retrospect, under these -conditions, is desirable, which will give us some insight into the -methods of siegecraft during the period of whose strongholds and art of -fortification we already have seen something. - -Many classical texts, from the time of Cæsar to the latest days of the -western Empire, supply us with authority for Roman military methods. -No passage throws fuller light on their siege practice than Cæsar’s -description of his siege of Alesia in Burgundy, the hill fortress -occupied by Vercingetorix.[65] The lines which were first drawn round -the stronghold by Cæsar were eleven miles in circuit, and communicated -with three camps, on hills of a height equal to that of the hill of -Alesia. Along the lines there were twenty-three _castella_, small -forts to hold pickets, and temporary examples of the type of which -the “mile-castles” of the Roman wall were permanent instances. The -stubborn resistance of Vercingetorix and the prospect of the arrival of -a relieving army, however, gave Cæsar occasion to elaborate his lines, -the character of which is very minutely described. They consisted of -an earthen bank with a ditch 20 feet broad, 400 feet in front of it -on the side towards the besieged stronghold. The ditch was dug with -perpendicular sides: its distance from the bank was a precaution -against sudden attacks of the enemy, and placed the bank out of the -range of casual missiles. The space between the bank and ditch was not -a level “berm,” but was furrowed by two ditches, 15 feet in breadth -and depth, of which the inner was wet, the water of the neighbouring -streams being diverted into it. Behind the inner ditch rose the earthen -_agger_ or bank, to the height of 12 feet. The _vallum_, the rampart -on the top of the _agger_, was of a type common in early warfare and -for many centuries later, consisting of a breastwork of interlaced -twigs stiffened by a row of palisades. The hurdles of the breastwork -were finished off with battlement-like projections: at intervals -there were tall uprights with forked tops, which were called _cervi_ -or “stags,” and acted as _chevaux-de-frise_ along the whole rampart. -There were also towers, obviously temporary constructions of timber, -at distances of 80 feet from one another. This, however, was not -enough. Cæsar aimed at holding his lines with as few men as possible, -so as to allow the rest to do the necessary foraging at a distance. He -therefore proceeded to sow the approach to the lines with pitfalls. -Five ditches, 5 feet deep, were dug out and filled with upright stakes -sharpened to a point and fastened together at the bottom by continuous -cross pieces. In front of these were three rows of pits, 3 feet deep, -arranged in a series of _quincunces_ or saltires: in these were placed -smooth sharpened stakes, so that little more than their points stuck -out of the ground, and the pits were then covered over with twigs and -brushwood. The eight rows formed by these obstructions were each 3 -feet apart. The whole arrangement, producing the effect of a row of -fleurs-de-lys, was called _lilium_: to the stakes the soldiers gave -the name of _cippi_ or “grave-stones.” On the opposite side of the -_vallum_, where an attack from a relieving army was expected, a similar -arrangement was made. Also, in front of the _lilium_, wooden cubes -with hooks fastened into them were hidden in the ground, bearing the -appropriate name of _stimuli_. - -Cæsar’s method of besieging Alesia was dictated by the probability -that, with an enemy on both sides, he would have to stand a siege -himself. After a doubtful battle, the Gallic army of relief made a -night attack on the lines, in which they found to their cost the -effectiveness of Cæsar’s death-traps. They brought with them hurdles, -with which to help themselves across the ditches, and scaling ladders -and grappling hooks, with the help of which they might climb or pull -down the rampart. Their weapons were slings, arrows, and stones, to -which the Romans replied with extemporised slings and spears. They -suffered two repulses, and then turned their attention to the weakest -of Cæsar’s camps, while Vercingetorix left Alesia to attack the -rampart. His force brought hurdles with long balks of timber to form a -footway across them, mantlets, or coverings under which an attacking -party, sheltered from Roman missiles, could undermine or make a breach -in Cæsar’s earthwork by the use of a bore, and hooks with which to cut -down the rampart on the top of the earthen bank. The attack was long -and determined. The Gallic pioneers filled up Cæsar’s fosses, so far -as they could, with earth, and themselves raised a mound from which -his devices of defence were easily seen. Where his lines were on level -ground, they were too formidable to attack: on the steep slopes of the -hills, on the tops of which his camps were pitched, there was more -chance for an enemy. Here the fiercest fighting took place: the towers -of the _vallum_ were assailed with javelins, the ditch was filled, and -an attempt was made to tear down the palisade and breastwork. Labienus, -unable to hold the lines, sent a message to Cæsar, whose intervention -with his cavalry turned the day and brought about the total defeat of -the Gallic army and the surrender of Vercingetorix. - -The account of the siege of Marseilles by Gaius Trebonius in B.C. 49 -gives us many of the methods employed by the Romans, and by Byzantine -and medieval engineers after them, in the siege of a walled town.[66] -Marseilles was no mere hill stronghold like Alesia: it was a strongly -fortified seaport town, well equipped for war with engines which hurled -pointed stakes 12 feet long against the besiegers, as they threw up -their earthen bank round the landward side of the city. Trebonius had -to make the line of penthouses (_vineæ_), by which his pioneers were -protected, of more than ordinary thickness to withstand these missiles. -In advance of the bank, a body of men, sheltered by a large penthouse -(_testudo_) levelled the soil. While this leaguer was established on -the landward side, Brutus gained a naval victory over the Massiliotes, -who nevertheless continued to hold out against the besiegers. The -right wing of the Roman army was especially open to attack from the -city; and on this side the besiegers built a tower of brick, to serve -as a base of operations and a refuge from attack. This tower, which -was raised to a height of six stories, was built by workmen who were -sheltered by hanging mantlets of rope. A roof was made of timber, -covered with a layer of bricks and puddled clay, to protect it against -fire, and with raw hides, to make it proof against darts and stones. -As the tower grew, this roof, from which the rope mantlets depended, -was raised by levers and screwed down as a covering to each story in -succession. When it was nearly completed, a wooden penthouse known as -the mouse (_musculus_) was constructed, consisting of a gallery 60 feet -long, with a gabled roof, which was covered, like that of the tower, -with bricks, clay, and hide. This was moved forward on rollers to the -nearest point in the city-wall. It withstood the huge stones which were -cast upon it; lighted barrels of pitch and resin, hurled from the wall, -rolled off its sloping roof and were pushed to a safe distance by the -men inside, armed with poles and pitchforks. Covered by their friends’ -fire from the brick tower, the soldiers in the mouse were able to sap -with their levers and wedges the foundations of the tower on the wall, -and managed to effect a breach. The defenders submitted, and asked for -a truce until Cæsar arrived; but, taking advantage of the interval, -they made a treacherous sally from the city, and, aided by a favourable -wind, burned down the besiegers’ constructions, including the mouse -and the brick tower, and destroyed their machines. Trebonius, however, -lost no time in constructing, instead of his earthen bank, a strong -wall of countervallation, composed of two parallel walls of brick, -each 6 feet thick, with a timber floor above. This quickly brought the -defenders to their senses, and they reverted to their old conditions of -peace. In this account the devices which play the chief part are met -again in numberless medieval sieges. The lines of countervallation, -the successful sapping operation, appear, for example, in the tactics -of Philip Augustus: the besiegers’ brick tower is met again in William -Rufus’ timber castle at Bamburgh: the engines of war and the protected -penthouses are commonplaces of medieval warfare. - -The bare record of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle throws little light to -speak of upon the strategy or military skill of the Danes. Nor does the -lyric form of the songs which celebrate the fight at Brunanburh and -the battle of Maldon allow of that definiteness of detail which the -student requires. More definite, although not unencumbered by rhetoric, -is the account which Abbo, the monk of Saint-Germain-des-Prés, gives -of the siege of Paris by the Northmen in 885-6.[67] The city of those -days was confined to the isle still known as La Cité, and was united -to its suburbs on the mainland by two bridges, where now are the -Pont-au-Change and the Petit-Pont. The approach to each bridge was -guarded, on the mainland, by a tower or _tête-du-pont_. The attack of -the Normans was directed against the northern tower, the construction -of which had not been finished. It is curious to notice how they -concentrated themselves on single points in the defence, neglecting -the prime necessity of closing all lines of communication to the -defenders. They came up to the tower with their ships, which were seven -hundred in number, not counting sailless boats, battered it with their -engines, and hurled darts at its defenders. The tower was shaken, but -its foundations stood firm: where the walls threatened to give, they -were repaired with planks of timber, and the tower was raised by these -wooden additions during a night to one and a half times its former -height. At daybreak the Northmen again began the attack. The air, -says Abbo, was full of arrows and stones flung from slings and from -the _ballistae_ or hurling machines. During the day the heightened -tower showed signs of succumbing to the enemy’s fire and their mining -efforts. Eudes, the brave defender of the town, poured down a mixture -of burning oil, wax, and pitch, which quenched the enthusiasm of the -besiegers, and cost them three hundred men. On the third day, the -Northmen established their land camp on the northern bank of the river, -near the church of Saint-Germain-l’Auxerrois. The camp was probably a -_geweorc_ such as they wrought by the Thames or the Ouse, but it was -girt, not with an earthen rampart, but with walls of clay mingled with -stone. From this centre they cruelly ravaged the surrounding country -during the remainder of the siege. Having thus established their -base of operations, they returned to the attack of the tower. Their -devices were the common devices of Roman warfare, which naturally would -recommend themselves to the assailants of the dying Roman civilisation. -We hear of the three great battering rams which they prepared, and -moved up against the walls under the shelter of wooden penthouses -on wheels, of the bores brought up to undermine the tower by men -moving under wicker mantlets covered with raw hides, of the _mangana_ -or stone-throwing machines used by the defenders, and of the forked -beams let down from the tower to catch the heads of the battering-rams -and render them powerless. Some of the Northmen worked at filling up -the ditches with whatever came to hand, earth, leaves, straw, meadow -grass, cattle, even the bodies of captives. Still the city held out, -and Eudes managed to slip through the enemy’s lines and reach Charles -the Fat with a request for relief. On his return the Northmen tried to -intercept him: he got back safely into Paris, while a relieving force -attacked the enemy and drove them back on their ships. When Charles -the Fat arrived he established his camp on the southern slopes of -Montmartre; but he was content, after a general attack upon the city -had failed, to let the Northmen go, taking with them an indemnity of -seven hundred pounds, and promising to leave the kingdom in March. -They, however, made an attempt to reach the upper Seine in boats, as -the larger vessels could not clear the bridges, and so proceed to -pillage Burgundy. Their purpose was discovered: the defenders of Paris -launched arrows at them from the walls, and a chance dart killed their -pilot. For a time their onward course was checked, but a series of such -assaults could not be sustained by the French. Eudes, elected king, -neglected the conflict, and gave words for deeds. “Their barks,” says -Abbo, “were in crowds on all the rivers of Gaul.” He ends his poem with -a call to France to give proof once more of those forces which she had -used in the past to conquer kingdoms more powerful than herself. “Three -vices,” he cries, “are causes of thy ruin: pride, the shameful love of -pleasures, the vain lust of gorgeous apparel.” The same words might -have been said to the English a hundred and twenty-five years later, -when Swegen and Thurkill were gripping London between their two armies. - -A short passage in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle affords some help to the -question of Danish strategy. London bridge, like the two bridges of -Paris, was an obstacle to the long Danish ships with their sails. In -1016, however, the Danes managed to drag their ships round the south -side of the bridge, apparently by making a ditch on that side of the -river. They then proceeded to make entrenchments about the city, their -headquarters being thus removed above bridge. There is no reason to -doubt that the London which they thus beset was a stone-walled city, -the Roman Londinium which Alfred had repaired. So was Paris, and so -were a large number of the towns of France, whose walls had been set -in repair by their bishops or lay lords. We read of Saint Didier, -bishop of Cahors 630-55, that he “enlarged, built, and made strong -Cahors with abundant labour, and a notable work of defence, fortifying -gates and towers with a girdle of walls compacted of squared stones.” -In the next century the Saracen invaders of southern France restored -the Roman walls of Narbonne, and checked the advance of Charles Martel -into Spain.[68] But for the many instances in which the fortifications -of Roman cities in France played a part in the warfare of this troubled -epoch, there are few in England. The _burhs_ of the Danish wars were, -with the exception of London, Towcester, Colchester, and a few more, -not stone-walled cities of Roman foundation, such as those which in -France were the natural prey of the Norman marauders, but villages or -small towns which had grown into existence for the most part since -the Saxon conquest, and owed their strength to walls of timber. In -France military art, as regards both fortification and siege-craft, was -altogether on a higher plane. The break of continuity caused by the -extinction of Roman civilisation in England produced a stage in the -development of attack and defence to which contemporary French history -affords no parallel. It is not till a later period that the finished -methods employed by both sides in the siege of Paris were used in -English warfare. - -The cases hitherto quoted refer to sieges of towns; and, as we have -seen, the castle or private fortress which plays so prominent a part -in medieval strategy was the result of the growth of the feudal -system, and takes its place in history at a comparatively late period. -A fortified town of Roman origin possessed its _arx_ or citadel: -this was, as it were, the keep of the walled enclosure, to which the -defenders could retire if the outer defences of the town were taken. A -castle, however, was a distinct enclosure, which frequently occupied -a portion of the area of a walled town, but had its own outer lines -of defence before the keep could be reached. The Norman conquerors of -England, regarding the castle as the main seat of defence and object -of attack, directed their attention to its fortification; and thus the -defence of the town or village in or near which the castle stood became -of secondary interest. We usually find that, where a castle forms -part of the defences of an English walled town, the castle has been -surrounded with a wall and provided with its necessary defences before -a wall has been built round the town in place of the earlier palisade. -In spite, however, of this change in the nature of the besieged -stronghold, the object of attack was still a fortified enclosure. -The methods of siege developed along the old lines; and the defences -applied to the castle were those which, on a more extended scale, were -applicable to the town. - -The warfare of the eleventh and twelfth centuries was to a great extent -a succession of sieges of castles, by direct attack or by blockade. In -1083 William the Conqueror, besieging Hubert of Maine in the castle -of Ste-Suzanne, did not venture to attack the wooded precipice on -which the castle stood, but entrenched his army within earthworks in a -neighbouring valley. The blockade lasted three years, and the advantage -lay much on the side of Hubert, so that eventually the Norman army, -after a desperate attack had failed, withdrew.[69] The chief feature of -the blockade was the construction of an opposition castle,[70] a method -employed upon more than one occasion by William II., who, in 1088, -compelled Odo to surrender Rochester castle by making two _castella_ -upon his lines of communication.[71] In 1095 William II. besieged -Robert Mowbray in Bamburgh castle. The great rock, with its girdle -of sea and marsh, did not lend itself to direct attack, and William -compelled its surrender by building a “new fortress,” which took the -form of a timber castle, probably of the ordinary mount-and-bailey -type, and was nicknamed Malvoisin, the “ill neighbour.”[72] From -this particular instance, the name of _malvoisin_ has been applied -generally, without sufficient reason, to the wooden towers which were -sometimes constructed to shelter a besieging force. As a matter of -fact, Malvoisin was merely one of many nicknames which were given, in -individual cases, to such besiegers’ castles,[73] and was no more a -generic term than is Château-Gaillard. - -Until the end of the eleventh century, when the first Crusade -taught western warriors the use of more advanced siege-engines, the -methods of attack upon a castle seem to have been of a very simple -description. Earthworks defended by timber could be gained by a -rush and hand-to-hand fighting; while fire would always be fatal to -a wooden stronghold ill provided against it. The Bayeux tapestry -shows us none of those siege-machines which were employed more and -more frequently against stone castles during the next century; and, -although the Conqueror’s army seem to have employed an elementary -form of stone-throwing machine, handled, like the later cross-bow, -by individual soldiers, and other devices more familiar in later -times,[74] such machines can hardly have been common. It was, no doubt, -their growing frequency at the beginning of the twelfth century which -made stone walls imperative for the protection of a castle. We have -seen _ballistae_ and other siege-engines of Roman origin used by the -Northmen at the great siege of Paris in 885; but such engines were -certainly not in common use in western Europe before the period of -direct contact with Byzantine civilisation. Ordericus Vitalis mentions -the construction of such machines, a “belfry” on wheels and devices -for hurling large stones, by Robert of Bellême’s engineer at Bréval in -1093, as though they were a novelty, and says of the engineer himself -that his sagacious ingenuity had been of profit to the Christians at -the siege of Jerusalem.[75] - -Suger’s detailed account of the attack made by Louis VI. upon the -castle of Le Puiset in 1111 may be taken as a fair description of the -methods employed by the besiegers and defenders of an ordinary castle -of earthwork and timber. The king brought numerous _ballistae_ to the -attack, but we have no indication as to their precise nature: the main -weapons employed were the bow, sword, and shield. The besieged came out -of the castle to meet the king; but, amid a hail of arrows from both -sides, were driven back through the main gateway, which was possibly, -as at Tickhill,[76] the only stone defence of the enclosure. From the -rampart of their stronghold, they hurled down wooden planks and stakes -upon the king’s knights. The besiegers, throwing away their broken -shields, made use of the missiles to protect themselves and force the -gateway. Carts laden with dry wood smeared with fat were brought up -to the doors, and a struggle took place, the royalists trying to set -the wood on fire, the defenders trying to put the fire out. Meanwhile -Theobald of Chartres made an attack on the castle from another quarter, -attempting to climb the steep scarp of the bailey. His followers, -however, were too hasty: many fell back into the ditch, while others -were surprised and killed by horsemen of the enemy, who galloped round -the defences of the castle to keep out intruders. The royalists had -almost given up hope, when a priest, bare-headed and holding before -him a piece of wood as an extemporised mantlet, reached the palisade, -and began to tear away the planks which covered the spaces between the -uprights. He was soon joined by others, who cut away the palisade with -axes and iron tools. The royal army poured into the castle, and the -defenders, taken between the entering force and Theobald’s men, retired -into the timber tower on the mount, but surrendered in fear. The king -burned the castle, but spared the donjon.[77] - -The assault upon a stone castle or walled town was conducted by direct -attempts upon the walls themselves, for which movable machines were -necessary, and by throwing stones or inflammable materials into the -besieged enclosure from stationary machines. The chief engine used -directly against the walls was the battering-ram, an enormous pole, -furnished with an iron head. Hung by chains within a wooden framework -placed on wheels, it was brought up to the wall, and driven against -it again and again. The men who worked the ram were protected by -a pent-house with a rounded or gabled top, called the “tortoise” -(_testudo_), which covered the machine and its framework. The roof of -the “tortoise” was made very solidly, to resist missiles thrown from -the ramparts, and the whole was covered with raw hides or some other -incombustible material, as a precaution against fire thrown by the -defenders (69).[78] - -[Illustration: Battering-ram protected by pent-house and mantlets] - -While the ram delivered its blows upon the face of the wall, sappers -and miners, sheltered by a smaller pent-house, known as the “mouse,” -“cat,” or “sow,” made their attack upon the foundations with the bore -(_terebra_), a heavy pole with a sharp iron head, which slowly broke -up the stonework and hollowed out a cavity at the foundation of the -walls (70). This work was assisted by sappers, who, advancing to the -wall beneath the shelter of inclined frames of timber or wicker-work, -known as mantlets, which they wheeled in front of them, hacked away -the stone-work with picks. When a sufficient hollow had been made, the -miners underpinned the wall with logs, set fire to them, and retired. -This device was constantly used throughout the middle ages to effect a -breach, and was successful at Château-Gaillard in 1204,[79] and on -other occasions; but it obviously must have taken much time, and must -often have failed of its purpose. - -Before, however, the movable engines could be brought to play upon the -stonework, it was necessary to fill up the ditch in front of the walls. -This work was done by soldiers, who, under the protection of mantlets, -flung into the ditch all the loose material on which they could lay -hands. When the Danes used their battering-rams against the northern -_tête-du-pont_ at Paris, the first thing which they attempted to do -was to fill the ditch, using even the dead bodies of their captives -when other material failed.[80] At Jerusalem in 1099, before Raymond -of Toulouse could bring up his “timber castle”[81] to the walls, a -deep natural hollow had to be filled. The work took three days and -nights: every man who put three stones into the hollow was promised a -penny.[82] Philip Augustus in February 1203-4 began his operations upon -Château-Gaillard by filling the ditch between the outer ward and his -lines, while his catapults played upon the masonry from a distance and -protected the workers between them and the wall.[83] - -[Illustration: Bore protected by mantlets] - -While the battering-ram, the bore, and the mine threatened the -stability of the walls, parties of the besiegers attempted to force -an entry into the stronghold. The simple method of bringing up fuel -to the main gateway, and burning down the door, was frustrated, in -process of time, by greater attention to the defences of the gateway, -and the reinforcement of its doors by herses or portcullises.[84] -Scaling-ladders were moved up against the walls: the daring spirits -who climbed these drew up with them other ladders, by which they could -descend into the enclosure. Another method of scaling walls was by the -movable “belfry,” a tower of several stories, in each of which a number -of men could be sheltered. The floor of the uppermost stage of the -tower was approximately on a level with the top of the ramparts, and a -drawbridge thrown out from it, when it was wheeled close to the wall, -formed a passage for the besiegers. The occupants of the lower stages -could mount by stairs to the top floor, and thus a considerable body -of men could come to close quarters with the defenders (72).[85] These -movable towers could be quickly constructed, where wood of sufficient -scantling was procurable. Philip’s belfries at Château-Gaillard -were composed of tree-trunks, untouched by the plane: all that the -carpenters had done to smooth them was to cut off the branches with -an axe.[86] In early instances of the employment of such towers, they -seem to have been chiefly used for bringing the small artillery of -the besiegers close to the walls. At Marrah in 1098, the Crusader -Raymond of Toulouse had a very lofty wooden “belfry,” of a height equal -to that of the towers on the town wall, made upon four wheels. Huge -stones were hurled and arrows shot from it upon the defenders of the -walls, and grappling-irons were thrust out to catch unwary persons with -their hooks. The walls were eventually climbed by scaling ladders of -the ordinary kind: if there was a drawbridge in connection with the -machine, it does not seem to have been used.[87] Antioch, earlier in -the same year, was entered by scaling ladders.[88] The belfry used -by Henry I. at Pontaudemer in 1123 was a movable tower, but was not -used for purposes of scaling. It was actually 24 feet higher than the -rampart: bow-men and arbalasters directed their arrows and bolts from -it upon the defenders, while others threw stones down from it.[89] Not -even at Château-Gaillard is there much reason to suppose that Philip -used his belfries to scale the walls. The miners and catapults did -the chief work, by opening breaches in the masonry of the outer and -inner wards: the middle ward alone was gained by an escalade, and this -was effected by a small body of men, who climbed through unguarded -openings in the substructure of the chapel, and so were able to unbar -the gates of the ward to the main body of the army. - -[Illustration: Besiegers scaling walls from movable belfry] - -The great siege-engines, capable of shooting stones or bolts, -which were often heated red-hot in an oven before delivery, from a -considerable distance, did their work from the background. The men who -looked after them were protected by a palisade, placed in front of the -engines; this was the case with Philip’s engineers at Château-Gaillard. -These machines are often indiscriminately called “stone-throwers” -(_petrariae_, _pierrières_) or catapults; and accounts of them differ -very considerably. It is clear that, in Roman and Byzantine warfare, -the two main types of engine were the stone-throwing machine, known -later as the mangon or mangonel, and the machine for shooting javelins, -known as _ballista_.[90] The first consisted of an upright flexible -beam between two solid upright posts. Cords were stretched from post -to post and wound round the beam. The beam was then drawn back with -the aid of winches and a stone placed in a hollow in its head; it was -then suddenly let go, so that the twisted cords slackened, and the -stone flew towards its mark, describing a high ellipse in its flight. -The force by which the _ballista_ was worked, depended, not on twisted -cords, but on the tension of the cord which joined the two extremities -of a great bow, and was attached to the movable grooved piece in -which the javelin was placed. The tension released, the javelin was -discharged. While the _ballista_ could be discharged with a definite -aim, the aim of the stone-throwing machine could be only general, and -its chief use was to cast stones which, by their elliptic flight, -dropped inside the walls of the besieged place.[91] - -[Illustration: Engine for shooting javelins] - -[Illustration: Stone-throwing engine] - -The _ballista_, which was simply a huge bow, capable of shooting -enormous bolts by the tension of a horizontal cord, was developed -upon a small scale into the cross-bow or arbalast, which could be -carried and managed by one man. The cross-bow was invented, or at -any rate re-invented, in northern Europe towards the end of the -eleventh century, it was employed in the first Crusade, and struck -the Byzantines as a novelty.[92] The development of the larger -engines seems to have proceeded with a view to stone-throwing, and -combinations of the machines mentioned above may have been employed -for this purpose.[93] Viollet-le-Duc, in his elaborate reconstructions -of siege-machines, shows, for example, a mangon with a central upright -post, working on a pivot, in a slot near the top of which is fixed a -javelin. This post is strengthened by two diagonal beams fixed to the -back of the framework, which moves on the same pivot, at the foot of -the machine. Between these the flexible beam which propels the javelin -is fastened by a cord working through a pulley to a winch turned by -a man, and a bundle of cords is tightly twisted round the central -post and the beam (74). He also shows a large stone-throwing engine -on a wheeled carriage, which, in addition to an apparatus of twisted -cords held in place by a system of ratchet wheels, and bound round the -movable beam, has a cord stretched round the back of the beam, and -connected with two huge springs forming a bow. The centre of the bow -is a massive upright framework of wood, which acts as a buffer to the -beam, when it is allowed to fly forward and discharge the stone (74). -Minute as these reconstructions are, they seem to improve upon the data -supplied by medieval writers and the pictures in MSS. Guillaume le -Breton, the panegyrist of Philip Augustus, describes the stone-throwing -machine used at the siege of Boves in 1185, as a great sling worked by -several men, which threw immense rocks of great weight. The beam to -which the projectile was attached worked on an axis, and was dragged -backwards to the ground with ropes, and then set free. - -[Illustration: Trébuchet or Slinging machine] - -[Illustration: Trébuchet with ropes attached to counterpoise] - -This description suggests that the beam, balanced on an axis, and -needing several people to attend to the discharge at one end, was -worked by a counterpoise at the other. This was the case with the -developed slinging machine, known as _trébuchet_. A pole, working on -a pivot between two upright stands, was weighted at one end with a -heavy wooden chest, filled with earth, which kept the pole, when not -in use, in a vertical position. To the other end was attached a long -sling, capable of containing large stones. When the tension of the -ropes which dragged the pole backwards and lifted the counterpoise was -released, the counterpoise fell heavily, bringing the pole abruptly -back into position, and the sling, describing a circle in the air, let -fly the stone when it reached the summit of the arc (75). Variations -of this form of catapult, which became general in the thirteenth -century, are found (76); the machine known as _cabulus_ which Philip -Augustus used with excellent effect against the strong inner wall -of Château-Gaillard, was possibly worked upon the principle of -counterpoise. - -Against these modes and machines of attack the defenders of a castle -had to contend. The obvious means of defence was to oppose to the enemy -a thickness of wall which would be proof against the blows of the ram -or the slow labour of the pick. But even the very strong inner wall -at Château-Gaillard, which was constructed with the special object of -resisting these engines, yielded to the miners, reinforced by the -great slinging machine. In this instance the castle had undergone -a long blockade; its communications had been cut off some months -beforehand; and the garrison was greatly reduced in numbers. The lesson -of the siege was that against a persistent and well-conducted blockade -mere passive strength was of little avail. Here, too, the defenders, -driven back from one bailey to another, seem to have renounced the -opportunity of final shelter afforded them by the keep, and to have -made an attempt to evacuate the castle by a postern before they fell -into the hands of the enemy. - -[Illustration: Aigues-Mortes] - -[Illustration: Carcassonne] - -Château-Gaillard, however, and the castles of its period will be -discussed in detail in the sequel. At present, we are concerned with -the direct methods employed to meet the attack of siege-engines -and attempts at escalade. Against the great catapults the besieged -were practically powerless. The use of such machines upon the walls -themselves was as dangerous to the stability of the masonry as their -use by the enemy, and hastened the chance of a breach: they could not -be employed from the interior of the enclosure, without endangering -the defenders on the rampart.[94] The summit of the rectangular -keep of the twelfth century was never constructed as a platform for -artillery: here, again, engineers probably feared the effect of the -constant vibration upon a flat wooden roof, and were content to conceal -their ridged roofs within high ramparts. The main arm of defence which -could be employed by the defenders was the cross-bow. Their superior -position upon the ramparts enabled them to throw down stones and -burning material upon the assailants engaged at the foot of the wall, -and the wheeled belfries formed a direct target for their arrows. The -ram could also be paralysed by letting down grappling-irons or beams -with forked heads, which gripped and disabled it; or sacks of wool or -earth could be lowered to meet its strokes. The assailants, however, -worked under their defences of pent-houses and mantlets, the solid tops -and sloping surfaces of which were specially devised against the shock -of stones and arrows; while, as we have seen, their coverings were so -protected that it was difficult for them to catch fire. - -[Illustration: - - Parapet defended by hoarding, showing elevation, section through - _hourd_ and _coursière_, and method of construction] - -[Illustration: Laval] - -The first improvements in defence, designed to meet an improved attack, -consisted in the protection of the ramparts. Behind the outer parapet -of the wall was the rampart-walk, a level path along the top of the -wall, which was sometimes protected by a parapet in the rear. From an -early date in stone fortification, it was customary to break the upper -portion of the parapet at intervals by openings called crenellations, -through which it was possible for an archer to command a limited part -of the field at right angles to the wall.[95] The crenellations, -however, were narrow compared with the unbroken parapets between them, -and, even in advanced examples of fortification like the ramparts -of Aigues-Mortes (77) and Carcassonne (78), these unbroken pieces -are still very broad, although they are pierced by arrow-slits. Even -allowing for an arrow-slit between each crenellation, the foot of the -wall could not be commanded from behind the parapet. In time of siege, -then, it became customary to supply the walls with projecting wooden -galleries, known as hoardings or brattices (_hourds_, _bretèches_), -which could be entered through the crenellations. The joists of the -flooring passed through holes at the foot of the parapet, and were -often common to the outer gallery and an inner gallery (_coursière_) -covering the rampart-walk. Both galleries had a common roof.[96] In the -floor of the outer gallery, between the joists, were holes, through -which missiles could be directed upon the besiegers at the foot of the -wall; while slits in the outer face were still available for straight -firing. The defenders of the ramparts were thus able to work under -shelter, with some command both of the field and the foot of the wall. -The defensive advantages of this scheme are obvious; but the galleries -were also liable, although the usual precautions for their covering -were taken, to destruction by fire, whether from arrows tipped with -burning tow, or the more formidable red-hot stones flung by catapults. -In any case, the catapults were a serious menace to their solidity. - -[Illustration: Coucy; parapet of donjon] - -The donjon and the towers of the _enceinte_ were also bratticed -at the rampart-level.[97] Indications of this practice are common -in military architecture abroad. The cylindrical donjon of Laval -(80), a work of the twelfth century, is covered with hoarding which -is supposed to be contemporary with the tower. The stone corbels -which carried the hoarding of the great thirteenth-century tower of -Coucy remain; and a row of plain arches pierced in the tall parapet -show how the gallery was entered from the roof (81). The somewhat -earlier round tower at Rouen was restored by Viollet-le-Duc on the -lines of Coucy, with a conical roof and hoarding. The inner wall at -Carcassonne and the curtain of Loches, among other examples, keep the -holes in which the joists of the hoarding were fixed; and the walls -of Nuremberg are still covered with inner galleries or _coursières_. -The practice of supplementing stone walls with timber defences lasted -till a late period; but, even before the end of the twelfth century, -corbelled-out parapets with machicolations appeared in isolated -instances. In subsequent chapters we shall see how military masons and -engineers applied their architectural skill to meet the problems which -siege-engines of greater strength and tactics more finished than those -of the past forced upon them. We have now to deal with earlier efforts, -which we have to some degree anticipated. - - - - -CHAPTER V - -THE BEGINNING OF THE STONE CASTLE - - -[Illustration: Map of principal castles in north-east England] - -In Domesday Book some fifty castles are mentioned by name or -implication; and the number was largely increased during the next -hundred years. In view, however, of the large number of temporary -private strongholds which came into being during the twelfth century, -it is difficult to estimate the number of permanent castles until, in -the later part of the century, Henry II. regulated and restrained the -efforts of private owners to guard their property with fortresses. The -castles included in Domesday do not represent the whole number which -existed at that period; and of such important castles as Colchester and -Exeter, which we know to have been founded before 1086, there is no -mention. To estimate the strategic plan which governed the foundation -of castles at its full value, we must therefore turn for a moment -to the later period at which the defence of England by a connected -system of these strongholds had been more thoroughly achieved. Here -also, it is not altogether easy, in view of the destruction of older -castles by Henry II., and the foundation of new ones at a later -epoch, to estimate the exact state of the castles of England at the -end of the twelfth century.[98] But, taking one special district, we -may at least gain an approximate notion of its lines of defence as -they existed about the year 1200. This is the north-eastern district -of England, containing the main strategic approach to Scotland, and -crossed by the rivers which descend eastwards to the sea. This was the -scene of the rebellion of the Mowbrays and the invasion of William -the Lion in 1174, in consequence of which four important castles -at least, those of Kinnard’s Ferry on the lower Trent, Thirsk and -Northallerton in the vale of Mowbray, and Kirkby Malzeard, on the -highlands above the right bank of the Ure, were demolished.[99] The -chief castles of this district will be found to guard the line of -the rivers. On the Trent were Nottingham, on the north bank, and the -bishop of Lincoln’s castle of Newark,[100] on the south; while the -greater part of the lower valley of the river was commanded at some -distance by the strongly-placed castles of Belvoir and Lincoln. On -the borders of Nottinghamshire and Yorkshire, Tickhill[101] stood in -advance of the Don, while the narrow passage of the Don, five miles -west of Doncaster, was guarded by Conisbrough. These castles defended -the approach from the high land on the west; the marshy country north -and east of Doncaster, towards the Humber, although it often proved -a refuge for freebooters, needed no permanent garrison. South of the -Calder, opposite Wakefield, stood Sandal. To the east, below the -junction of the Calder and the Aire, was Pontefract, in a position of -great strength and importance.[102] There was no great castle on the -Wharfe, although Harewood guarded the south bank of the river between -Otley and Tadcaster, and at Tadcaster itself there was a castle, of -which little is known; Cawood castle was simply a manor-house of the -archbishops of York.[103] On the Ouse, almost in the centre of the -shire, were the two castles of York, at the head of the tideway. -Knaresborough was west of York, on the north bank of the Nidd. Each of -the dales of the North Riding had its strong castle. In Wensleydale was -Middleham, south of the Ure. Richmond, from its cliff at the mouth of -Swaledale, commanded a vast tract of country, reaching to the Hambleton -hills and the forest of Galtres, north of York. Barnard Castle stood -in a strong position on the Durham bank of the Tees. The castles of -the eastern part of the North Riding were Skelton and Castleton, both -in Cleveland, and belonging to the house of Bruce. Helmsley stood at -the entrance of Ryedale; Pickering and Malton were on the Derwent, -and Scarborough guarded the coast. South of Scarborough, in the East -Riding, the one castle of importance at this date was Skipsea, on the -low coast-line of Holderness, between Flamborough and Spurn heads. -Returning to the border of Durham, and crossing the Tees, we find -Brancepeth and Durham on the Wear. On the south bank of the Tyne was -Prudhoe in Northumberland: north of the Tyne was the great fortress of -Newcastle. Most of the castles and small strongholds of Northumberland -were the growth of a later age. The principal castles at this period -were Mitford on the Wansbeck, Warkworth on the Coquet, Alnwick on the -Alne, Wark and Norham on the Tweed, and Bamburgh and Holy Island, -castles on the seaboard. This list might be extended, but the most -important fortresses east of the Pennine chain are included in it, -and from it the strategic geography of this important district can -be readily recognised. Of the thirty-four castles in this list, ten, -including the gateway-tower at Newark, had rectangular tower-keeps, of -which nine remain; Conisbrough and Barnard Castle (87) had cylindrical -tower-keeps. Of the rest, in most cases, as at Sandal (86), the mounts -remain, and in a few instances, as at Skipsea, there are remains of -a shell-keep. The shell-keeps of Lincoln and Pickering are still -excellent examples of their type. The masonry at York, Pontefract, and -Knaresborough belongs to a later period; and in almost all instances, -where masonry remains, it bears trace of substantial later additions. - -[Illustration: Sandal Castle; Plan] - -[Illustration: Barnard Castle; Plan] - -It will be noticed that castles which guarded passes through hilly -districts were generally placed, like Middleham and Richmond, in -comparatively open country at the foot of the pass. This was the -case with Welsh castles like Brecon and Llandovery, or the tower of -Dolbadarn, below the pass of Llanberis. The isolated position at the -head of a pass was not easily victualled, nor was it so useful as the -situation on more open ground, from which, as at Brecon or Middleham, a -larger extent of mountain country could be commanded. Trecastle (44), -at the top of the pass between Brecon and Llandovery, has already been -mentioned as a site which was probably abandoned early: the tract which -it commanded is limited compared with that within reach of Brecon, the -point towards which all the valleys of the neighbourhood converge. - -In places where a castle formed part of the defences of a walled town, -it was usually placed upon the line of the wall, so that the wall -formed for some distance part of its curtain. This can be well seen -at Lincoln, where the castle occupied the south-west angle of the -older Roman city. The castle of Ludlow is in the north-west angle of -the town, the wall of which joined it on its north face and at its -south-west corner. At Carlisle the castle filled up an angle of the -town, the town walls meeting its south curtain at either end. In such -cases, the castle, while defending the town, was also protected from -it by a ditch, across which a passage was furnished by a drawbridge. -The castle of Bristol stood upon the isthmus, east of the town, between -the streams of the Avon and Frome, and, in this strong position, was -joined by the city wall at either extremity of its west side. In 1313, -when the citizens were in rebellion, they cut off the castle from -the city by building a new wall on that side.[104] In the case of -Bristol, the building of the castle made some alterations in the town -wall necessary, as time went on, but, from the beginning, the castle -occupied its place in the regular _enceinte_. If, at York, the castles -were at first built, as seems to be the case, outside the defences -of the town, the circuit was soon extended to include the castle, at -any rate, upon the right bank of the river. Although the castle of -Southampton is almost entirely gone, the points of junction of its -curtains with the west wall of the town are quite clear. Similarly, -the position of castles such as Shrewsbury, Leicester, and Nottingham, -or close to the _enceinte_ of the town, can be traced, although little -is left of the walls. In foreign walled towns like Angers or Laval, -the castle formed, as in England, a portion of the outer defences. In -later castles like Carnarvon and Conway, the same relation to the plan -of the town was preserved. There are exceptions, of which the chief is -the Tower of London, within the Roman, but outside the medieval city -wall. Chepstow is also outside the town, between which and the castle -is a deep ravine: but in this case the town was of a growth subsequent -to the foundation of the castle. A distinction must be drawn between -castles founded in connection with fortified towns, in which the castle -formed part of a general scheme of defence, as at Bristol and Oxford, -and castles under the protection of which towns, like Chepstow, grew -up, and were subsequently fortified. A good example of this latter -class is Newcastle, in which the relations of town and castle are -exactly opposite to those at Chepstow. When the castle was founded by -the Conqueror, the place, once garrisoned by the Romans, and for a time -inhabited by a colony of English monks, was probably an inconsiderable -village. The town which grew up on the site took its name from the -castle, and was walled in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The -walls, however, were brought down to the banks of the Tyne at some -distance east and west of the castle, which was thus contained entirely -within their circuit. At Norwich, a place of no great importance before -the Conquest, the castle is also entirely within the line of the old -city wall. One of the best examples of the connection between a walled -town and a castle is at Launceston, where the borough of Dunheved grew -up within a narrow area which was virtually the outer ward of the -strong hill-fortress. - -The establishment of a castle upon a permanent site was followed, -sooner or later, by the building of stone fortifications. This work -was often very gradual. We have seen that even a castle so important -as that of York retained part of its timber stockade as late as 1324. -This, however, was an exceptional case. The walls and towers of -medieval castles show, as might be expected, a considerable variety of -masonry; but the epoch at which their fortification in stone became -general may be said to be the third quarter of the twelfth century. In -1155 Henry II. resumed castles and other royal property into his own -hands, and ordered the destruction of the unlicensed castles which had -risen during the civil wars of the previous reign.[105] This step was -followed unquestionably by much activity in strengthening the defences -of the castles which were left. - -At the same time, there are many substantial remains of stone -buildings in castles earlier than this era. Stone donjons or keeps -were certainly exceptional in England before the reign of Henry II., -although there are a few important examples of an earlier date. It -cannot be disputed, however, that a certain number of castles were -provided with a stone curtain-wall[106] and other stone buildings not -long after the Conquest. Curtain-walls thus built would follow the line -of the earthen bank surrounding the bailey, and take the place of the -timber stockade. They were at first of the simplest form. An edict of -the council of Lillebonne in 1080 laid down the rule, so far as the -Norman duchy was concerned, for constructing the defences of private -castles; and, although the details refer primarily to the ordinary -timber structure, they also have a bearing on the construction of early -curtains of stone. No ditch was to be deeper than the level from which -earth could be thrown by the digger, without other help, to the soil -above. The stockade was to follow a course of straight lines, and to -be without _propugnacula_ and _alatoria_—_i.e._, projecting towers and -battlements, and rampart-walks or galleries.[107] - -The earliest type of curtain-wall would be strictly in accordance with -these rules—a strong wall of stone surrounding the bailey, and climbing -the sides of the mount to join the defences of the donjon. We read -of the destruction by Louis VI. of France of the stone fortification -with which the house of the lord of Maule was surrounded;[108] and the -edict already quoted applies to fortifications on level ground, and -includes, not merely castles, but strong private houses, which might -not necessarily follow the castle plan. The edict, however, proceeds -to forbid altogether the construction by private persons of castles -on rocks or islands. The reason of this is obvious. Such isolated -strongholds might become, in the hands of private owners, a centre -of rebellion against the suzerain. In 1083, Hubert of Maine held out -successfully against the Conqueror in his rock castle of Ste-Suzanne -(Mayenne) on the Erve, “inaccessible by reason of the rocks and the -thickness of the surrounding vineyards.”[109] William II. in 1095 -besieged Robert Mowbray in his castle on the well-nigh impregnable -rock of Bamburgh, with considerably better fortune.[110] Such rocks -formed, as it were, natural mounts which made the construction of the -ordinary mount-and-bailey castle upon them unnecessary. The hardness -of the soil, moreover, made the construction of earthworks difficult -or impossible. The natural method of defence would be to raise a stone -wall which enclosed the stronghold. - -[Illustration: BAMBURGH CASTLE: great tower] - -[Illustration: BAMBURGH CASTLE] - -[Illustration: Richmond; great tower] - -Neither at Ste-Suzanne nor at Bamburgh (91) is there existing -stonework earlier than the twelfth century. Of the castle of -Saint-Céneri-le-Gérei (Orne), which we know to have been fortified -with stone walls before the end of the eleventh century,[111] only -indistinguishable masses of masonry remain to-day. On the other hand, -there are a certain number of castles on rocky and isolated sites, the -walls of which may be fairly attributed, in whole or part, to the later -half of the eleventh century. The most important example is Richmond -castle in Yorkshire (91), on a high promontory of rock above the Swale. -The shape of the enclosure is triangular. The most conspicuous feature -of the castle is the splendid square tower or donjon, which was -completed between 1170 and 1180, and stands on the north side of the -_enceinte_, at the head of the approach from the town. The curtain, -however, west of the donjon, contains “herring-bone” masonry,[112] and -is of a rough construction which affords the greatest contrast to the -regularly dressed and closely jointed masonry of the great tower. The -tower, on three sides, forms an outward projection from the curtain, -of great size and strength, and is a structure of one period from the -ground upwards. But, on entering the castle, it is at once obvious -that the lower part of the south wall of the tower is formed by part -of the earlier curtain. In the middle of this section of the work is a -wide doorway, with a round-headed arch of two unmoulded orders, which -now forms an entrance into the basement of the tower. The capitals -of the jamb-shafts of this archway are of an unmistakably eleventh -century character, with volutes at the upper angles, and a row of -acanthus leaves round the bell. This type of capital is seen in such -buildings as the two abbey churches at Caen, the nave of Christchurch -priory, the west front of Lincoln minster, and other fabrics completed -before 1100, and is a sure guide to the date of the work in which it -occurs. It would appear, then, that the masonry of this archway and -much of the curtain is the work of Alan of Brittany, earl of Richmond, -who certainly founded the castle, and died in 1088.[113] The castle -contains more work of his date, of which something will be said in the -sequel. - -[Illustration: Ludlow; Entrance to inner ward] - -When the great tower of Richmond was built, an entrance was made on -the first floor, from the rampart-walk of the curtain. It is quite -clear that, up to this time, the archway just described had been the -main entrance of the castle, and had probably been covered on the -side next the town by a rectangular building, which formed the lower -stage of a gateway-tower or gatehouse, lower than the present donjon. -This is borne out by a comparison with the keep at Ludlow, where it -is quite clear that an eleventh century gatehouse was converted at a -later period into a keep, by walling up the outer entrance (94). A -new entrance to the castle, as at Richmond, was made in the adjacent -curtain, where it could be easily commanded by the tower. The date of -the lowest stage of the donjon is revealed, as at Richmond, by the -details of capitals and shafts, which in this case belong to an arcade -in the east wall of the inner portion (95).[114] - -[Illustration: Ludlow; Wall arcade in basement of great tower] - -[Illustration: Ludlow; Plan] - -The site of Ludlow (96), like that of Richmond, is a rocky peninsula, -where a stone curtain, for which material existed on the spot, formed -the obvious means of defence. There was no mount and no keep. Exeter, -again, is an early example of a stone-walled castle upon a rocky site, -where a gateway with a tower above formed the principal entrance. -Such sites were protected naturally by the fall of the ground on the -steeper sides; the side on which approach was possible was covered by -a ditch cut in the rock. The ditch would be crossed by a drawbridge, -let down from the inner edge, next the gateway. The gatehouse itself -would be a building of two or more stages; at Ludlow the upper stage, -as completed, was considerably loftier than the lower.[115] At Exeter -there were probably three stages. A single upper stage remains at -Tickhill. At Lewes and Porchester there is clear evidence of an upper -chamber. The gatehouse at Porchester, as at Ludlow, was the entrance -to an inner ward, divided by a ditch from the large outer ward,[116] -which, at Porchester, represented the greater part of the _enceinte_ of -the Roman station, and contained the priory church and buildings. In -these early gatehouses, the lower stage was closed at either end by a -heavy wooden door, and was covered by a flat ceiling of timber. There -was no arrangement for a portcullis. At Ludlow the lower stage appears -to have been divided into an outer porch and inner hall by a cross -wall, in which there must have been a door; but communication between -these parts was also obtained by a narrow barrel-vaulted passage in the -thickness of the east wall, which, opening from the outer division, -turned at right angles to itself in the direction of the length of the -wall, and, with another right-angled turn, opened into the inner hall -(95). This passage was guarded by doors, which opened inwards at either -end.[117] When the outer doorway of the gatehouse was blocked, the -lower stage was covered in with a pointed barrel-vault.[118] - -[Illustration: Porchester; Plan] - -As already indicated, the details of these gatehouses are very simple, -and it is only where an attempt is made at ornament that their date -can be fairly judged. Thus at Porchester, the entrance archway, masked -by defensive work of a more advanced period, consists of an unmoulded -ring of _voussoirs_, divided from the jambs by plain impost-blocks. The -outer bailey or base-court of the castle, which is still surrounded by -the Roman walls with their semicircular bastions, has two gatehouses. -These occupy the sites of the west and east gates of the Roman -_enceinte_, and the east or water-gate is in part Roman. The western -gatehouse was rebuilt at a date contemporary with the enclosure of the -castle proper within the north-west quarter of the Roman station, and -was much altered at a later period. The archways of the Norman building -remain, and show no attempt at ornament, the inner one alone having -impost-blocks below the arches. The work at Porchester is usually -attributed to the early part of the twelfth century, and the ashlar -facing of the side walls of the inner gateway appears to be of that -date. A similar severity of detail is seen in the parallel case of -Lewes, where the original gatehouse was also covered in the fourteenth -century by a barbican (98). The great gatehouse of three stages, at -Newark castle (99), was the work of Alexander, bishop of Lincoln from -1123 to 1148, whose uncle, Roger, bishop of Salisbury (1107-39), -appears to have built the gatehouse at Sherborne. The archways of the -lower stage at Newark are of great width, and are as simple in detail -as those at Porchester. The outer or northern wall of the tower is -faced with finely-jointed ashlar, and the archway on this side has a -hood-moulding, with billet ornament.[119] - -[Illustration: Lewes; Barbican] - -The position of the gatehouse in relation to the curtain varies. At -Richmond, Porchester, and Exeter the inner face of the gatehouse was -flush with the curtain. At Ludlow, Newark, and Tickhill it was partly -outside, but mostly inside the curtain. At Lewes the projection was -wholly internal. Its measurements also vary. Porchester was 23 feet -in length by 28 feet in breadth: Exeter and Lewes were about 30 feet, -Tickhill about 36 feet square: Ludlow was 31 feet broad, but was some -feet longer. The area of the gatehouse at Newark is larger than any, -and the general proportions and elevation were those of a rectangular -donjon rather than a mere gateway-tower.[120] - -[Illustration: Newark; Gatehouse] - -Stress has been laid on the occurrence of early stone fortifications -on rocky and precipitous sites, where the ordinary earthworks were at -once impracticable and unnecessary. It will be noted, however, that -the gatehouses which have been described are not found wholly in such -positions. Tickhill and Lewes were mount-and-bailey castles with strong -earthworks. Porchester is on level ground, open to Portsmouth harbour -on two sides, and defended by a ditch on the sides towards the land: -the site was already walled, but the rectangular keep appears to stand -upon the base of an earlier mount, which may have been thrown up so -as to enclose the Roman tower at the north-west angle of the station. -Newark (157) stands on a moderate height above the meeting of the Devon -and an arm of the Trent, with a deep ditch on the north and east sides -towards the town. There was no castle here before Alexander began to -build in or about 1130; and his work from the beginning consisted of -a rectangular enclosure without a mount, in which the gatehouse had -something of the importance of a keep. The necessity of defending the -entrance of the castle, whatever the nature of the site might be, led -to the construction of stone gatehouses at an early date; and, at -Tickhill or Lewes, the gate-towers were probably constructed at a time -when the mounts and embankments of the bailey were still defended by -timber. - -Stone curtains which display “herring-bone” masonry may generally -be assumed to be early in date. It has been customary to look upon -“herring-bone” masonry as indicative of pre-Conquest work, and many -buildings have been described as “Saxon” on the strength of this detail -alone. On the other hand, it never occurs in direct association with -details which may be regarded as definite criteria of pre-Conquest -masonry; and the dimensions, apart from other features, of churches -in which it is found in any quantity, usually afford suspicion of its -post-Conquest origin.[121] Its use in castles, which, as has been -shown, were a Norman importation into England, demolishes its claim to -be regarded as a distinctive sign of Saxon work; and its employment -in Normandy, especially in the donjon of Falaise, where almost the -whole of the inner face of the walls shows “herring-bone” coursing, -may be set against any theory which would attribute it to English -masons after the Conquest.[122] It was used by Roman builders, and -much of it may be seen in the towers of the _enceinte_ at Porchester. -Saxon builders, however, did not copy Roman methods of walling, and -the surest criterion of Saxon work is the thin wall, wholly composed -of dressed stone, or of rag-work without facings. Norman builders, -coming from a country where the continuity of Roman influence was never -broken, used the ordinary Roman method of a compound wall, in which -a solid rubble core was faced with ashlar on one or both sides. It -is only natural that in early stone castles, which were constructed -as quickly as possible, the facing should be of a rough description, -of coursed rubble or of “herring-bone” courses laid in thick beds -of mortar. At a subsequent date, when masonry was added to already -fortified sites, the work could be pursued in a more leisurely manner. -The most striking example of “herring-bone” work in an English castle -is in the cross-wall of the great tower at Colchester (101), which is -unquestionably a building of the eleventh century. Here the work was -evidently hurried on, with the object of securing the greatest amount -of strength in the least possible time, and Roman tiles were re-used in -large quantities as bonding courses for the rubble walls, and for the -“herring-bone” coursing of the dividing wall. At Richmond, as has been -noted, there is a certain amount of “herring-bone” work in the curtain. -The castle was founded on an entirely new site by Alan of Brittany: -earthworks were out of the question, and the date of the older masonry -of the stone wall is beyond dispute. - -[Illustration: Colchester; Cross-wall] - -A very remarkable example of “herring-bone” walling is the curtain-wall -at Tamworth (48). The castle was founded by Robert Marmion after the -Conquest on the low ground at the meeting of the Tame and Anker, the -town, the fortified _burh_ of Æthelflæd, being on higher ground to the -north. Marmion’s fortress took the mount-and-bailey form. The bailey -was a triangular platform of earth, raised artificially above the level -of the river bank, with its apex towards the confluence of the streams. -The mount was on its west side, and was divided from it by a ditch. The -defences on the side next the town were of stone. Here the curtain-wall -remains in very perfect condition, crossing the ditch and climbing -the mount, with a sloping rampart-walk along the top. The inner face -is composed entirely of “herring-bone” courses, alternating with one, -two, and sometimes three, layers of thin horizontal stones. This -appearance of more than one horizontal course is very unusual.[123] -It is obvious that the site, being commanded by the town, would be -materially strengthened by a stone wall on that side: on the south -side, scarping and ditching would have been sufficient, and there is -no trace of stone-work of an early period here. The original entrance -was at the north-eastern angle of the enclosure, and probably took the -form of a stone gatehouse.[124] Other instances of “herring-bone” work -in curtain-walls that may be mentioned here are at Corfe, Hastings, -and Lincoln. Corfe was built on an isolated hill, which was scarped -and ditched, something after the manner of a “contour” fort of early -days: the portion of the curtain in which “herring-bone” coursing is -found follows the natural line of the edge of the hill. Hastings is -a fortress on a steep promontory: the mount, on the east side of the -enclosure, was defended by a deep ditch, and covered by a large outer -bailey with formidable earthworks. The curtain, on the east and north -sides of the inner ward, is chiefly of the thirteenth century; but part -of the north curtain, forming the north wall of the castle chapel, is -of “herring-bone” construction. Lincoln, as we have seen, was a large -mount-and-bailey fortress, surrounded by earthworks, which, on the west -side, enclosed portions of the wall of the Roman city. “Herring-bone” -masonry is seen here and there in the west and north curtains, which -have been raised on the top of the earthen banks.[125] - -[Illustration: Chepstow; Hall] - -The battlemented parapet with which the curtain-wall of a castle is -usually crowned, generally may be assigned, in its present state, -to a later repair and heightening of the curtain. This is the case -at Lincoln, where the parapet and upper part of the wall are of the -thirteenth century. It has been seen that the edict of Lillebonne -in 1080 forbade the defence of the curtain by flanking towers,[126] -rampart-walks, and other aids to defensive warfare; and, as a matter -of fact, the full development of the fortification of the _enceinte_ -belongs to a later period. At the same time, towers projecting beyond -the line of the curtain are found in some of our early Norman castles -of stone. The line of the early curtain at Richmond is unbroken by -contemporary towers, and closely follows the edge of the rock on which -it is built. But at Ludlow (96) where the inner ward is the original -castle, founded probably by Roger de Lacy after 1085, the curtain is -flanked by four original towers in addition to the gatehouse, which has -been described. The shape of the ward is that of a triangle with convex -sides, the base of which, on the side of the outer ward and the town, -faces south and west. Some thirty feet to the east of the gatehouse, a -tower, in the basement of which an oven was inserted at a later date, -capped the south-west angle of the enclosure, projecting southwards as -far as the edge of the ditch. The west curtain continued in a line with -the west wall of this tower for some sixty feet, until it was broken -by a small postern tower. At the apex of the triangle, projecting to -the north-west, was another tower, the remaining tower being at the -north-east angle, with its north wall in a line with the north curtain. -All these towers are, roughly speaking, rectangular in shape, but the -outer angles of the north-east and north-west towers are chamfered. -The original openings were round-headed loops with wide inward splays. -Although the curtain was thus supplied with several projections, more -towers would be needed to flank it perfectly, and large portions of the -wall, particularly on the north and east sides, were left without more -protection than could be given by their own strength. Oxford castle is -another instance of early walling, where the tall rampart tower which -commanded the river and the castle mill still remains.[127] - -[Illustration: Chepstow; Plan] - -Of the stone buildings which existed within the enclosures of early -Norman castles, the traces which remain are comparatively few, and in -most cases work of an altogether later period has taken their place. -The great hall for the common life of the garrison, such as Robert -d’Oily built in Oxford castle in 1074, would be indispensable. At -Ludlow there can be little doubt that the original hall stood on the -site occupied by the present hall, much of the east wall of which is -apparently of the same date as the curtain. The two lower stages of -the oblong keep at Chepstow are the hall (103), with the cellar below, -founded by William, son of Osbern, before 1071. Although the upper -stage was transformed in the thirteenth century by the insertion of -traceried windows in the north wall, and of an arch between the daïs -and the body of the hall, the walls are of eleventh century masonry, -and the plain arcade which went round them is clearly visible on the -north and west sides. In the south wall of the cellar are the loops -which lighted it; these have lintel-heads with arch-shaped hollows -cut in the soffits. The hall and cellar at Richmond, which occupy the -south-east angle of the bailey, appear to be those built by Alan of -Brittany before 1088. A few additions took place here at the end of the -twelfth century,[128] but the windows in the north wall of the hall, -which are of two lights, with edge-rolls in the jambs, are clearly -of early date. When, for a time, the great stone tower became the -fashionable form of keep, a great hall formed part of its internal -arrangements; but this was the hall of the lord’s private dwelling, and -was used by the garrison only in time of siege. Domestic buildings, -including a great hall, may sometimes have been constructed of timber -within the bailey, and at the end of the twelfth century were probably -superseded by permanent buildings of stone, like the halls at Warkworth -or at Oakham. As at Richmond, such halls would be placed against or -close to the curtain, to leave the interior of the bailey as open as -possible. In case of siege, freedom of movement within the area of -the castle was essential, and the bailey formed the natural base of -operations. The hall at Chepstow was on the highest and narrowest part -of the rocky promontory on which the castle stands, at the head of the -bailey; its south wall formed part of the curtain overhanging the great -ditch between the castle and the town (106).[129] - -[Illustration: LUDLOW CASTLE: inner bailey] - -Norman castle-builders were careful to provide chapels within their -fortresses. In several cases, the chapel within the bailey appears to -have been the first building of stone raised inside the enclosure. The -small chapel at Richmond, in a tower of the east curtain, is almost -beyond doubt that which was granted by Alan of Brittany to St Mary’s -abbey at York about 1085. The details are very rude in character: there -is a plain wall arcade, supported on shafts, the capitals of which -have rough voluting and no abaci. The same type of capital is found in -the wall arcading of the original gatehouse at Ludlow (95), and also, -though with more finished ornament, in that of the circular nave of St -Mary Magdalene’s chapel (108) within the same castle. Certain details -in the chapel at Ludlow, especially the bands of chevron ornament round -the arches, seem to indicate that the nave is later than the eleventh -century. The arch which divided the nave from a rectangular chancel -ending in a half octagon, is of advanced twelfth century date; and it -is clear that the chancel must have been built or remodelled at a later -date than the building of the nave. The aisled chapel at Durham castle, -which now forms part of the basement of Bishop Pudsey’s building along -the north side of the bailey, has groined vaults, cylindrical columns, -and capitals with voluted crockets and square abaci, which may be -safely ascribed to 1075 or a little later. The capitals may be compared -with those of the original gateway arch at Richmond. The classical -spirit which is so noticeable in them, and is derived directly from -the contemporary work of Normandy, is also apparent in the capitals -of the crypt of the castle chapel at Oxford. Oxford castle was founded -in 1071, Durham in 1072. At Hastings, the first of the Conqueror’s -castles, there is, as has been said, much herring-bone work in the -north wall of the chapel nave and in the vice or turret-stair of -the central tower. Such definitely architectural detail as is left, -however, belongs to a rebuilding of the later part of the twelfth -century. - -[Illustration: Ludlow; St Mary Magdalene’s Chapel] - -The importance of the castle chapel in Norman times, and indeed -throughout the middle ages, deserves a note. Chapels were often -richly endowed, and, as at Hastings, Bridgnorth, and Leicester, -were sometimes founded as collegiate establishments, with a dean and -canons. The collegiate church of St Mary at Warwick, founded by Roger -of Newburgh, the second Norman earl, probably had its origin in a -castle chapel, removed to a new and enlarged site within the town. The -greatest of these collegiate chapels, although one of the youngest, -was St George’s at Windsor, founded by Edward III. The chapels at -Hastings, Bridgnorth, and Leicester were churches of some size and -importance; and their chapters, like those of the secular cathedrals, -usually consisted of royal clerks, generally non-resident, whose -duties were served by vicars. As royal chapels, they were exempt from -episcopal jurisdiction; and the term of “free chapel,” which was given -to them, became applied in course of time to chapels founded in private -castles and even upon manors.[130] In most cases a castle chapel was -served by a single priest, either the incumbent or his vicar. The -incumbent of the free chapel of St Michael in Shrewsbury castle, -usually a royal clerk holding his grant from the king, and inducted -by the sheriff as the king’s officer, held the church of St Julian in -Shrewsbury as parcel of his cure.[131] Where the Norman castle and -parish church stood side by side, as at Earls Barton or Higham Ferrers -in Northamptonshire, the lord of the castle and his household would -doubtless attend the church. But the foundation of a chapel within -the castle was a common thing, even when the church, as at Ludlow or -Warwick, was at no great distance; and in later years, when chantry -foundations became usual, castle chapels increased in number. Thus -at Ludlow, a second chapel, served by two chantry priests, was built -within the outer bailey about 1328;[132] and a college of eight chantry -priests was founded in 1308 by one of the Beauchamps in his castle of -Elmley in Worcestershire.[133] - - - - -CHAPTER VI - -THE KEEP OF THE NORMAN CASTLE - - -We have seen that there were two types of early Norman castle in -England. There was the ordinary mount-and-bailey castle, with its -defences of earthwork and timber; and there was the castle founded -on a rocky site, in which there was no mount, and the defences were -of stone. In the first instance, the strongest position, the mount, -was occupied by the donjon or keep. In the second case, as at Ludlow, -the wall was defended by a strong gatehouse and a certain number of -towers; but at first there was, strictly speaking, no keep. During -the first half of the twelfth century, an era of constant rebellion -against the Crown, private owners constructed castles in very large -numbers, for purposes of aggression and self-defence. The second half, -the age of the first Plantagenets, was an era of consolidation, during -which the building of castles was methodised under royal control. -Unlicensed fortresses disappeared, leaving only their earthworks to -mark their place. The permanent castle of stone became the rule; and -to this period, the second age of our medieval military architecture, -belong some of our most formidable and imposing castles. The aim of the -builders, during this epoch, was to strengthen to the best of their -ability that point in the plan which would form a centre of ultimate -resistance to an attack from without. This point was the keep.[134] - -[Illustration: CARISBROOKE: steps to keep] - -The keep of Norman and early Plantagenet days was virtually a castle -within a castle. In the mount-and-bailey castle, there was generally -only one entrance to the enclosure. If the besiegers forced this and -entered the bailey, a ditch divided them from the mount, the most -formidable part of the defences. Here the defenders could concentrate -themselves for a last struggle, in which the advantage, unless the -siege could be prolonged indefinitely, was distinctly on their side. -Even where the mount was of inconsiderable height, it commanded the -bailey and the ditch at its base. Its sides were too steep to -allow of its being climbed without some artificial means of foothold. -A chance arrow, tipped with burning tow, might reach the palisade -round the summit of the mount, and set it alight in a dry season; but -the defending party had all the advantage of being able to discharge -their missiles downward and into a large portion of the bailey. Their -disadvantage lay in the possibility of a prolonged blockade by a large -force, and in consequent scarcity of ammunition and victuals. The -danger of fire could be minimised by covering the wooden defences with -skins newly flayed or soaked in water; but the work of renewing these -in case of a long siege would be difficult. - -The wooden donjon on the mount took the form of a square tower -surrounded, at the edge of the mount, by a palisade, and approached, -as has been described already, by a steep wooden bridge, which crossed -the ditch into the bailey. But it is obvious that the existence of a -castle in any given place as a permanent centre of royal influence must -lead to the abandonment of wooden defences in favour of defences of -more lasting material. The stone curtain first took the place of the -palisade in the defences of the bailey, and was built across the ditch -and up the sides of the mount, ceasing, as can be seen at Berkhampstead -(42) or Tamworth, at the level of the summit. The next step was to -replace the palisade of the mount with a stone wall of circular or -polygonal shape. In some instances where this was done, it is possible -that the old wooden tower was left within the enclosure. Cases in which -a new tower of stone was built upon the mount are rare. Builders would -hesitate to charge the surface of the artificial hillock with the -concentrated weight of a large square tower. The encircling curtain -was much better adapted to the plan of the mount, and distributed -its weight more successfully over the edge of the surface. But, with -the building of a stone wall round the summit, the necessity of a -tower would be removed. Just as, in castles like Exeter and Ludlow, -there was from the first a stone wall without a definite keep, the -enclosure being virtually a keep in itself, so, in the more limited -area of the mount, the encircling wall formed the keep, and, in the -larger examples, sheltered upon its inner side buildings, usually of -timber, which afforded the necessary cover for the defenders, while -their roofs, abutting on the wall below the summit, left room for the -rampart-walk and the wooden galleries which were fitted to the curtain -in time of siege. - -[Illustration: Cardiff; Keep] - -This was the genesis of the so-called “shell” keep, which converted -the summit of the mount into a strong inner ward, the centre of which -was clear of buildings, and gave more chance of concentration to the -defenders than the narrow passage between the wooden tower and the -palisade, into which the angles of the tower would have projected -awkwardly. One of the best examples of the type which remains is the -keep upon the larger of the two mounts at Lincoln, a polygon of fifteen -faces on the outside, twelve on the inside. The wall has lost its -parapet, but retains its rampart-walk; it is 8 feet thick, and keeps -its height of 20 feet perfect round the whole of the enclosure. The -masonry is ashlar of late twelfth century character, and each of the -external angles is capped by a flat pilaster buttress. The marks on the -inner face of the walls indicate that the enclosure was surrounded by -timber buildings, with which two small mural chambers communicated, in -the thickness of the outer curtain where it joins the keep. The doorway -of the keep is in the north-east face of the wall, which is pierced by -a segmental-headed archway, with a semicircular covering arch on the -outer face. This doorway, defended by a wooden door with a draw-bar, -was approached by a stone stair made in the side of the mount. At the -present day the ditch at the foot has been filled up, and the stairs -are modern, but originally the ditch must have been crossed by a -drawbridge at the foot of the stair, which, when drawn up, would have -left the mount isolated from the bailey. There was a small doorway -in the south-west face of the keep wall, probably intended to be a -postern, through which an exit could be gained in emergencies.[135] - -[Illustration: Alnwick; Plan] - -The shell of masonry upon the mount, however, was by no means the -universal form taken by the keep. Sometimes, as at York, the timber -defences of the mount survived until a comparatively late period, -when their place was taken by a tower of a form in keeping with the -principles of fortification of the day.[136] At Alnwick (115) the -base of the great mount, with a considerable portion of its ditch, -remains between the two wards of the castle. The present cluster of -towers and connecting buildings upon the mount, surrounding a somewhat -dark and confined courtyard, is in large part a nineteenth century -reconstruction of the fourteenth century house of the Percys which -occupied the site. The outer and inner archways, however, of the -gatehouse through which the keep is entered, are twelfth century work, -and agree very well in date with the large remains of Norman masonry -which can be traced in the curtains of both wards. It is probable that, -about the middle of the twelfth century, Eustace, son of John, who -died in 1157, surrounded the whole of the present enclosure with stone -walls, and, levelling the mount to its present height, built in stone -the earliest domestic buildings of the castle, upon the enlarged site -of the earlier wooden donjon and palisade. The appearance of Eustace’s -buildings must have been very different from that of the mansion of the -Percys; and we may assume that he defended the summit of the levelled -mound by a thick curtain, against which his hall and other domestic -apartments were placed. - -[Illustration: Beaugency] - -[Illustration: Falaise] - -In France and Normandy, the rectangular donjon of stone began -to supersede the wooden tower at an early date. At Langeais -(Indre-et-Loire), Fulk the Black, count of Anjou, built a stone donjon -as early as 992.[137] Three walls of this structure are left: it -was oblong in form and was composed of a basement and upper floor. -The masonry is largely faced with courses of small cubical stones, -following the manner inherited by the Romanesque builders of France -from their Roman predecessors: tiles are introduced in the arched heads -of the windows in the upper stage, which are not mere loops, but have a -considerable outward opening. This keep was obviously intended to be at -once stronghold and dwelling-house. Such a building was a translation -into stone of a wooden construction like the tower-house on the motte -at Ardres. It is built on a promontory above a small stream, and is -defended by a ditch on the landward side. Many of these stone towers -remain in Normandy and the country round the Loire; and, as a rule, are -earlier in date and larger in area than most of the similar buildings -in England. The tower of Beaugency (Loiret) is an oblong on plan, -measuring about 76 feet long by 66 feet broad (116): the present height -is 115 feet. The date indicated by the masonry is about 1100.[138] The -fabrics of the towers of Falaise (Calvados) and Domfront (Orne) may be -attributed to Henry I. In or about 1119 he systematically garrisoned -his fortresses at Rouen and other places, of which Falaise was -one.[139] Domfront, from 1092 onwards, was his favourite castle.[140] -Its strong position gave it an exceptional advantage as a base of -operations; and in 1101, when Henry ceded his Norman possessions to his -brother Robert, he kept Domfront for himself.[141] After the battle of -Tinchebray (1106) Henry was lord of Normandy, and restored order in -the duchy by razing the unlicensed strongholds built under Robert’s -weak rule.[142] The tower of Domfront, however, and possibly that of -Falaise, were not built until 1123.[143] At Domfront the castle is a -large enclosure, occupying the highest point of a long hill which has -a gradual eastward slope, but rises in an abrupt cliff from a narrow -valley on the west, and descends steeply on the north and south. A -deep ditch, through which the modern road from Caen to Angers has been -carried, divided the castle from the town. The great tower lies to the -east of the centre of the castle enclosure, so as to command the ditch -and the town beyond. Only the north-west angle, with a portion of the -adjacent walls, remains perfect. The height slightly exceeds 70 feet. -The area of the whole structure is 85 feet by 70, not counting the -buttresses and plinth. At Falaise (117) the great tower occupies nearly -the whole of the summit of the isolated cliff on which it stands, the -town occupying the hilly but lower ground on the north side. The length -of the tower is a little less than that of Domfront, while the breadth -is slightly greater. The height is about the same. - -The tower of Domfront, like that of Beaugency, stood within a walled -castle, where the capture of the bailey would have exposed the tower -directly to the besiegers. It was therefore built with an exclusive -view to strength, and its window openings, even upon the second floor -above the basement, were small and narrow, those on the first floor -being mere loops. On the other hand, the tower of Falaise stands high -above the curtain-wall by which the ascent from the town was protected. -Its outer face is of ashlar throughout, and the window openings of the -two upper stages, far above the reach of stones and arrows, are double, -divided by shafts with carved capitals. Both towers were separated into -three parts by cross-walls; but the two upper stages at Falaise are -now undivided, and at Domfront, above the basement, there remain only -indications of such a division. - -Returning to England, we may safely assert that, with very few -exceptions, our rectangular towers belong to a period which bears, from -the historical point of view, a close likeness to the period of Henry -I.’s fortifications in Normandy. Henry II. pursued the same policy of -destroying unlicensed castles and strengthening royal strongholds; -and his building operations took the form of providing his castles -with towers, such as already were a chief feature of the castles of -Normandy and Maine, but were certainly very exceptional in England. The -approximate date of several of these towers can be obtained from the -entries in the Pipe Rolls for the reign of Henry II.[144] - -Henry II., like the Conqueror, directed his attention to the defence -of the main water-ways of his kingdom. The castles of the coast and -of the Welsh and Scottish frontiers were also chief objects of his -care. The Pipe Rolls of 1158-9 and 1160-1 contain accounts of large -sums spent on the castle of Wark-on-Tweed, at the extreme north-west -corner of the kingdom.[145] In 1158-9 occur charges for the tower of -Gloucester,[146] at the head of the Severn estuary; and in the same and -following years are many mentions of the castle and tower of the great -littoral stronghold of Scarborough.[147] Berkhampstead, commanding the -approach to London from the north-west, was an object of substantial -expense in 1159-60 and 1161-2.[148] In 1160-1 £215. 18s. 5d. was spent -in the fortification of the city of Chester:[149] work was also done -at Oswestry,[150] and other accounts show that attention was paid to -the victualling of castles on the Welsh border at Clun and Ruthin.[151] -Accounts, beginning in 1164-5, refer to the strengthening of Shrewsbury -castle.[152] Sums were spent on the tower of Bridgnorth, which -commanded the defiles of the Severn between Shrewsbury and Worcester, -in 1168-9 and following years;[153] and mentions of Hereford,[154] -Shrawardine,[155] and Ellesmere,[156] testify to the care with which -the western frontier of the kingdom was protected. Of the coast -castles, apart from Scarborough, Dover has a constant place in these -accounts. For example, in 1168-9, 40s. 6d. was paid for the hire of -ships to bring lime from Gravesend to Dover, and £34. 5s. 4d. was spent -on the work for which this was required.[157] Southampton castle was -repaired in 1161-2,[158] and a well was made there in 1172-3.[159] The -tower of Hastings was in progress in 1171-2.[160] In 1165-6 £256. 4s. -9d. was spent upon the castle of Orford, the great stronghold of the -Suffolk coast, which was an object of large yearly expense down to -1171-2.[161] On the line of the upper Thames, continual sums were spent -on the palace-castle of Windsor: the wall of the castle is referred -to in 1171-2 and 1172-3.[162] Work was done at Oxford and a well made -in 1172-3 and 1173-4.[163] Hertford castle was maintained to guard -the Lea.[164] In addition to Dover, the castles of Rochester,[165] -Chilham,[166] and Canterbury[167] protected the main routes to the -narrowest part of the Channel. The chief fortress of the vale of -Trent was at Nottingham, where large sums were spent in 1171-2 and -1172-3.[168] Of the inland castles of the north, the tower of Newcastle -cost some £385 between 1171-2 and 1174-5[169] This forms a contrast to -the small sum spent on the tower of York—£15. 7s. 3d.—in 1172-3:[170] -it is clear, from the Pipe Rolls of later reigns, that this was merely -a wooden structure.[171] - -However, there are earlier instances of towers which are of first-class -importance, and these must be briefly described before we dwell upon -the characteristics of the donjons of the second half of the twelfth -century. We have seen that William the Conqueror, immediately after his -coronation, began the construction of certain strongholds in connection -with the city of London.[172] His first work was probably to enclose -within a palisade the undefended sides of the bailey, the east side of -which was covered by a portion of the Roman city-wall. Before the end -of his reign, the White tower had been begun as a principal feature -of the castle, and was completed in the reign of William Rufus, who -in 1097 built a wall about it.[173] This tower is therefore at least -as early in date as most of the early square towers of Normandy and -the adjacent provinces, and is considerably earlier than the towers -of Falaise and Domfront. A tradition attributes the design to the -direction of Gundulf, bishop of Rochester 1077-1108, who is also said -to have been the builder of the donjon-like tower at Malling in Kent, -originally attached to the church of St Leonard, and of the tower, the -ruins of which remain, on the north side of the quire of Rochester -cathedral. - -The White tower is at present 90 feet in height, and is therefore -much lower than the nearly contemporary tower of Beaugency. Its area, -however, is far greater, covering an oblong of 118 feet from east to -west by 107 feet from north to south. It is four stages in height, and -was built of rubble masonry, ashlar work being confined entirely to -the pilaster buttresses and windows, and the plinth. Modern repairs -have made the original appearance of the tower hard to reconstruct. -The entrance was upon the first floor, and was never covered by a -fore-building: this entrance seems to have been in the western part -of the south wall. A well-stair or vice, in a round turret at the -north-east corner, was the chief means of communication between all the -floors; but vices were also made from the second floor to the roof in -the square turrets of the north-west and south-west angles. There is -also a square turret above the place which would ordinarily be occupied -by the south-east angle; but the south wall, throughout its height, is -continued into an apsidal projection, which is curved round to meet the -east wall. The two upper stages of this projection form the apse of -St John’s chapel, with its encircling gallery. The faces of the tower -and the apse are strengthened by flat buttresses at regular intervals, -which are gathered in at a string on the level of the floor of the -uppermost stage, and again at the level of the roof. There are no -window openings in the basement, which was originally used for stores. -The window openings of the first and second floors were originally -narrow loops, with wide internal splays, but have been considerably -enlarged, with some damage to the appearance of strength which the -tower once possessed. The openings in the aisle of the chapel on the -second floor, however, were wider than the rest. The third floor, being -out of the range of ordinary missiles, had wide window openings: the -two openings in the south wall of the larger room on this floor are -double. The greatest thickness of the walls of the basement is 15 feet: -the walls of the uppermost stage are from 10 to 11 feet thick. - -[Illustration: White Tower; Plan of Second Floor] - -[Illustration: White Tower; St John’s Chapel] - -The tower is divided internally into two parts by a longitudinal wall, -east of the centre, 10 feet thick.[174] Thus in the basement there -is a large western chamber, 91 by 35 feet, and on every floor above -there is a corresponding room, the dimensions of which increase with -the thinning of the outer walls to a maximum of 95 by 40 feet. The -eastern chamber, however, is divided into two parts by a cross-wall, -considerably to the south of the centre. There is thus in the basement -and each floor an oblong north-eastern chamber, into which access is -obtained from the main well-stair. In the basement there is a doorway -in the longitudinal wall between this and the western chamber; but, -on each of the upper floors, the communication is maintained by five -openings in the wall. Apart from the recesses of the loops, and the -mural lobbies which lead to the vices in the turrets, there are only -two mural passages, one in the first and one in the second stage, -communicating with garde-robes; but the wall of the third floor is -pierced all round by a gallery, with a barrel vault, in the thickness -of the wall, which communicates at either end with the broad gallery -above the aisles of St John’s chapel. - -[Illustration: Tower of London; St John’s Chapel - -[Illustration: Christchurch] - -The south-eastern quarter of the tower contains, in the basement, the -sub-crypt of the chapel, known in later days as “Little Ease.” On the -first floor is the upper crypt, which, as well as the sub-crypt, has a -barrel vault, and ends in an apse. The second floor is the ground-floor -of the chapel and its aisle or ambulatory, which is divided from the -nave by plain round-headed arches springing from cylindrical columns -with capitals, those of the eastern columns famous for the Tau-shaped -plaques left uncarved between their volutes, those of the western -columns scalloped (122). The nave of the chapel rises through the -third floor to the barrel vault. The aisles have groined cross-vaults: -the gallery above them on the third floor is covered by a half barrel -vault. This gallery, as before mentioned, is connected in its north -and west walls with the mural gallery of the main chambers. The ground -floor of the chapel communicated with the north-eastern chamber through -a doorway in the cross-wall; but the main entrance was through a short -mural lobby from the western chamber, which led into the west end of -the south aisle. At a late date a vice was made in the thickness of the -wall from this lobby to a doorway in the basement, by which access was -obtained to the chapel from the later domestic buildings adjoining the -south side of the tower. - -The well of the tower, a most necessary feature in case of siege, -was in the floor of the western chamber of the basement, near its -south-western angle, and was cased with ashlar. Only three fireplaces -remain, all in the east wall, two on the first, and one on the second -floor: the smoke escaped through holes in the adjacent wall. The use of -the rooms on the various floors is uncertain, and it is possible that -they may have been separated by wooden partitions into smaller rooms. -The basement chambers, however, were obviously store-rooms; and the -great western chamber on the third floor was used by many of our kings -as a council-chamber. The first-floor rooms may have been intended for -the use of the garrison, while the larger room on the second floor was -probably the great hall of the tower, and the smaller room the king’s -great chamber. The upper room, next the council-chamber, may have been -for the use of the queen and her household. Accommodation, suited to -the scanty needs of the times, was thus provided for a large number -of persons; and the great size of the chapel alone indicates that the -tower was intended as an occasional residence for the royal family. -The palace hall at Westminster, however, was in building, when Rufus -made his wall round the Tower; and it is clear that the cold and dark -interior of the fortress was planned mainly with a view to defence, and -with little respect for comfort. - -The great tower of Colchester castle (47), which is of the same date as -the White tower, covers an even larger area. The internal measurements -of the ground-floor, excluding the projections at the angles, are 152 -feet north and south by 111 feet east and west. This, the greatest of -all Norman keeps, has unfortunately lost its two upper stages, and, -with them, the chapel, which, like that in the White Tower, was built -with an apsidal projection covering the junction of south and east -walls. The crypt and sub-vault of the chapel, however, remain. In this -respect, and in the division of the floors into larger and smaller -chambers by a cross-wall running north and south, the likeness between -these two great towers is very marked. The rectangular projections, -on the other hand, which cap three of the angles of the tower at -Colchester, are far more prominent than those of the Tower of London, -and form small towers in themselves; and, even at the angle where the -apse of the chapel is extended eastward, the south wall has been built -of a thickness to correspond with the projections at the north-east -and north-west angles. That at the south-west angle differs in plan -from the rest, being longer from east to west and wider on its western -face than the others. Its south face also is recessed from the level -of the south wall of the tower, but projects in a large rectangular -buttress at the point where it joins the main wall. This south-west -tower contained the main staircase. The entrance was on the ground -floor, immediately east of the buttress just mentioned, and not, as in -most rectangular keeps, upon the first floor. The ashlar with which -the exterior of the tower was cased has been stripped off, and the -rubble core of the walls, with its bonding courses of Roman tiles, is -now exposed. Below the ground floor the walls spread considerably: -this can be seen upon the north and west sides, where the hill drops -towards the river, and the upper part of the solid foundation is above -ground. Between the angle towers the walls are broken, on the east and -west sides, by two rectangular buttresses of slight projection: on the -north side there is only one, and on the south side none. The ground -floor and first floor were lighted by narrow loops, splayed inwardly -through about half the thickness of the wall. In each of the east, -north, and west walls of the ground floor there are three of these. -The south wall has only two: one lights the well chamber on the east -of the entry, while the other, at the opposite extremity of the wall, -lights the sub-vault of the chapel. The wall between the two, being on -the side of the tower most open to attack, is of great solidity, and -is unbroken by opening or buttress. In each face of the first floor, -exclusive of the angle towers and apse of the chapel, there were four -loops. The window openings of the upper stages were probably larger. -One of the most striking features of this tower is the plentiful use of -Roman tiles among the masonry, especially in the cross-wall, where they -are arranged in a very regular and beautiful series of “herring-bone” -courses (101). This employment of Roman material gave rise to a -tradition, not yet wholly extinct, that the tower was a Roman building. -It need hardly be said that nothing would be more natural than for the -Norman masons to adopt the economical principle of applying to their -own use material which lay ready to hand among the ruins of the Roman -station. - -[Illustration: Dover] - -[Illustration: Clun] - -The towers of London and Colchester are exceptional in their date and -in the hugeness of their proportions. Although the towers of the later -part of the twelfth century have many features in common with them—the -division by means of cross-walls, the well-stairs in one or more of the -angles, the pilaster buttresses projecting from the outer walls, and -the mural galleries and chambers—no tower was subsequently attempted -upon their scale. The tower of Rochester (frontispiece), which appears -to have been begun somewhat earlier than 1140, and is therefore -intermediate in date between these two exceptional examples and the -later towers, is 113 feet high to the top of the parapet, and is 70 -feet square (exterior measurement) at its base. The tower of Dover -(126), built in the early part of the reign of Henry II., measures -98 by 96 feet at the base. The walls, however, have the exceptional -thickness of 24 to 21 feet, so that the internal measurements are -considerably reduced, while the height to the top of the parapet is -only 83 feet. The towers of London and Colchester are also exceptional -in the importance given to the chapel in their plans. The great -prominence of the angle turrets at Colchester is an unique feature, -while the position of the main entrance upon the ground floor, -although not unique, is very unusual. - -The later towers differ from those of London and Colchester in the -fact that they were additions to enclosures already existing, instead -of being the nucleus of a castle founded for the first time. Although -they have a general family likeness, neither their position on the -plan, which was necessarily dictated by the nature of the site, nor -the details of their arrangements, are uniform. Most of the castles in -which they occur are divided by a wall, built across the enclosure from -curtain to curtain, into an outer and inner ward or bailey. The tower, -standing at the highest point of the inner ward, was placed so as to -command both these divisions of the castle. If the outer ward were -entered, the besiegers were confronted by a second line of defence, the -wall of the inner ward, in conjunction with which the great tower, with -its superior height, could be used by the defenders. Finally, if the -inner ward were taken, the tower still remained as a formidable refuge -for the garrison. - -[Illustration: Guildford] - -Where a new tower keep was added to castles of the usual type, whose -main defences consisted of an earthen mount and banks, it was often -raised, as at Canterbury and Hastings, on a new site, independent -of the mount, which was probably avoided as affording insufficient -foundation. Thus, at Rochester, the old mount of the eleventh century -castle, now known as Boley Hill, remains at some distance from the -later enclosure. But there were cases, and possibly more than are -generally recognised, in which the mount was utilised for a tower. At -Christchurch the comparatively small keep was built entirely upon the -artificial mount. The keeps of Norwich and Hedingham (135), two of the -grandest of their class, were built upon mounts, which, if in great -part natural hills, had been scarped and heightened by art. The mounts -at Guildford and Clun (127) are artificial. In both these last cases -the summit of the mount was converted into a shell keep, surrounded -by a wall; but on the eastern side of this enclosure a tower, of -respectable if not large dimensions, was made. The tower at Clun was -built against the east slope of the mount, the basement being entirely -below the level of the summit of the earthwork. This is also partly the -case at Guildford (128), where the tower is placed across the eastern -edge of the mount. The inclusion at Kenilworth of artificial soil -within the basement of the keep has led to the suspicion that the mount -of the castle was reduced in height, and the tower built round the -lower portion (132). - -[Illustration: Scarborough; Plan] - -At Guildford and Clun the combination of a shell of masonry with a -tower keep produced the effect of a small inner ward—which is virtually -what a shell keep is—with a tower upon its _enceinte_. Frequently, -as at Scarborough (129) and Bamburgh the tower keep stood upon the -line of the curtain between the two wards. At Scarborough it actually -stands athwart that line, but its greater projection is towards the -inner ward, from which, of course, it was entered. The towers at -Norham (157) and Kenilworth fill up a corner of the inner ward, but -have no noticeable projection beyond the curtain. This is also the -case at Porchester (131), where the north-west angle, in which the -keep stands, is also the north-west angle of the Roman station.[175] -Some, however, of the finest of these towers, Rochester, Dover, and -Newcastle, stood wholly detached within the inner ward, although, as -at Rochester, near enough to the curtain to enable the defenders to -command the outer approaches from the upper stages. - -[Illustration: Map of Rectangular Keeps] - -[Illustration: Porchester] - -From the point of view of dimensions the towers may be divided into two -classes. There are the towers proper, such as Clun, Corfe, Guildford, -Hedingham, Helmsley, Newcastle, Porchester, Richmond, Rochester, and -Scarborough, in which the height is greater than the length or breadth. -Such towers are approximately square; and to them must be added Dover, -in which, however, owing to the immense thickness of the walls, the -height is less than the length or breadth. In one case, Porchester -(131), the measurement from north to south exceeds that from east to -west by 13 feet, and at first was also in excess of the height; but -the tower was raised to nearly twice its height not long after the -completion of the original design. The second class is composed of -keeps, of which one or both of the dimensions of the ground-plan exceed -the height, without the exceptional circumstances which governed the -proportions of Dover. Such keeps are noticeably oblong in shape. At -Castle Rising and the tower of Bowes in Yorkshire the height is less -than either the length or breadth. At Kenilworth (132) the length from -east to west exceeds the breadth by nearly 30, and the height by 7 -feet. Middleham, from north to south, measures approximately 100 feet -by 80 from east to west: its height is only 55 feet, which, though it -surpasses the 50 feet of Bowes and Castle Rising, is much less than -the 80 feet of Kenilworth. Its length and breadth, however, make up an -area far surpassing the 87 by 58 feet of Kenilworth, the 82 by 60 feet -of Bowes, and the 75 by 54 feet of Castle Rising. The foundations of -another keep of this class remain at Duffield in Derbyshire. Bamburgh, -69 by 61 feet, but only 55 feet high, is another member of the class. -Another great Northumbrian keep, Norham, although its height is 90 -feet, is oblong in plan; and its measurement from east to west comes -within 4 feet of the height, so that it stands on the border between -the second and the first class. - -[Illustration: Kenilworth] - -The internal divisions of the keeps are not uniformly the same, and -do not always correspond to the height. The usual arrangement in the -loftier keeps, as at Hedingham, Porchester, Rochester, and Scarborough, -is a basement with three upper floors; but at Corfe, which is 80 feet -high, as at Guildford, which is only 63 feet high, there are only two -upper floors. At Dover, 83 feet high, and Newcastle, 75 feet high, -the second floor was surrounded by a mural gallery, high above the -floor-level, so that the second and third floors were combined into -one lofty room.[176] At Norham, however, there were four upper floors. -Kenilworth, only 10 feet lower, had a lofty basement with only one -floor above it. At Bowes there were two floors. At Middleham and Castle -Rising, there was one main floor; but, by the subdivision of the rooms -on this stage, a second floor was made in portions of the building. -As a rule, the walls grow thinner as they rise: this was achieved by -rebating the inner face at each floor to provide a ledge for the floor -timbers. In exceptional cases, there is an off-set on the exterior of -the tower; and at Rochester the walls are thinned from 12 feet at the -base to 10 feet at the top by a slight exterior batter. At Porchester -the walls are 11 feet thick at the base: this is reduced to 7 feet at -the first floor, and, by an off-set at the level of the original roof, -to 6 feet in the upper stage. The thickest walls, next to those at -Dover, appear to be at Newcastle, where their thickness at the first -floor is 14 feet. - -Many of these towers, such as Rochester and Dover, are built of -rag-stone or coursed rubble, with dressings of ashlar. The masonry -at Guildford (128) is extremely rough, and “herring-bone” coursing -is extensively used: the date of the tower, however, to judge by its -internal details, is not earlier than the third quarter of the twelfth -century.[177] On the other hand, not a few have their walls cased with -ashlar. Hedingham and Porchester are noble examples from the east and -south of England; Bridgnorth and Kenilworth from the midlands. Of the -towers of Yorkshire, Bowes, Richmond, and Scarborough have ashlar -casing; Middleham is of rubble with ashlar dressings. Ashlar facing -is used throughout at Bamburgh, Newcastle, and Norham: at Norham the -ashlar is of two distinct kinds, small cubical stones being used in one -part, and larger stones in another.[178] As at Colchester, Dover, and -Kenilworth, the foundations of the larger towers spread considerably, -and rise above ground in a battering plinth, into which the -buttresses at the angles and on the face of the walls die off without -interruption. At Newcastle there is a roll string-course above the -plinth, and at Bamburgh (91) the plinth is moulded with a very imposing -effect. Where the tower is built on an uneven site, as at Middleham -or Scarborough, the plinth appears only on the faces where the ground -falls away from the tower. - -The angles of the tower were always strengthened by rectangular -pilaster buttresses of the ordinary twelfth century type, formed by -thickening the two adjacent walls. In most cases these meet, forming -a solid exterior angle. Occasionally, as at Guildford, Hedingham, -and Rochester, a hollow angle is left between them, which, at Castle -Rising and Scarborough, is filled by a shaft or bead. Above the line -of the parapet the angle buttresses are continued into square turrets. -Within one or more of these angles, there was a vice. At Newcastle -(139) the angle buttresses are of such breadth and projection as to -form distinct towers: this is even more noticeable at Kenilworth, where -there are angle towers not unlike those at Colchester. On the faces of -the tower between these angles there were usually one or more pilaster -buttresses of slight projection. These varied in number according to -the plan and site of the tower. At Dover there is one on each face, -with the exception of the side which is covered by the forebuilding. -At Kenilworth there are four on one face, three on another, two on a -third: the remaining wall has disappeared. At Porchester there is one -on each of the west and north faces, none on the east or south: when -the tower was heightened, neither angle nor intermediate buttresses -were continued upwards. It is worthy of note that one of the angle -towers at Newcastle is polygonal, not rectangular, in shape. This -points to a transition in methods of fortification, of which more will -be said hereafter. The south-east angle at Rochester is rounded; but -this is the result of a repair of the tower which took place in the -thirteenth century. - -[Illustration: HEDINGHAM: great tower] - -As the main object of these towers was defensive, their external -architectural features were generally confined to their excellent -masonry. A moulded plinth, as at Bamburgh, is of very rare occurrence. -At Norwich and Castle Rising a wall is arcaded or recessed: this, -however, is quite contrary to the usual practice. String-courses, -where they were used, were generally confined to the buttresses, as -at Kenilworth; although in a few cases, as at Richmond, they were -continued along the wall. The necessary window openings were few and -small. Here, however, a distinction must be made. It has been remarked -already that the donjon of a castle sometimes formed the residence of -its lord as well as a strong tower in time of war. The towers of London -and Colchester were certainly planned upon their liberal scale with -this double end in view; and, destitute of comfort as they seem -to us to-day, the upper floors of the White Tower were at any rate -well lighted. Similarly, at Rochester, there was a large provision -of single-light windows in the floors above the basement. And, as -a rule, while the basement was lighted by a very few narrow loops, -set high in the wall, and the first floor, which was not above the -range of missiles, was lighted sparingly by narrow loops with wide -internal splays, the second floor, which formed the main apartment, had -much larger windows. These, as in the Tower of London, or at Dover, -Hedingham, and Scarborough, were sometimes of two lights, divided by -an intervening shaft or piece of wall. At Newcastle, where the second -floor, owing to the thickness of the walls, in which separate chambers -are contrived, is very dark, there is a wide single opening in the -intermediate buttress of the east face, which externally has a moulded -arch and jamb-shafts (139). At Richmond, a tower the single object -of which seems to have been defence, the window openings, with one -exception, are narrow loops with internal splays; and, of all twelfth -century towers, this was probably the darkest and least comfortable -(93).[179] - -The main entrance of the tower was usually on the first floor, -although sometimes, as at Dover, Newcastle, and Norwich, it was on -the second floor, and led directly into the main apartment. It was -obviously unsafe to make an entrance in the basement, where the doors -could be easily forced or burned. At the same time, there is, as we -have noticed, a basement entrance at Colchester, where the approach -was protected by a strong ditch. The rocks on which Bamburgh and -Scarborough stand made the position almost impregnable, and in both -cases the main doorway of the tower is on a level with the soil of the -ward in which it stands.[180] When the outer opening of the original -gateway at Richmond was removed to make way for the new tower, the -inner opening was left, forming a direct communication between the -interior of the castle and the basement: this also was permitted by the -natural strength of the site; but the main entrance to the tower was -in the south-east corner of the first floor, from the rampart-walk. -At Ludlow, both openings of the gateway were walled up (94), and a -stair was made to the first floor against part of the west wall of the -tower.[181] Even in the tower on the mount at Guildford, the main -entrance was on the first floor (128). Where the doorway led into -the chief apartment of the tower, it received special architectural -treatment. That at Newcastle is a wide opening with a semicircular -arch of three orders and shafts in the jambs: it has been rebuilt, but -probably follows the original design closely. On the other hand, the -first-floor entrance at Kenilworth, which led into the main room, is -exceedingly plain, with a segmental arch, and a semicircular relieving -arch in the wall above. - -[Illustration: NEWCASTLE: great tower] - -Entrances on upper floors were necessarily approached by stairs, -which were habitually placed against the wall, at right angles to -the entrance, and sometimes, as at Dover, Newcastle, and Rochester, -turned the angle of the wall in their descent. These were usually -covered by a structure known as the fore-building, which provided a -formidable covered approach to the main entrance. The fore-building -formed a substantial annexe to the tower, and has some variety of plan. -Indications of it are found in its simplest form at Scarborough, where -it was of two stages. The lower stage was a vaulted passage against -the south wall, from the end of which the basement doorway was entered -at right angles; the upper stage was entered by a doorway from the -first floor of the tower. The entrance passage was closed by wooden -doors; if these were forced, an attacking party would still have some -difficulty and danger in breaking into the tower, while missiles, -hurled upon them through a hole in the floor of the upper stage, would -make retreat from the passage a delicate matter. The fore-building at -Kenilworth was also of two stages, enclosing an entrance stair, which -led to the doorway on the first floor. The arrangement at Rochester was -more complicated. Here the stair began against the north-west angle -buttress, where it was covered by a small tower of two stages, the -lower containing the doorway, the upper communicating with a vaulted -chamber in the angle of the first floor of the tower. The stair then -turned the angle, and, protected by an outer wall some 6 feet high, -rose along the north wall of the tower to a drawbridge, with a deep -pit below. At the further side of the drawbridge, the east part of -the north wall was covered by a building in three stages. The middle -stage, entered from the drawbridge, contained a chamber, in which was -the main entrance to the first floor of the keep. The lowest stage was -a vault, which communicated with the basement of the tower; the upper -stage, entered from the second floor of the tower, contained a room, -which may have been a chapel. At Dover and Newcastle the fore-buildings -were even more elaborate, including a lower tower which protected -the entrance and right-angled turn of the stair, a middle tower which -covered the stair half-way up, and an upper tower at the head of the -stair, beyond the platform from which the second floor was entered. -The basement of the fore-building at Newcastle was the castle chapel; -the lower tower was, as at Rochester, simply a gate-tower; the middle -tower formed a covering to a second gateway on the stair; and the -upper tower contained a vaulted guard-room commanding the platform of -entrance. At Dover, the upper tower, solid at the base, had vaulted -chambers on the first and second floors; the middle tower enclosed a -well, the mouth of which was contained in a chamber entered from the -platform in front of the main doorway of the keep; while the lower -tower formed a large projection at the south-west angle of the keep, -containing upon its first floor a covered landing for the stair, from -which opened to the east a room, probably an oratory, and to the west -a porter’s lodge. Upon the second floor was the chapel of the keep, -entered from the main apartments. A vault in the basement of the lower -tower of the fore-building communicates with the basement of the keep -through another vault, which is common to the keep and fore-building. -Similarly, the vault at the first-floor level of the upper tower -communicates with the main first floor through another common vaulted -chamber. The Dover fore-building is thus an integral portion of the -keep. - -Of all existing fore-buildings, that at Castle Rising (143) is in the -best state of preservation. Here the main entrance to the keep is on -the east face of the building, near its north end. The stair, which -had a timber roof, ascends by the side of the east wall, straight from -the ground. There is a gateway at its foot, and another gateway at a -landing half-way up. The upper flight of stairs, which was also roofed -with timber, passes through a third gateway into the upper floor of -a tower, which, as at Rochester and Norwich, covers the main doorway -of the keep, and is not placed, as at Dover and Newcastle, beyond the -doorway. Each of the doorways of the fore-building has a rounded arch -with an edge-roll, and shafts with cushion capitals in the jambs. The -main doorway of the keep has five orders, the four outer orders being -shafted, and the arch having rich late Norman mouldings. The chamber -at the head of the stair is vaulted in two bays, but originally had a -timber roof. There is a vaulted chamber beneath it. - -There is an exceptional arrangement at Porchester (131), where the -stair, instead of being covered by the fore-building, is set outside -it, against its eastern face. From the landing at the head there is a -straight passage, between the first-floor rooms of the fore-building, -to the main entrance of the tower; while, from the same landing, -another flight of stairs leads to the northern rampart-walk of the -castle. Another exceptional fore-building is found at Berkeley -(142). Here, however, the exception consists in the fact that it is -a fore-building, not to a tower, but to a shell-keep of peculiar -construction. The mount of the early Norman castle was reduced in -height, and its base, forming a platform some 20 feet above the ground, -was enclosed within a wall, 8 feet thick, which is strengthened by -pilaster buttresses and rises to a height of 60 feet. Against the -south-east face of this wall is a narrow fore-building. The stair, -which was covered by a timber roof, passes through the lower stage of -a gateway-tower, and ascends to a platform, from which, after another -gateway has been passed, the interior of the shell is entered. The room -upon the first floor of the gateway-tower is entered from the platform -by a narrow ledge above the stair. - -[Illustration: Berkeley] - -[Illustration: CASTLE RISING: stair of forebuilding] - -[Illustration: Rochester; internal cross-wall] - -As the main doorway of a tower-keep was set in the outer face of a -thick wall, a narrow passage had to be traversed before the interior -of the tower was reached. At Castle Rising, the wall is comparatively -thin, and the doorway is recessed deeply, so that the tower is -entered directly. In most cases, the keep was divided internally into -two parts by a cross-wall, which reached from the basement to the -summit.[182] This wall was often central, as at Porchester, Rochester, -and Scarborough; but in towers which are oblong in plan, as at Castle -Rising and Middleham, it divided the keep into two unequal rectangles. -At Bowes, as also in the Norman keep of Domfront, it was so far from -being central that it cut off only a narrow oblong from the interior, -the large main room on the first floor of Bowes being left nearly -square. In a square keep, the cross-wall was frequently opposite the -main entrance, and parallel with the fore-building. At Hedingham, -Lancaster, Porchester, and Scarborough, it is at right angles to the -fore-building, so that the main entrance is, as in the oblong keep -of Castle Rising, in an end, and not in a side of one of the rooms. -The cross-wall at Scarborough was not continued to the second floor; -and, on the first floor, a transverse arch took its place, throwing -the two main rooms into one. A great transverse arch, perhaps the -finest architectural feature in any of our tower-keeps, also spans the -second floor at Hedingham, in place of the cross-wall (147). On the -second floor at Rochester, the cross-wall is represented by two pairs -of rounded arches, divided by a central block of wall containing the -well-shaft (145). But a cross-wall was not an universal feature of a -tower-keep. Neither Clun nor Guildford, towers of moderate size, have -one; and, of the greater keeps, Newcastle, Richmond, and Kenilworth -have undivided interiors. This is remarkable in a keep of the area of -Kenilworth: at Newcastle and Richmond the walls are so solid that the -interior space is comparatively small, while at Newcastle additional -room was supplied by unusually spacious mural chambers. At Castle -Rising, in addition to the main cross-wall, each of the divisions -of the keep has a smaller cross-wall at its extremity, cutting off -additional apartments from the main rooms, and allowing in one place -the insertion of an upper floor. - -Of the divisions of the tower, whether divided by a cross-wall or not, -the basement was probably used for the storage of arms and provisions. -It sometimes contained the opening of the well of the keep.[183] The -first floor, where there was no other, contained the main apartment or -hall. In the loftier type of keep, this was on the second floor, and, -as we have just seen, the substitution of an arch or arcade for the -cross-wall sometimes converted this floor into one large apartment. At -Dover and Porchester, as in the Tower of London, the division into two -apartments was maintained, and there is only a small doorway through -the cross-wall. The second room, in these instances, probably formed -the “great chamber” or private apartment of the lord of the castle when -in residence. Where the hall was on the second floor the first floor -was probably set apart for the garrison in time of siege and for the -servants. The provision for private bedrooms was, in those days of -publicity, extremely small; but where, as at Dover and Newcastle, the -thickness of the wall allowed of several large mural chambers, some of -them may have been devoted to this purpose; and in some keeps, as at -Hedingham, an upper floor above the main apartments was provided, which -doubtless served this end.[184] - -[Illustration: HEDINGHAM: doorway of great tower] - -[Illustration: HEDINGHAM: second floor of great tower] - -For the purpose of communication between the floors, the example of -the towers of London and Colchester was followed. A well-stair was -constructed in one of the angles from the basement to the summit of -the tower, and had an entrance to each floor through a short passage -in the thickness of the wall, or sometimes in the embrasure of one of -the windows. This single stair was the only means of approach to the -basement. At Dover there are two such stairs; and, in a few instances, -there are small outer doorways to the basement, which may be -original, like the postern, high above the ground at Newcastle, or may -have been cut at a later date, like the entrance to the basement from -the fore-building at Kenilworth. The two stairs at Dover are diagonally -opposite to one another. At Rochester a second stair, also diagonal to -the other, begins at the first floor and ascends to the roof. The main -stair at Guildford starts in an angle of the first floor: the basement -was probably entered by a trap-door and ladder, but later, probably in -the thirteenth century, a doorway was cut through the wall into the -basement below the main entrance. At Scarborough, although the main -entrance was at the basement level, it merely opened on a stair leading -to the first floor: the stair to the basement, if there was one, seems -to have been in one of the angles which has been destroyed. In the -keeps of Richmond and Ludlow, owing to the preservation of the older -gatehouses in whole or in part, the arrangements are exceptional. The -basement at Richmond (93) had, as we have seen, its own entrance from -the interior of the castle; but there was also an inserted stair, now -blocked, in one of its angles from the first floor. The main stair of -the tower, however, started to the left of the main entrance on the -first floor, and continued upwards straight through the south wall to -the level of the second floor, where it stopped. The stair from the -second floor to the roof started from a point above the first floor -entrance, and also ran through the whole thickness of the south wall -above the lower stair, opening on the rampart at a point above the -entrance to the second floor.[185] At Ludlow, as a consequence of the -transformation of the gatehouse, the original straight stair from the -basement to the floor above, in the thickness of the east wall, was -blocked up, and the basement was entered only by a trap-door in the -first floor.[186] - -The various floors of the tower-keep were of timber, and vaulted -chambers, even in the basement, were an exception. The basement at -Newcastle has an original vaulted roof, on eight ribs springing from -a central column: the vaulting of the basement at Richmond, also from -a central column, is an insertion. At Norham the basement is divided -by the cross-wall into two parts, one of which has a cross-wall of -its own, dividing it into two chambers, both barrel-vaulted: the -other division has four bays of groined vaulting, divided by plain -transverse arches. The basement at Bamburgh was also vaulted in three -chambers, the largest of which had a central arcade of three arches, -from which ribs were struck to the outer wall and cross-wall. The two -chambers of the basement at Middleham were also vaulted, one from a -central arcade of five bays. But these northern examples are quite -exceptional; and, even at Castle Rising, where the architectural -treatment of the various portions of the building is unusually -elaborate, and the larger chamber of the basement is divided by a row -of columns, vaulting was confined to the small subdivisions which -support the lesser first-floor chambers already mentioned. - -[Illustration: NEWCASTLE: chapel] - -Mural chambers, made in the thickness of the wall, were necessarily -vaulted, the usual form employed being the barrel-vault, which sprang -from the wall without any dividing string-course. Otherwise, the only -apartment which had a stone roof was the chapel, frequently found in -connection with the tower-keep. It must be added, however, that the -chapel hardly ever occupies any part of a main floor in the keep, and -that at Castle Rising, where it is in an angle of the first floor, -the chancel alone is vaulted, and is constructed in the thickness of -the wall. Chapels on the scale of those of London and Colchester were -never again attempted in a keep. According to the usual theory, chapels -in castles and houses were planned so that no room used for secular -purposes should be above them; and their position in a keep was usually -upon the upper floor of a tower in the fore-building, communicating -with the adjacent floor of the main structure. The altar was always -placed against an east wall, and the distinction between nave and -chancel was usually kept. Thus at Rochester, where all three stages of -the tower of the fore-building are vaulted, the top floor was probably -a chapel, the nave of which was entered directly from the second floor -of the keep through a mural passage, while the chancel communicated -through a small vaulted lobby and a short stair with the main stair of -the keep.[187] At Dover the chapel, with ribbed vaulting, and a chancel -arch of two orders with chevron moulding and jamb-shafts, occupies -the upper floor of the lower tower of the fore-building. The walls of -chancel and nave are arcaded, which is a very usual feature in a castle -chapel, but does not appear at Rochester. The entrance from the second -floor of the keep at Dover was through a mural chamber and a passage -along the west wall of the chapel, which led to the chapel doorway on -the left hand, and a small vaulted room, possibly a vestry, on the -right. At Porchester, again, the south chamber on the first floor of -the fore-building was the chapel, approached from the passage which led -through the fore-building to the main doorway. The chapel at Newcastle -(152) is in an unusual position, in the basement of the fore-building, -and is entered through a passage from the foot of the main stair. It -also had originally an outer doorway, which communicated directly with -the outer stair of the fore-building near its foot—another unusual -feature. The ribbed vaulting, wall-arcading, and chancel arch, are of -remarkably excellent workmanship, and the “water-leaf” ornament of the -capitals of the wall-arcade bears a close resemblance to that of the -capitals of the contemporary Galilee of Durham. As the fore-building -at Newcastle is against the east wall of the keep, the longer axis of -the nave of the chapel runs north and south, and is at right angles -to that of the chancel. The chapel is thus =T=-shaped: the altar was -placed on one side of the chancel, against the east wall, and was -practically invisible from the nave. It is probable that the constable -of the castle and his family or friends occupied the western part of -the chancel, facing the altar, while the nave was used by the garrison -and servants.[188] - -Roomy chapels, like those at Newcastle and Old Sarum, were not merely -the chapel of the great tower, but of the whole castle. On the other -hand, the ordinary chapel of a tower-keep provided less accommodation, -and seems to have been intended for the lord of the castle or his -deputy and their immediate household. At Guildford the chapel of the -keep is a mere oratory, formed by two mural chambers at right angles -to one another, in the south-west angle of the first floor. The main -body of the chapel, covered with a barrel-vault, is in the west wall; -the space for the altar, arranged so that the priest faced eastwards, -is in the south wall, and is covered by a half-barrel-vault set at -right angles to the longer axis. The nave, which is thus quite out of -sight of the altar-chamber, has a wall-arcade of late twelfth-century -character, supplying a valuable clue to the real date of this rudely -built and archaic-looking keep. Although a chapel or oratory in the -keep was not uncommon, it was on the whole a luxury. At Richmond and -Ludlow no provision was made for one; the chapels of the castles, which -remain in both cases, were of earlier date than the conversion of the -gatehouse into a tower. It is not unlikely that the name of chapel may -have been given in later days to rooms in keeps and fore-buildings -which were intended for quite other purposes.[189] - -Although, in time of siege, cooking in the keep itself would sometimes -be necessary, no special part of the tower was set aside as a kitchen. -Castle Rising is an exception, where the room cut off at the north-west -angle of the first floor seems to have served this purpose, and a -circular chimney-shaft was hollowed out in the angle itself.[190] -Fireplaces are found in most tower-keeps, though not on all floors. -Rochester and Dover were well provided in this way, while, on the -other hand, the tower of Porchester was without any apparent means -of artificial warmth. The fireplaces at Dover in the cross-wall are -of great size; those at Rochester are numerous, but small, and have -arches decorated with the thick and roughly-cut chevron ornament which -also appears in the arcade of the cross-wall on the second floor. The -original fireplaces at Newcastle are in the large mural chambers on the -first and second floors. The main apartment here was probably warmed by -a brazier on the floor; and this may have been a common method, as it -was in the halls of private houses. A vent for the smoke must have been -made in the roof. - -Water, in view of the straitened circumstances of a siege, was a -necessity in a keep, and, where there are no remains of a well, it -is safe to assume that one has been filled up. In a mount-keep like -Guildford, the well may have been inside the shell which walls in the -front part of the mount. The wells of the Tower of London and Castle -Rising were in the basements. At Colchester there is a well-chamber in -the south wall of the basement, to the right of the entrance-passage. -But in the later keeps the pipe of the well, a cylinder lined with -ashlar, was often carried up through the thickness of a wall to the -upper floors, which thus received their supply of water directly, -without the necessity of a journey to the basement. At Kenilworth it -was in the south wall, close to the south-west angle, with an opening -on the basement and first floor. It is in the east wall at Newcastle, -near the north-east angle: it has only one opening, at the well-head -on the second floor, and is reached by a mural passage from the main -apartment. There are two wells at Dover, one in the middle tower of -the fore-building, with an opening at the level of the second floor, -the other in the south wall of the keep, with its only opening on the -second floor, in a mural chamber to the left of the main entrance. The -pipe at Rochester is in the centre of the cross-wall, and was carried -up to the third floor, with an opening in the north chamber of each -stage. - -Mural chambers have been noticed incidentally. Some keeps, even of the -largest size, have their walls unpierced, save for window openings: -this is the case with Corfe. Porchester, in spite of its great size, -contains only two, which were used for the common and necessary purpose -of garde-robes or latrines. On the other hand, the exceptionally -massive walls of Dover contain a large number of such chambers, most -of which are of considerable size: the position of the garde-robes -here is not easy to determine. At Newcastle advantage was taken of -the thickness of the walls to construct large chambers in connection -with the first and second floors: that in the south wall of the second -floor, known as the “king’s chamber,” has an original fireplace, and -is well lighted. A doorway at its north-west corner leads into a -garde-robe in the west wall. The number of mural chambers at Newcastle -is small compared with that at Dover, but the walls were freely pierced -with passages and galleries. A stair, made through the upper part of -the south and west walls to the ramparts, seems to have been abandoned -during the progress of the work: the notion that it was deliberately -intended to lead a body of the enemy, who might have entered the tower, -into a _cul-de-sac_, is fanciful, but it certainly might have had -this unintentional effect. At Dover, Hedingham, Newcastle, Norwich, -and Rochester, where the hall or apartments on the second floor were -of unusual height, galleries were made in the walls round the upper -part of the stage. The gallery at Dover was not continued round the -north-west angle of the tower, but a passage, now blocked, was made -through the cross-wall from north to south, so that the east room on -this floor was completely surrounded by a gallery. The gallery at -Rochester surrounds the whole tower, communicating with the vices in -the south-west and north-east angles, and opening upon the interior of -the tower in no less than fourteen places, each of which corresponds to -a loop in the outer wall. Where the arcade which, on the second floor, -takes the place of the cross-wall, joins the east and west walls, the -floor of the gallery is raised by a few steps, to provide the adjacent -arch with a solid abutment. The arrangement of the mural galleries at -Bamburgh, which, owing to the modern alterations of the interior of the -tower, is rather obscure, seems to have been very like that at Dover, -with a passage through the cross-wall between two divided rooms upon -the second floor. The gallery at Hedingham, like that at Rochester, is -complete, and this floor, which is still roofed, is admirably lighted -(147). In cases where a mural chamber served as a garde-robe, as at -Guildford, Porchester, and the tower of the Peak, the outer wall, in -which the seat was contained, was slightly thickened and corbelled -out at this level, and a vent made below the seat. At Kenilworth the -north-west turret seems to have been used entirely as a garde-robe, -the lower part of the basement forming a pit for the refuse.[191] The -garde-robes at Castle Rising are contained in a vaulted chamber in the -west wall of the first floor, the vents opening upon the recesses by -which the outer face of the wall is broken up. - -[Illustration: NORHAM: great tower] - -[Illustration: NEWARK CASTLE] - -The roof of the tower-keep was of timber with an outer covering of -lead, and was some feet below the level of the encircling rampart-walk -on the top of the outer walls. The rampart-walk had a parapet upon its -outer face, which at regular intervals was lowered to form embrasures. -The solid portions of the parapet were of much greater breadth than -the embrasures: the familiar type of battlemented parapet, in which -the embrasures are of equal width with the solid “cops” or _merlons_ -between them, belongs to a later date. From the rampart-walk stairs -led into the summits of the angle turrets, which were some feet above -the level of the parapet. The original arrangement of the roof can be -gathered only from the marks left against the inside of the walls. In -towers with a cross-wall, like Rochester, each of the divisions was -covered, as a general rule, by a roof of more or less high pitch. A -central gutter ran along the top of the cross-wall, and side gutters -along each of the lateral walls, which were drained through spout-holes -made in the outer walls, which carried the rampart-walk. At Porchester, -where, as already noted, the tower was heightened, there was originally -a high-pitched central roof, with lean-to roofs against each of the -lateral walls, and gutters above the centre of each of the two interior -chambers. This curious arrangement seems to suggest that the cross-wall -itself was added when the tower was heightened, and that the gutters -originally were supported by timber struts in the second or attic stage -of the tower. When the tower was raised, a flat roof was planned and -possibly laid, and, by a curious and unique device, for which it is -hard to find an adequate reason, the parapets of the east and west -walls were slightly gabled. The present roof, however, is formed in -the usual way, with two gables and central and side gutters. In towers -without a cross-wall, like Ludlow, Newcastle, and Richmond, the -covering was a single high-pitched roof. In any case, the roof was -below the level of the rampart-walk, and was not intended to form a -free field for the defence of the tower: the occupation of the roof of -the tower for purposes of defence was not contemplated until a somewhat -later period than that at which the rectangular tower-keep was in -general fashion. At Rochester, and probably in many other instances, -the inner side of the rampart-walk was protected by a rear-wall, lower -than the parapet. The parapet at Rochester was 2 feet broad and 8 feet -high: the rear-wall had a breadth of 3 feet, and the rampart-walk of 4 -feet. A foot of wall was left for the springing of the roofs and for -their side-gutters. The roof at Newcastle was re-laid in 1240; but here -and at Dover the insertion of comparatively modern vaults makes the -original arrangement difficult to trace. The present roof of Richmond -is modern, with a skylight to give light and air to the dark room on -the second floor: the height of the outer walls above the roof suggests -that the original roof was of unusually high pitch or rose above an -intermediate attic. The angle turrets formed elevated platforms, -approached from the rampart-walk by stone stairs. Their elevation -afforded a greater command of the proceedings of the enemy at the foot -of the tower; and their solid construction may sometimes have allowed -the defenders to employ them for stone-throwing engines, without -interference with the operations of the soldiers on the somewhat narrow -rampart-walk. - -It has already been shown that, if the main object of these towers -was defensive, many of them seem to have been planned with a degree -of comfort which indicates that their builders had an eye to their -permanent use as the principal residence within the enclosure of the -castle, and that, in the towers built during the reign of Henry II., a -compromise between their military and domestic character was effected. -It is clear, however, that, in the cases of Richmond and Ludlow, the -converted gatehouse-towers were planned simply as military strongholds. -Their position, in both these instances, was exposed to direct attack, -while the early domestic buildings occupied a more sheltered position -on the further side of the inner ward. The tower-keep can never have -formed a convenient residence, even where, as at Hedingham, it was -well lighted, or, as at Dover, was unusually roomy. New methods of -fortification led to its general disuse, and although, in certain -parts of England, the type persisted upon a small scale until the end -of the middle ages, the period during which the fashion of building -rectangular tower-keeps was pursued was comparatively short. - - - - -CHAPTER VII - -THE PERIOD OF TRANSITION: CYLINDRICAL TOWER-KEEPS - - -The development of the castle during the twelfth century was governed, -as has been explained, by the methods of attack which its defenders -had to meet. The strong fortresses of the reign of Henry II., with -their stone curtains and rectangular keeps, opposed to the enemy a -solid front of passive strength which defied attack. Sufficiently -provisioned, a small garrison was capable of holding out against a long -blockade, and tiring the patience of the assailants, whose artillery -could make but little impression upon the masonry of the castle. At -the same time, the stone castle with the rectangular tower-keep does -not represent a final point in the perfection of fortification. The -early Plantagenet castles were, on the contrary, merely a departure -from the ordinary type of castle, composed of earthwork and timber, in -the direction of an organised system of permanent stone castles. They -belonged to a transitional period; for, even while they were being -built, improvements upon their most striking feature, the rectangular -keep, were suggesting themselves. During the last twenty years of the -twelfth century, lessons learned by the Crusaders from the traditional -methods of fortification employed in the Eastern empire exercised -a profound influence upon the military architecture of France and -England; and the application of these lessons during the thirteenth -century entirely altered the defensive scheme of the castle, until -the plan of masterpieces of fortification like Caerphilly and Harlech -presented an entire contrast to the plan of defensive strongholds like -Norham and Scarborough. - -The first necessity which had governed the development of -fortification was that of enclosing the defended position so as to -present an adequate barrier to attack. The bailey was surrounded -with its palisade; while the palisaded mount, with its wooden tower, -commanded—that is, overlooked—the operations of the defenders within -the bailey, and provided a second line of defence, if the bailey were -taken. As siege-engines increased in strength, stone-work took the -place of stockading. The bailey was encircled by a stone wall with a -certain number of towers on its circumference. It was sometimes divided -into an outer and inner ward by a cross-wall, or, as at Ludlow (96), -a large outer bailey was added to it, which formed a courtyard for -barracks and stabling, and a protection in time of war for dwellers on -the outskirts of the castle and for their flocks. A wall superseded -the palisade round the mount, or a strong tower was built, either -in connection with the mount or on a new site, which commanded the -whole enclosure. Thus the passive strength of the castle was ensured. -But stone walls and towers, however strong, were in themselves an -insufficient protection, unless the defenders could keep themselves -fully informed of the movements of the enemy. It was necessary that -they should be able to command the field in which the besiegers worked, -and especially the foot of the wall or tower on which the attack was -concentrated. The battering-ram, the scaling-ladder, and the mine must -be kept under constant observation. A first step towards this was the -establishment of projecting towers along the wall at intervals. These -flank the wall—that is, the outer face of the wall between them can be -overlooked and protected by bodies of men posted upon the projection on -either flank. At first, however, the system of flanking was far from -perfect; and therefore the next step was in the direction of improving -it, so that every portion of the outer surface of the _enceinte_ might -be covered by the fire of the defenders. This improvement, which we are -about to trace, was effected gradually, (1) by a change in the form of -the flanking defences themselves; (2) by their multiplication at more -frequent intervals. The first of these changes begins to be noticeable -during the later years of the twelfth century: the second was brought -to pass in the first half of the thirteenth century, and led to further -developments in the arrangement of the lines of defence. - -The rectangular form of the keep and of the towers on the curtain was -in two respects a drawback to the defence of the castle. In the first -place, the salient angles of the masonry were liable to destruction -by sap and mine. The parallel jointing of the stonework made the -removal of fragments of stone by the bore or pick at these points a -comparatively easy, if still laborious, task. In the second place, the -angles of a tower or curtain, which were thus points of danger, were -precisely the places which the defenders were least able to command -satisfactorily. Each face of a rectangular tower commands the field -immediately in front of it: the range of shot, from the point of view -of each marksman, is in a direction at right angles to the face of -the tower. Strictly speaking, the foot of the whole curtain and its -towers lies within a “dead angle,” as vertical fire from the rampart is -impossible; but the wooden galleries attached to the rampart obviated -this difficulty. But, if the lines of two adjacent faces of the tower -are produced, it will be seen that the space contained by these is -out of the defenders’ range, and within it miners can work securely, -while the main attack is directed against the faces of the rectangle. -One obvious concrete illustration of this is seen at Rochester. When -King John, in 1215, besieged the castle, he directed against it his -stone-throwing engines. Finding that progress by this means was slow, -he set his miners to work. A breach was made in the outer curtain, and -the miners continued their operations on the tower, and eventually, -after much difficulty, broke their way through it.[192] We can see -to-day that the south-east angle of the tower has been rebuilt, and -that the form of the reconstructed turret is round, and not square. -This, no doubt, marks the place where the breach was made: the repairs -are evidently part of the work taken in hand by Henry III. in 1225. - -A further weak point in the defences of the castle was the insufficient -flanking of the curtain. In the eleventh century, as we have seen, -flanking towers were discouraged by feudal over-lords, who rightly -recognised the danger which a strongly fortified castle, in the hands -of rebels, might mean to themselves. As time went on, stone curtains -were provided with towers; but these were not many in number, and, -so long as the rectangular form of tower continued in fashion, long -spaces of straight wall were left between the projections. The risk of -providing too many salient angles was probably recognised by military -engineers. From the flanking towers the adjacent part of the wall could -be covered by the artillery of the defence; but, where a long interval -existed between two towers, the wall mid-way was out of effective -range. To protect these unflanked points in time of siege, a body of -defenders would have to be kept on each spot. A twelfth-century castle, -therefore, to be thoroughly defended, needed a large garrison to cover -its numerous weak points. Any attempt to concentrate the defence upon -one threatened spot might lead to the weakening of the defence at other -points, of which the enemy would not be slow to take advantage. - -Added to this was an inherent drawback in the normal plan of the -castle. Its wards and keep provided a system of successive lines of -defence, which caused an enemy immense trouble to pierce, but could -not offer a combined resistance to him. In many castles, like Norham -or Barnard Castle, the inner ward and keep were placed at a distant -angle of the enclosure, and were protected from external attack by -steep outer slopes and a river at their foot. In such cases, the wall -of the outer ward offered the first resistance: the inner ward did -not come into action until the enemy had entered the outer ward, and -the defenders had to retire to the inner enclosure. If the inner wall -was breached or stormed, the keep gave the defence its last shelter. -At Château-Gaillard, as has already been described, the chief feature -of the siege was the capture of ward after ward: the defenders, in -despair, did not even attempt to resort, as a final resource, to -the keep. Château-Gaillard was in its own day a model of scientific -fortification. Its fall was therefore a very striking example of the -disadvantage of successive lines of defence, of which only one could -be effectively used at a time. It is true that here and there, as -at Rochester, the keep was placed so near the curtain of an outer -ward that the exterior of the castle could be commanded from its -battlements, and its artillery could be brought into play over the -heads of the defenders of the curtain. At Richmond, the great tower -commands the one side of the castle from which attack was possible, -and was thus placed in the very fore-front of the defence. But such -arrangements were happy ideas which occurred to individual engineers, -and do not imply any systematic advance in the science of defence. - -[Illustration: Château-Gaillard; Plan] - -The experiences of the earliest Crusaders brought the warriors of -the west face to face with methods of defence far superior to those -employed in England and France. The city-wall of Antioch gave them an -example of a perfect system of flanking defences; and, in the triple -_enceinte_ of Constantinople they saw how successive lines of defence -could be used in co-operation. At Antioch the wall was flanked at -frequent intervals by fifty towers. Each of these, rising above the -curtain, commanded not only its space of intermediate wall, but the -rampart-walk as well. The rampart-walk, moreover, passed through the -towers, which were protected by strong doors. To gain the whole line -of wall, therefore, it was necessary to occupy the towers, each of -which could be converted into a separate stronghold, isolating the -intermediate rampart-walk. The siege was badly conducted, the Crusaders -limiting themselves to a strong position between the city and the -Orontes, and allowing the defenders to hold their communications on -two sides of the city open for some five months. Posts of observation -were eventually established on the two neglected sides; but the actual -capture of the city was due to the treachery of one of the commanders -of the Turkish garrison, who admitted a body of Franks into one of the -towers in his charge. They made their way into seven more towers, and -so gained access to the city.[193] The three walls of Constantinople -surrounded the whole city: each was higher than the one outside it, -so that all three could be used simultaneously by the defenders.[194] -Against such a system of concentric defence, the besiegers were -manifestly at a disadvantage. - -These lessons from the east, stimulating though they were, did not -produce their full practical effect for some generations in the -west. Our engineers had to pass through a long epoch of gradual -experiment before they could arrive at a finished system of flanking -or of concentric lines of defence. The traditional mount-and-bailey -plan provided the foundation of the plan of the stone castle. The -traditional importance of the keep as the ultimate place of refuge -dictated the arrangement of ward behind ward, culminating in the great -tower. Meanwhile, the improvement of flanking defences led more and -more to the concentration of engineering skill upon the curtain, so -that the keep gradually took a place of secondary importance. As an -obvious result of further improvement, the keep was dispensed with, -and the whole attention of the engineer was directed to combining the -defences of the castle into a double or triple line of simultaneous -resistance to attack. These steps took time: the transition from one to -the other was effected by no sudden revolution, but by work along old -lines, a work of revision and improvement, until the finished product -formed an almost complete antithesis to the source from which it was -derived. - -The earliest signs of transition in England are seen in the -strengthening of the masonry by the reduction and elimination of -salient angles. It is obvious that, if a rounded or polygonal form is -given to a projecting tower, or if the angle of a rectangular tower is -rounded off, a wider field will be commanded by the artillery of the -defence. The new range will be a large segment of a circle radiating -from the centre of the tower, instead of a rectangle in front of each -face. The sectors at the angles within which an attacking party can -work securely will be thus eliminated, and the chances of the success -of a mine will be less. The masonry also will offer much greater -resistance to the battering or boring engines of the enemy. The joints -are no longer parallel, but radiating, so that it becomes much harder -work to force out stones and effect a breach. The obtuse angles of -polygonal towers, with the joints of the masonry in the alternate faces -running in oblique directions to each other, have a much greater power -of resistance than the right angles of the ordinary twelfth-century -tower. - -The general use of circular and polygonal forms is first found in -connection with the principal tower of the castle, the keep. The -main object was at first, no doubt, the greater cohesion imparted -to the masonry: the scientific advantages, from the point of view -of artillery, probably were not realised till later. In France the -cylindrical donjon appeared at an earlier date than in England: that -at Château-sur-Epte (Eure) is said to have been begun in 1097.[195] -The tower of Houdan (Seine-et-Oise) is a cylinder flanked by four -cylindrical turrets: it was built during the reign of Louis VI. -(1108-37),[196] and the form shows that the builders looked, not merely -to the strength of the masonry, but to the reduction of the enemy’s -chances of successful attack. The majority, however, of such donjons -in France belong to the second half of the twelfth century and the -beginning of the thirteenth, and were contemporary with our rectangular -towers. But the engineers of Henry II., to whom we owe so many of our -stone keeps, were certainly acquainted with the possible benefits of -forms other than square. The keep of Orford in Suffolk was probably -built between 1166 and 1172,[197] and is therefore earlier in date than -many rectangular keeps. - -[Illustration: Conisbrough; Keep] - -Internally, it is cylindrical; externally, a polygon of twenty-one -sides, with three very large rectangular turrets projecting from it. -It has a basement and two main floors, and is entered by a two-storied -fore-building, which forms a southward continuation of the eastern -turret. The sloping base of the tower is continued round the turrets, -and greatly strengthens their angles; while the turrets themselves -are so placed as to flank the whole tower and fore-building very -effectively, and to provide additional room in the interior. This -combination of the rectangular and polygonal forms is, for its date, an -unique departure from the ordinary type of English tower-keep. But it -must be remembered that the shell-keep on the mount usually took the -form of a cylindrical or polygonal wall strengthened by buttresses; and -at Orford, where the tower appears to stand upon the base of a levelled -mount, we may have a conscious adaptation of this form to the heavier -and loftier tower. At Gisors (Eure) the older donjon was an octagonal -tower, built on a mount, and surrounded by a circular wall. The tower -was probably built by Henry II. between 1161 and 1184,[198] within -the somewhat earlier shell, and took the form which was best suited -to the artificial soil on which it stood. But there are at least two -instances of English rectangular keeps in which a slight departure from -the normal form was made for obvious purposes of additional strength, -without reference to an artificial site. At Newcastle the north-west -turret is octagonal, with very obtuse angles. In the small tower of -Mitford, on the Wansbeck above Morpeth, the north wall is built with an -obtuse salient angle, so that the tower forms an irregular pentagon. -The date of this tower cannot be fixed with certainty, but it probably -belongs to the second half, at any rate, of the twelfth century; and -it can hardly be doubted that the object of this peculiar device was to -give the defenders better command of the angles of the tower which were -exposed to attack from the inner ward. - -[Illustration: Conisbrough; Keep. Plans] - -Somewhat later than these is the noble cylindrical keep of Conisbrough -(166), which is attributed to Hamelin Plantagenet, a natural brother of -Henry II., and husband of Isabel, heiress of William, earl of Surrey. -Hamelin died in 1201: the tower was built, as the architectural details -show, during the last quarter of the twelfth century. It is a regular -cylinder; and to its circumference are applied six bold buttresses, -which narrow slightly outwards, and rise above the parapet in turrets. -The whole is built of dressed stone in large rectangular blocks, the -fine condition of which, after more than seven hundred years, is -extraordinary. The construction is unusually solid: the thickness of -the wall in the basement exceeds 20 feet. On the first floor it is -just under 15 feet: in the two upper floors it is reduced by internal -off-sets, until, at the rampart level, 75 to 80 feet above the ground, -it is 12½ feet. In addition to this the buttresses, which project -9 feet at the basement level and 8 feet above, are not used, like the -turrets at Orford, to contain additional rooms, but are built solid. -The chapel, however, was formed by constructing a chamber in the -eastern buttress upon the third floor. - -[Illustration: Conisbrough; Fireplace] - -The tower of Conisbrough, like that of Orford, was intended for -residential as well as defensive purposes; but light and comfort were -sacrificed to military necessities. The entrance, as usual, was upon -the first floor, but there is no trace of any fore-building, nor is -the original means of approach at all clear. The basement was simply -a domed well-chamber and store-room: the only approach to it from the -first floor was an opening in the centre of the guard-chamber, over -which was probably the windlass by which buckets were lowered into the -well.[199] The first floor was a guard-chamber: there were no windows, -and the only means of admitting daylight was through the open door on -the far side of the passage through the wall. On the right-hand side of -this passage, a curved stair mounts through the thickness of the wall -to the second floor, which it enters by a landing in the embrasure[200] -of a loop on the north side. This floor was the hall of the keep. -There is a large fireplace (168) in the west wall, with a spreading -chimney-breast, and a lintel of joggled stones resting on triple -shafts with carved capitals. In the wall between the fireplace and the -entrance is a rectangular recess, containing a small sink, which was -drained through the wall. There are two windows, the loop close to the -entrance, and a double window opening to the south-east. The embrasures -are barrel-vaulted: that of the double window has a stone bench on all -three sides, and stands three steps above the floor of the hall. This -window was not glazed: the upright between the two rectangular openings -has at the back a rounded projection, through a hole in which the bolt -of the shutters passed, and the fastening was further secured by a -wooden draw-bar. On the north-east side of the hall a winding passage -with two turns and a flight of steps leads through the thickness of the -wall to a garde-robe. - -To reach the third floor, the hall had to be crossed to a recess in -the direction of the south-west buttress. From this point a curved -staircase mounted through the wall to the embrasure of a loop in -the south-east face of the third floor. The apartment on this floor -contained a smaller fireplace, immediately above that on the second -floor, and treated with similar architectural ornament. The flue of -the lower chimney runs up through the wall behind that of the other: -the common chimney-top projects from the rampart-walk above. There is -also upon this floor a trefoil-headed recess with a sink. There are two -windows, the loop in the south-east face, and a double opening, similar -to that below, looking south. This room corresponded to the “great -chamber,” which is found in the larger houses of the middle ages. On -its east side the chapel, an irregular hexagon, vaulted in two ribbed -bays with a transverse arch between, was constructed in the eastern -wall and buttress. The details of its beautiful capitals, like those of -the fireplaces, show elementary foliage of the water-leaf type, such as -is found in the chapel of the tower at Newcastle (152). Chevron is used -in the stilted transverse arch and round the outside of the arch of the -loop at the east end. The quatrefoil openings north and south of the -chancel bay, and the trefoil-headed _piscinae_ in the same walls, are -of an advanced transitional character; and, by comparing these details, -a date approximating to 1185-90 may with some certainty be given to the -tower. In the north wall of the chapel a doorway leads into a small -vestry or priest’s chamber, lighted by a loop. The stairway to the -rampart-walk mounts through the wall above this chamber, and its head -is above the western bay of the chapel. It is entered from a recess in -the north-east wall of the second floor, and from this recess there is -also a zigzag passage to a garde-robe, the seat of which is corbelled -out in the angle between the north-east buttress and the north wall of -the tower. The two lower stairways and the two garde-robe chambers are -each lighted by a small loop. - -In the roomier arrangement of the keep at Orford, the stair is a vice -in the turret or buttress to which the fore-building is annexed. The -chapel is upon the first floor of the fore-building, and, being on a -level of its own, not corresponding to the levels of the tower, is -approached from the stair by a separate passage. The entrance to the -chapel is a doorway on the left of this passage, which is continued -through the south-east wall of the tower to a priest’s room in the -south turret. - -The defensive side of the arrangements at Conisbrough must now be -considered. The tower stands close to the north-east corner of a -large bailey, the shape of which follows that of the knoll on which -it is built: the north segment of the tower, with the two adjacent -buttresses, continues the line of the curtain; but five-sixths of the -circumference, with four of the buttresses, are within the enclosure. -On the north and east sides the steepness of the hill made access -nearly impracticable, and the natural point of attack was from the -south and south-west. The position of the keep is at the point furthest -removed from attack, and the capture of the inner ward, as will be -seen in a later chapter, was rendered very difficult by a well-guarded -approach.[201] The tower stood on higher ground than the rest of the -ward, and the entrance, on the south-east side, was sheltered by the -east curtain. The south and south-west faces were fully exposed to an -attack from the inner ward, and it was on this side, therefore, that -the defenders needed full command of the sides and base of the tower. -Accordingly, when we mount to the rampart-walk, and examine the tops of -the buttresses, we find that the two which are upon the north curtain, -and were not exposed to attack, contain cisterns. The two on either -side of the main entrance were not necessary for flanking purposes, as -the entrance itself would be defended by some kind of platform in time -of siege. One, therefore, above the chapel, was employed as a house for -carrier-pigeons; while the other contained an oven, in which stones -and arrows could be heated. The remaining two buttresses are raised -platforms which effectively flanked that part of the circumference -which was otherwise insufficiently guarded, and lay open to catapults -and mining operations. The spreading base of the tower and buttresses -served further to keep the battering-ram and bore from direct contact -with the main wall of the tower, and improved the flanking position of -the defenders; while missiles dropped from the summit upon this talus -or sloping surface would rebound upon the enemy with deadly effect. - -Above the talus the solidity of the main wall defied the force of -catapults. These engines, however, had increased in strength and range, -and it was no longer safe to give light to the tower in the somewhat -lavish method adopted by the engineers of some of our large keeps. At -Conisbrough, as we have seen, the walls of the first floor, save for -the entrance passage, are absolutely solid. The loops in the upper -floors are very few in number, and the one on the most exposed face -is almost concealed by a buttress. The double window on the second -floor is immediately over the main entrance, on a side which it would -be difficult to command with a large siege-engine. That on the third -floor is placed upon an exposed face, but would probably be out of -range.[202] The garde-robe vents are on the side where the tower -crosses the line of the curtain. - -In time of siege the larger windows would be shuttered and barred. The -defence would be conducted from the top of the tower, while a body -of the garrison would be told off to protect the main entrance. The -whole summit would be utilised. The defence was not confined, as in a -rectangular keep, to the rampart-walk; but there was a rear-wall to -the walk, through which openings probably gave access to a covered -round-house above the third floor. To this room, which, to judge -from contemporary instances, had a conical roof, arms and missiles -could be hauled up, through trap-doors in the floors below, from the -guard-room and the store-chamber in the basement. There was no vaulted -roof in the tower above the basement, so that the flat roof could -not be used as a platform for catapults. There is no indication that -hoarding was employed outside the rampart. The tower and its buttresses -were finished off with a battlemented parapet in the usual way; the -buttresses, as has been shown, were so constructed and so near together -that additional wooden defences were practically unnecessary. - -[Illustration: Etampes; Donjon. Plan] - -[Illustration: GOODRICH CASTLE: round tower with spur at base] - -[Illustration: GOODRICH CASTLE: buttery hatches] - -In France the treatment of the donjon was pursued with more variation -than in England. To the middle of the twelfth century belongs, for -instance, the donjon of Etampes (Seine-et-Oise), which takes the form -of a quatrefoil (172). The donjon of Provins (Seine-et-Marne) is of -much the same date, the ground-plan forming an octagon flanked by -four cylindrical turrets. Although both these towers have analogies -in England, they were constructed nevertheless by French engineers -at a period before even the rectangular tower had become common with -ours.[203] They are also only two out of many diverse experiments. The -cylindrical form, however, commended itself to the builders of the -finest French examples. Château-Gaillard (163) follows closely upon -Conisbrough in point of date, having been begun by Richard I. in 1196. -The donjon is not, as at Conisbrough, a tower to which the line of a -somewhat earlier curtain has been adapted, but is part of a homogeneous -scheme of fortification. The site of the castle is the top of a very -steep and almost isolated hill on the right bank of the Seine: the west -slope is a precipice, and the only practicable attack could be made -from the ridge joining the hill to the high ground on the south. The -donjon is set so that its west face projects from the curtain of the -inner ward, upon the very edge of the precipice. The interior forms a -regular cylinder, and the west face is a segment of a circle. On this -side the solidity of the masonry is increased by a tremendous outward -slope or batter, the whole height of the basement and adjacent -curtain. Towards the inner ward, however, the cylinder is strengthened -by a covering spur, also battered, so that, while the interior of -the castle was commanded from the rampart, the tower offered to the -besiegers an angle of immense thickness and strength, immediately -opposite the gateway of the inner ward. A possible prototype in -France of this form of defence is the donjon of La-Roche-Guyon -(Seine-et-Oise), higher up the Seine, where the spur covers about a -quarter of the circumference of the tower. Philip Augustus adopted -the same device a few years later in the White tower at Issoudun -(Indre).[204] It is seen at Goodrich (174), Chepstow, and elsewhere. - -[Illustration: Château-Gaillard] - -As the upper portion of the tower of Château-Gaillard is gone, its -internal arrangements are difficult to decipher. It was purely a tower -of defence; but the inaccessible nature of the west side allowed of -large windows being made in that face upon the first floor. There was -probably a low second floor, above which was the roof and rampart-walk. -The rampart was defended with the aid of a device, unusual at the -time, although very general at a later period. The sides of the tower -within the ward were furnished with narrow buttress projections above -the battering base, which gradually increased in breadth as they went -higher. These divided the face of the tower into a series of recesses -spanned by low arches, on the outer face of which the parapet was -carried. The top of each recess, between the parapet and the wall, -was left open, so that the defenders could use the holes for raining -down missiles upon their opponents. Such holes, formed by corbelling -out a parapet in advance of a wall or tower, are called machicolations -(_mâchicoulis_),[205] and gradually superseded the external gallery -of timber. Holes in stone roofs for the same purpose are found at an -earlier date, as in the fore-building at Scarborough; and, as early as -1160, they appear in connection with the parapet of a donjon at Niort -(Deux-Sèvres).[206] The general tradition is that they were invented -by the Crusaders in Syria, where wood for hoarding was not easily -obtained; and this is probably true.[207] They appear in a state of -perfection, which testifies to a long course of previous experiment, -at the great Syrian castle of Le Krak des Chevaliers (176), begun in -1202. But hoarding continued in use in Europe long after the building -of Château-Gaillard, and even the donjon of Coucy (Aisne), by far the -finest of all cylindrical donjons, was garnished with timber hoarding -carried on stone corbels—an interesting example of the transition from -one form of defence to another. - -[Illustration: Le Krak des Chevaliers] - -[Illustration: Coucy] - -The cylindrical form of donjon was brought to perfection in France -under Philip Augustus (1180-1223). At Gisors, which came into -his hands in 1193, he built a new circular tower on the line of -the curtain, which superseded Henry II.’s octagonal tower on the -mount. His fortification of Gisors led directly to the building of -Château-Gaillard by Richard I., to cover the approach from French -territory to Rouen.[208] But in 1204 the capture of this great -stronghold delivered Rouen into Philip’s hands; and in 1207 he built -the donjon, now known as the Tour Jeanne d’Arc, at Rouen. Here we meet -with the tower vaulted from basement to roof, with a strongly defended -entrance at the level of the ward in which it stands, of which the most -perfect example is found at Coucy.[209] Coucy, the work of a powerful -vassal of the crown of France, represents a degree of scientific -fortification to which none of our cylindrical donjons attains. The -castle was constructed, like Conway at a later period, in connection -with the defences of a walled town.[210] It consists of two wards, a -large outer ward or base-court and an inner ward of irregular shape, -with four straight sides of unequal length and round towers at the -angles. In the middle of the east side, between the two wards, is the -donjon (177), a cylinder of some 200 feet high—90 feet higher than the -tower of Rochester. It stands isolated from the curtain of the inner -ward, from the line of which about one-third of its circumference -projects, and is surrounded by a ditch, originally paved with stone. -To this ditch there was no external access. On the outer edge of the -ditch, joining the east curtain of the inner ward at two points, was -a strong wall or _chemise_. Outside this was the ditch dividing the -inner ward from the base-court. Within the inner ward, a low wall took -the place of the _chemise_ of the donjon, and access to the tower was -provided by a bridge across the stone-flagged ditch. The bridge was -worked by a windlass, and, when not in use, remained drawn up on the -threshold of the tower. - -The donjon of Coucy is built in three stages, and has a large -apartment, originally vaulted, on each floor. There is no basement -chamber below the level of the entrance. In order to facilitate -vaulting the various floors, each chamber was planned with twelve -sides, lofty niches being left between the abutments of the vault.[211] -Without giving a detailed description, we may notice the points in -which this great structure resembles and improves upon the tower of -Conisbrough. (1) The isolation of the tower, defended by its own ditch -and, towards the field, by its own curtain, makes an entrance on the -ground floor possible. In this respect, the builders of Coucy followed -the example of Philip Augustus at the Louvre and at Rouen. (2) The -defences of the entrance are more elaborate than at Conisbrough, where -the doorway was closed merely by a strong wooden door, reinforced -by two draw-bars, and a straight passage led into the guard-room on -the first floor. At Coucy there was a similar door, but in front of -it was an iron portcullis, worked from the first floor of the tower, -and sliding through grooves at the back of the jambs of the doorway. -The portcullis was defended further by a machicolation or open groove -in the floor above. The entrance passage behind the wooden door was -closed by a hinged grille at the entrance to the guard-room. (3) The -stair, as at Conisbrough, was on the right of the entrance passage, -but, instead of following the curve of the wall, was a vice, which -led straight to the roof, communicating with the two upper floors on -the way. The device adopted at Conisbrough, by which the stair ends -at each floor, and, in order to ascend further, the floor has to be -crossed, was adopted in the lesser towers at Coucy,[212] but not in the -donjon. The Conisbrough method has the advantage, very desirable in a -tower, of keeping the approach to the roof under direct observation -throughout its entire distance: we find it used in the stairs of the -rectangular keep at Richmond. (4) The tower of Coucy, as already -noticed, was defended by a lofty parapet, pierced with arches, which, -in time of siege, gave access to an outer wooden gallery supported -by stone corbels.[213] The form of the corbels is that which became -general in later times: each is composed of four courses of stone -projecting one above the other, with their outer ends rounded. (5) -The well at Coucy was in one of the niches between the abutments of -the ground-floor vault. (6) There are garde-robes at Coucy on the -left of the entrance-passage, and in a similar position at the entry -to the first floor. (7) We have seen that at Conisbrough arms were -probably transported from the basement to the roof through a series -of trap-doors in the floors. At Coucy there was a circular opening -left for this purpose in the crown of the vault of each floor. (8) -The solidity of the tower of Coucy is emphasised by the absence of -large windows, even more noticeable than at Conisbrough; and, although -the tower contains fireplaces, its purely defensive character is -unmistakable. It provided accommodation for an enormous garrison, but -for residential purposes, it would have been uncomfortable to the last -degree. It contains no trace of a permanent chapel: when the tower was -in use, an altar might have been set up in one of the niches on the -first floor; but the regular chapel was in the inner ward, and was -connected with the domestic buildings. - -In the walls of the tower of Coucy can still be seen the holes which -served to attach the scaffolding during construction. The spiral course -which they take shows that the scaffolding, rising with the tower, -formed an inclined plane of a moderate slope, up which the necessary -materials could be wheeled. The advantage of a cylindrical tower from -this point of view is obvious. Another structural feature is the -provision of gutters for the drainage of the roof in the stonework at -the back of the vault-ribs of the second floor. The absence of any -effective provision for draining the centre of the roof at Conisbrough -points to the probability that it was sheltered, as already explained, -by a conical roof of its own. - -[Illustration: Pembroke] - -The introduction of the cylindrical donjon in England coincides with a -period at which the keep was already beginning to disappear from the -castle. The principal examples, which may be attributed to the early -years of the thirteenth century, are on the frontier and in the south -of Wales. Chief among them is the fine tower of Pembroke (180), which -was probably built by William Marshal, earl of Pembroke and Striguil, -about 1200. The castle of Pembroke was of great importance, owing to -its situation upon an arm of Milford haven,[214] and its command of the -passage to Ireland. The keep was probably the first completed portion -of the present castle, the stone-work of which, as it stands to-day, -is very largely of the late twelfth and early thirteenth century.[215] -It is a round tower, with a basement and three upper floors, standing -just within, but not touching, the curtain which divided the inner and -higher from the outer ward. The height is 75 feet; the floors were -of wood, but the uppermost stage was vaulted by a dome, which still -remains, rising in the centre of the tower above the rampart-walk. The -stair is a vice in the west wall, from the basement to the summit: the -main entrance was upon the first floor, but there is also a basement -entrance, which seems to have been pierced not long after the building -of the tower. The whole structure batters upwards, and the walls are -slightly gathered in at each stage on the outside, a method the reverse -of that pursued at Conisbrough: the masonry is roughly coursed rubble. -On each of the first and second floors there is, towards the inner -ward, a two-light window with pointed openings, the spandrils between -which and the enclosing arch are pierced with plate tracery. The third -floor was lighted by windows pierced in the dome.[216] Commanding, as -it does, the whole interior of the castle, this tower is remarkably -grand in situation; and its thick walls offered considerable resistance -to artillery. It shows, however, no advance upon the defence of -Conisbrough. The rampart-walk is narrow, and the dome in the centre -prevented the employment of the roof as a platform. - -[Illustration: Pembroke; Plan] - -The cylindrical donjon in England and Wales was simply an experiment -attempted here and there, as an improvement upon the rectangular tower, -but was never carried to the general perfection which it attained in -France. Its isolation at Coucy, upon the outer face of the inner ward, -protected by its own inner ditch, and covered by a strong curtain of -its own, are signs of a perfection of engineering skill to which our -builders did not attain. In one case, at Flint, we find a round tower -which is isolated within its own ditch at one corner of the castle, -but stands outside the main wall, and had no separate curtain of its -own.[217] The plan strongly suggests a mount-and-bailey fortress, the -isolated tower occupying the site of the mount, and the bailey walled -in, leaving the moat, which was marshy and was filled with water at -high tide, clear. The construction of this keep is peculiar: it is -composed of an outer and inner circle of masonry, with barrel-vaulted -passages between the two. Its actual date is unknown.[218] But, as -a rule, where the keep stands upon the outer line of defence, it is -joined by the curtain of the bailey. Thus at Caldicot, near Chepstow, -the castle is simply a mount-and-bailey enclosure surrounded by a stone -curtain of the thirteenth century. The keep is a round tower at one -corner, standing upon the partially levelled mount; and the curtain -crosses the ditch to join it on both sides. At Conisbrough, where the -keep was on the line of the curtain; at Pembroke, where it stood just -within the line, there was no ditch round it: the high ground on which -it was placed seems to have been thought a sufficient protection. - -There are, however, a few round towers which, although they have not -their own curtain in the sense of Coucy, are yet within defences of -a peculiar nature, and therefore stand in a class apart. The most -remarkable of these is Launceston, where the tower stands upon the -summit of a lofty artificial mount of early Norman origin, and is -approached by a steep and well-defended stair, ascending the face of -the mount to the main entrance. Round the outer edge of the mount -remain the lower courses of a stone wall, concentric with the keep. -Within this is another and higher circular wall, which was crowned by -a rampart-walk, approached by a stair in the thickness of the wall, to -the left of the entrance. Inside this enclosure is the tower itself, -which now consists of a basement and a ruined upper floor. The narrow -space between the tower and the encircling wall was evidently roofed -over at the height of the first floor of the tower: holes for joists -still remain.[219] This double circle of masonry recalls Flint, where, -however, the intermediate passage was vaulted, and the outer circle was -probably the whole height of the tower.[220] Flint does not possess -the low outer wall which existed at Launceston. The nearest analogy to -Launceston is at Provins (Seine-et-Marne), where the octagonal keep -has its own outer curtain, and is composed of an outer octagon with -cylindrical turrets at the angles, commanded by an inner octagon rising -two stages higher. The upper stage at Provins is surrounded by a lofty -crenellated wall, on which rests a conical roof. - -[Illustration: Dolbadarn] - -Another case is the keep of Tretower in Breconshire, which stands on -a slightly elevated site near the confluence of the Rhiangol with the -Usk. Here the arrangement is very curious. The keep, a round tower -with a basement and three upper stages, stands within the ruins of -an approximately rectangular enclosure. This enclosure bears a close -resemblance to the outer wall of a rectangular keep, but has two -octagonal projections from the south face, one of which contains a -vice, and the other a large fireplace. The tower itself seems to be -somewhat earlier than the year 1200: the fireplaces on the first and -second floors have architectural decoration recalling that of the -fireplaces at Conisbrough, shafts with capitals carved with foliage of -a very elementary kind. The solution which suggests itself is that a -rectangular tower, of a somewhat original plan, was begun and raised -to a certain height, and that the builders then changed their minds, -built a circular tower within the unfinished keep, and left the outer -walls to serve as a curtain for the new structure. - -The keep at Tretower, in its ordinary features, may be compared with -the tower of Bronllys, only a few miles distant, on the other side of -the pass through the Black mountains, at the southern foot of which -Tretower stands. This tower also seems to be a work of the end of the -twelfth century, but its architectural details are much plainer: both -seem originally to have been between 70 and 80 feet high, and each -contained a basement and three floors. Each has a battering base, and -above this the wall at Tretower batters slightly to the summit; the -diameter of Tretower exceeds that of Bronllys throughout. The original -entrance in each case was on the first floor, from which at Tretower -a vice led to the top of the building. The basement at Tretower had -its separate stair in the wall opposite the entrance. At Bronllys the -basement has a pointed barrel vault, and was entered by a stone stair -and ladder from a trap-door in one of the window recesses of the first -floor. The stair from the first floor to the second opened from another -window recess, and curved through the wall, as at Conisbrough; there -was, as also at Conisbrough, a separate stair to the third floor. The -wall of the basement at Bronllys has been broken through in two places, -and in one of these a hollow in the wall has been disclosed, in which -originally a great beam was inserted to give coherence to the masonry. -The same feature is seen in the outer building at Tretower. This device -was frequently employed in the construction of medieval walls, but its -traces are not often so clearly seen. - -[Illustration: Dolbadarn; Interior] - -One feature of the tower of Bronllys is that, like that of Caldicot, it -stands upon an artificial mount, which occupies the ordinary position -of such earthworks, at the head of the enclosure. The more roomy, -but lower, tower at Hawarden, the upper floor of which is internally -an octagon, almost surrounded by a mural passage, is built upon a -lofty mount. At Skenfrith in Monmouthshire the tower, nearly equal -to Bronllys in diameter, but not higher than Hawarden, stands upon a -very low mount, and is placed in an isolated position, nearly in the -centre of a trapezoidal enclosure. Here the lowness of the mount and -the absence of indications of a normal earthwork plan suggest that it -was raised to strengthen the foundations of the tower, and is not the -mount of an earlier castle. The knoll, on the other hand, on which -the round tower of Dolbadarn (183) stands, between the two lakes at -the foot of the pass of Llanberis, is natural. The details of this -tower are very plain, but it was probably built during the thirteenth -century. There is no trace of any castle in connection with this small -military outpost, which, like the not far-distant rectangular keep of -Dolwyddelan, on the eastern slopes of Moel Siabod, bears some analogy -to the “pele-towers” of the north of England, and may have been built -by a Welsh chieftain upon an English model during the reign of Henry -III. - -[Illustration: York; Clifford’s Tower] - -None of the towers in England and Wales mentioned in this chapter have -the inner spur which has been noticed as characteristic of French -towers. It appears, as has been said, at Goodrich and Chepstow. Other -instances are a tower in the outer curtain at Denbigh, and the spur on -the inward face of the great tower at Barnard Castle. Here the work -is not earlier than the time of Edward II., and the tower is little -more than a large mural tower added to a large shell-keep standing on -a high rocky point. The spur here is a half pyramid, the apex of which -dies away in the face of the tower. Of an octagonal tower we have one -example at Odiham in Hampshire, which may be of the end of the twelfth -century. This has the feature, anomalous for so early a date, of angle -buttresses which project 4 feet, but are only 2 feet broad. - -[Illustration: Berkeley Castle; Plan] - -Of donjons which were built in England during the reign of Henry III., -the most interesting, by virtue of their plan, are those of York -and Pontefract. The tower of York (185), raised upon the mount of -the northern of the two castles, was built possibly about 1230, and -assumed the quatrefoil shape which is found in France at Etampes. This -keep, presumably because it is built on a mount, is usually called a -“shell”; it was, however, a regular tower, and the entrance, in the -angle between two of the leaves of the quatrefoil, is guarded by a -rectangular fore-building, on the first floor of which was the chapel. -As at Etampes, the quatrefoil plan is preserved internally, but the -angles formed by the meeting of the four segments are chamfered off: -there was no vaulting, as at Etampes, but the floors were of wood. -A quatrefoil plan was also adopted at Pontefract, with some slight -variation, owing to the irregular shape of the rocky mount. This keep -is in a state of complete ruin, although some idea of its former shape -may be gathered from a bird’s-eye view preserved among the records of -the duchy of Lancaster.[221] We can see, from what is left, that it -was not built upon the top of the mount; but that, on three sides, the -mount was enclosed by walls of revetment,[222] which formed the base -of the segments composing the quatrefoil. This process recalls the -walling-in of the mount at Berkeley, where, however, the lower part of -the mount was left, and the space between the slope and the wall filled -in with earth. At Pontefract the slope of the mount must have been much -reduced before the walls of revetment were added: the sandstone upon -which the castle was built is soft, and would lend itself easily to -such an operation. - -The bird’s-eye view of Pontefract just mentioned cannot be regarded -as absolutely trustworthy, but it gives us the relative position of -the various towers of the castle. It shows us a curtain flanked by a -formidable row of mural towers; the keep, a complicated erection of -several segments, with bartizans[223] projecting from the battlements -in the angles formed by the junction of the segments, is still the -dominant feature of the castle; but our attention is equally claimed -by the defences of the curtain and the domestic buildings which it -encloses. And, in pursuing our subject, we must first trace the growth -of domestic buildings within the castle area, and then turn to that -strengthening of the curtain which led eventually to the disuse of the -keep. - - - - -CHAPTER VIII - -THE DWELLING-HOUSE IN THE CASTLE - - -The castle needed, among its chief requirements, a dwelling-house which -might be occupied by the owner and his household. Thus the stronghold -of the lord of Ardres upon its mount was planned as a capacious -dwelling, with a kitchen attached; and where, as in this case, the -keep was the castle, it necessarily served the double purpose of -fortress and residence. Enough has been said of the rectangular and -cylindrical forms of tower-keep to show that the domestic and military -elements were often combined in their arrangements. But the use of the -tower-keep as the principal residence within the castle was a fashion -of comparatively short duration. The example of its double use had -been set in the great towers of London and Colchester, and in the -rectangular towers of Norman and French castles. Of the towers of Henry -II.’s reign, those which, like Castle Rising, are low in proportion -to the area they cover, generally have the best provision for living -purposes. Lofty towers, like Newcastle or Conisbrough, can never have -been comfortable residences; and it is not surprising to find that at -Newcastle, about half a century after the building of the tower, a -more commodious dwelling-house was built within the castle area.[224] -But we have seen already that in early castles, as at Oxford, a hall -for the lord or his constable was generally, if not always, built -within the bailey. The practical necessity of this is obvious in -mount-and-bailey castles, where the tower on the mount, or the stone -shell which took its place, was reserved for the main purpose of a -final refuge in time of siege. No one who examines the sites of castles -like Lincoln, Launceston, or Clare, with their formidable mounts, can -fail to realise that the mount was an inconvenient place of residence, -and that domestic buildings would be naturally provided in the annexed -bailey. Bishop Bek’s thirteenth-century hall at Durham, built against -the western curtain of the bailey, stands upon the substructure of a -far earlier building. The domestic buildings in the bailey at Guildford -appear to be of earlier date than the stone tower on the mount; while -at Christchurch in Hampshire (123), the dwelling-house next the river -and the tower on the mount appear to be almost contemporary. - -Castles which, for reasons already explained, were surrounded from -the beginning with a stone wall, and had at first no regular keep, -contain even better examples of the existence of a separate hall. -The eleventh-century hall at Richmond is almost perfect, although -some additions, made nearly a century later to the upper part of -the structure, have led to the mistaken attribution of a later date -to the whole building.[225] At Ludlow, mingled with the fabric of -the fourteenth-century hall, are clear indications of the earlier -stone hall, built, as at Richmond, against the curtain on the least -accessible side of the inner ward. The fabric of the great hall at -Chepstow, much enriched and beautified in the thirteenth century, is -contemporary with the foundation of the castle in the eleventh century. -Part, at any rate, of the substructure of the hall at Newark belongs to -the castle founded in the twelfth century by Bishop Alexander, although -the whole building on that side of the enclosure, with the exception of -an angle-tower, bears witness to reconstruction and repair at two later -periods. At Porchester, again, the substructure of the hall contains a -considerable amount of early Norman work, which may be attributed to -the time of Henry I. - -The situation and plan of the hall remained very much the same -throughout the middle ages. What we find at Richmond, Ludlow, -Chepstow, or Durham, we find also at Manorbier, Caerphilly, Harlech, -and Carnarvon, at Warwick and at Naworth. The domestic buildings were -placed against the curtain on one side or at an end of the inner ward, -and preferably where a precipice or steep slope made the assault of -the curtain on that side difficult or impossible. This position is -well illustrated in the fortified thirteenth-century house of Aydon -in Northumberland. Here there was, on the side of entrance, a large -walled outer ward, or, as it was called in the north of England, a -“barmkin.”[226] The house was built round two sides of a walled inner -courtyard, the hall and main apartments standing on the brink of a -deep ravine, where they were safe from approach or from the peril of -siege-engines. The curtain was therefore pierced with window-openings -of a fairly large size, which gave the house more light and comfort -internally than would have been possible upon a more exposed face of -the site. The hall at Warkworth (49) was built against a solid curtain -upon the steepest side of the peninsula occupied by the castle, and, -although there were no window-openings in the curtain at the level of -the hall, it was pierced by a postern, through which the kitchen could -be supplied, at the end nearest the tower. Castles on comparatively -level sites show the same disposition. At Cardiff (191), the domestic -buildings are on the west side of the enclosure, built against the -curtain, and protected by the river, and bear the same relation in the -plan to the main entrance and the shell-keep on the mount, as the hall -at Warkworth bears to the gateway and the mount with its later strong -house.[227] - -[Illustration: Cardiff Castle; Plan] - -The plan of the hall and its adjacent buildings was, and continued -to be, that of the ordinary dwelling-house. The _aula_ of Harold at -Bosham in Sussex is represented in the Bayeux tapestry (36) as a house -with a basement, apparently vaulted, and an upper floor approached by -an external staircase. No division of the upper floor is shown: it -consists apparently of one large room. This plan, with the division of -the hall by a cross-wall into a main and smaller chamber, is precisely -what we find, at the end of the century after the Conquest, at the -large town house in Bury St Edmunds known as Moyses hall, or at the -manor-house of Boothby Pagnell in Lincolnshire. It is represented in -manor-houses of the later Gothic period at the so-called “Goxhill -priory” in Lincolnshire or at the house of the bishops of Lincoln at -Liddington in Rutland. Its most familiar survival in non-military -architecture is in the halls of several of the Oxford colleges, like -Christ Church or New college. In the plan of the monastery, the frater -or dining-hall followed the same lines of an upper room upon a vaulted -substructure. Similarly, the hall of a castle was simply an ordinary -_aula_ placed within an enclosure walled for military purposes. The -hall at Christchurch is the exact counterpart of Harold’s _aula_ in -the Bayeux tapestry. It is a rectangular building, probably of the -third quarter of the twelfth century, with a basement, originally -vaulted, and lighted by narrow loops. The first floor formed one large -apartment, and was well lighted with double window openings, one of -which, at the south end, received special architectural treatment. -There was a fireplace in the east wall, on the side next the stream: -the cylindrical chimney-shaft still remains. The entrance, near the -south end of the west wall, was probably approached by an outer stair -at right angles to the wall, and led into the lower end of the hall, -opposite the daïs for the high table. The fireplace, set diagonally -to the entrance, warmed the daïs and the body of the hall: the end -near the doorway, corresponding to the “screens” of the ordinary hall, -was probably left free for the coming and going of the servants. The -basement was simply a cellar and storehouse. It had a doorway in the -west wall, while in the east wall was a gateway communicating with -the water. The elevation is nearly identical with that of the house -at Boothby Pagnell; but at Boothby Pagnell a cross-wall divides both -upper floor and basement into larger and smaller chambers; while -at Christchurch there was at the south-east corner a rectangular -garde-robe turret, built out into the stream, which kept the vents from -both basement and upper floor continually flushed.[228] - -The division of the first floor into a larger and smaller apartment -corresponds to the division of the ordinary dwelling-house into hall or -common-room of the house, and bower or withdrawing-room and sleeping -apartment for the chief members of the family.[229] In the developed -plan of the medieval private house, the small vaults below the bower -became the cellar, and, as at Manorbier, a vice was provided by which -wine could be brought directly from it to the high table. The bower -or solar[230] itself was known in large houses as the great chamber, -and access to it was obtained through a door near one end of the -cross-wall behind the daïs. There was, however, a variation upon this -plan in which the hall and bower are on a different floor-level, and -this appears at a fairly early date. In this case the hall occupied the -whole height of the basement and first floor, and was entered from the -ground-level of the bailey: the cellar, in this case, was on a level -with the floor of the hall, and the solar was reached from the daïs by -a stair. This plan became very common in the later Gothic period; and -is well illustrated in manor-houses like Haddon and Compton Wyniates, -and in the colleges of Cambridge, where the common-room or parlour took -the place of the cellar, and the solar was occupied by the master’s -lodging. But it is also found in castles and fortified houses, as at -Berkeley and Stokesay. An indication of its employment at a date not -long after the Norman conquest is found in the story of the insult -offered to Robert of Normandy by William Rufus and Henry I. They came -to visit him, about the year 1078, at the castle of L’Aigle, where he -was staying, either in the constable’s house or some dwelling near the -castle. William and Henry played dice “upon the solar,” and indulged -in horseplay, which took the form of making a deafening noise, and -pouring water on Robert and his followers, who were below. Robert lost -his temper, and rushed into the dining-hall (_cenaculum_) to punish -his brothers: the quarrel, stopped for the time being by their father, -was the beginning of the long feud which ended for Robert in his -confinement at Cardiff. The mention of the “solar” distinctly implies -a room upon the upper floor, probably at some elevation above the -hall.[231] - -This alternative plan supplied more direct communication with the -kitchen than was possible, where the hall was upon an upper floor; and -in connection with it, a kitchen and its accompanying offices are very -frequently found at the lower end, near the entry of the hall. This -became, in manor-houses and in the colleges of Cambridge, the normal -position of the kitchen, buttery, and pantry, divided from the body of -the hall by the “screens.” Most of the cooking in the earlier castles -must have been done either in temporary sheds or in the open air: the -basement of the hall, which, in later manor-houses, was sometimes used -as a kitchen, was not so used at an early period. The apartment in -a corner of the cleverly planned first floor of the keep at Castle -Rising was probably a kitchen, and is a rare instance of a room set -apart for this purpose before the end of the twelfth century. It must -be remembered, however, that the domestic buildings of castles were -very often, as at Ludlow, enlarged and entirely rebuilt, until they -became, as at Cardiff and Warwick, splendid mansions; and details with -regard to the original arrangement of the lesser apartments are thus -hard to recover. - -[Illustration: LUDLOW: interior of building west of great hall] - -At Warkworth (49), probably a little before 1200, a house of -considerable extent, including more than one private apartment and -a kitchen, was built against, and at the same time with the, west -curtain.[232] Up to this time, the castle had been an ordinary -mount-and-bailey stronghold with timber defences, and no earlier -stonework remains. The new house was much beautified by additions -made in the fifteenth century, but the plan was little altered. Its -central part was the hall, parallel with the curtain which it joined. -The entrance was in the side wall next the bailey, and led, as usual, -into the lower end of the hall, which occupied the full height of -the house, and thus formed the only internal means of communication -between the lord’s and the servants’ quarters. An unusual feature of -the hall, which cannot have been well lighted, was an eastern aisle, -over which the sloping roof was probably continued. At the upper -end, behind the daïs, the cellar was entered directly from the hall: -a straight stair next the curtain gave access to a landing, from -which a doorway gave access to the great chamber. The great chamber -communicated with a polygonal angle tower, called by the curious -name of “Cradyfargus,”[233] the first floor of which, next the great -chamber, may have been the chamber of the master of the house, while -the upper floor was probably used by the ladies. Nearly at right angles -to the great chamber, against the south curtain, was a chapel, of -which enough remains to show us that the ground-floor, entered from -the bailey, was used by the servants and garrison: while the west end -was divided into two stories, the upper one of which was entered from -the private apartments, and was a gallery for the use of the lord and -his family. It is difficult to speak positively of the arrangements of -the kitchen, which stood against the west curtain at the other end of -the hall. It may originally, like the kitchen at Berkeley, have had no -direct communication with the hall: the passage and offices between, -in their present state of ruin, are fifteenth-century additions or -reconstructions. But all the elements of the larger English house are -here. The chief alterations in the fifteenth century were the building -of a porch and gateway-tower in front of the hall entrance, and the -insertion of a lofty turret, with a vice and vaulted vestibule to the -great chamber, to the north-eastern angle of the hall, where it blocks -the last bay of the aisle. - -An aisled hall, as at Warkworth, was a very exceptional feature. There -are, however, a few existing examples of a hall with a nave and two -aisles, the most famous of which is the thirteenth-century hall at -Winchester. The midland castles of Leicester and Oakham also had aisled -halls: that at Leicester was divided by arcades of timber, and still -exists, although many of its original features, including the timber -columns, have been removed or obscured. The hall at Oakham has been -more fortunate. This castle, upon a flat site which had no strategic -advantages, was really an _aula_ or manor-house, enclosed by a strong -earthen bank, and was probably not surrounded by a wall until the -thirteenth century. Within this enclosure Walkelin de Ferrers, towards -the end of the twelfth century, built an aisled hall of four bays, the -architectural details of which are of unusual beauty, and of great -importance in the history of early Gothic art in England. The building -runs east and west, the original entrance, from the ground-level of -the bailey, being, as usual, in the last bay of a side-wall, in this -case the easternmost bay of the south wall.[234] The daïs was at the -west end; and two doors, which probably communicated with the kitchen -and buttery, remain in the east wall. The aisles would doubtless be -kept clear of tables, to facilitate the service from the kitchen.[235] -At either end of the building, the arcades spring, not from responds, -but from corbels. Semicircular responds would have interfered with -the benches behind the high table, and with the free passage of the -servants between the kitchen and the aisles.[236] The columns are -slender cylinders of Clipsham stone: the capitals are tall, and carved -with a great variety of stiff-stalk foliage, with which are mingled -bands of nail-head and dog-tooth. The arches are rounded: dog-tooth -is used in the hood-mouldings, which rest upon figure-corbels. The -classical character of the foliage, and the refined sculpture of the -figures and heads in the corbels throughout the hall, have analogies in -one or two other buildings of the district: they recall very closely -the early Gothic work of the Burgundian province, and its English -derivatives at Canterbury and Chichester. Nothing, however, is known -of the masons employed; and the fabric has no documentary history. In -the low side-walls are double window-openings, each with a sculptured -tympanum beneath an enclosing arch: the pier dividing each of the -windows is faced with a shaft, and the jambs are adorned with elaborate -dog-tooth. These windows may be compared with those of the aisled -hall of the episcopal palace at Lincoln, built about a quarter of a -century later, where the arcades at both ends sprang from corbels. A -close parallel to the arrangements of the hall at Oakham is provided -by the contemporary hall, built by Bishop Pudsey at Auckland castle, -near Durham. Here, again, the so-called castle was simply an _aula_ -without the strong earthworks which give Oakham a military character. -The proportions of the Auckland hall are larger, and its architecture -more simple, but with even more advanced Gothic characteristics. At the -end of the thirteenth century, considerable alterations were made in -the structure, and at the Restoration the hall was converted by Bishop -Cosin into a chapel.[237] This involved the blocking up of the original -entrance, the position of which exactly corresponded to that of Oakham. -A new doorway was made in the west wall, and the bay which originally -was set apart for the daïs was converted into an ante-chapel. In -neither case do any other contemporary buildings remain: the mansion at -Auckland, on the west side of the old hall, is a building of several -periods, of which the earliest existing portion is not earlier than the -reign of Henry VII. - -[Illustration: DURHAM CASTLE - -HISTORICAL GROUND PLAN] - -Hugh Pudsey (1153-95), the prelate responsible for the hall at -Auckland, did much to increase the splendour of the episcopal -castle at Durham (199). Durham castle is an excellent example of a -mount-and-bailey fortress on a strong triangular site, with precipitous -natural defences on the north and west. The entrance was on the one -accessible side, from the plateau on which the cathedral and monastery -stood. At the apex of the site, on the right of the entrance, was the -mount, with a shell-keep on its summit; while to the left, along the -west side of the bailey, was the original hall. The eleventh-century -chapel was on the north side of the bailey, nearly opposite the -entrance. Pudsey’s chief work was the construction of a long building -of three stories in connection with the north curtain. The eastern part -of the basement was formed by the early chapel; the rest was probably -devoted to store-rooms and cellars. On the first floor was a great -hall, entered by a doorway (201) which may fairly be called the most -magnificent example of late Norman Romanesque art in England. Above -this, on the second floor, approached by a vice in the south-east -corner, was another hall, known as the Constable’s hall, and to-day as -the Norman gallery. The walls of this upper structure were lightened by -their construction as a continuous arcade, the arches forming frames to -window-openings, and the piers between them being faced with detached -shafts in couples (203). The internal arrangements of this building -are now much obscured by the partition of the lower hall into several -large rooms; while the south part of the upper hall has been cut up by -smaller partitions. Early in the sixteenth century a new chapel was -built on the east side of the lower hall, and against the south wall of -the basement and first floor was made a stone gallery of two stories. -The outer stair to the lower hall was then taken away; but Bishop -Pudsey’s doorway was left, and light was thrown upon it by a large -mullioned window in the outer wall of the gallery.[238] - -Meanwhile, about the end of the thirteenth century, Bishop Bek, who -also improved upon Pudsey’s work at Auckland, raised against the -west curtain, and upon the substructure of the early hall, the great -banqueting-hall, which is now used as the dining-hall of University -college. This hall, again, has inevitably been much altered, but -its actual plan and arrangements are very fairly maintained to-day, -and the long two-light windows with simple geometrical tracery in -the side walls represent, with some restoration of stone-work, its -original lighting. The entrance, up a flight of stairs and through a -porch added by Bishop Cosin, is in the south end of the east wall, -and leads into screens roofed by a gallery, on the south of which -are the kitchen and servants’ offices. A doorway in the east wall -led from the daïs to the bishop’s private rooms; but at this end the -older arrangements were altered by the construction of Tunstall’s -gallery in the sixteenth century, and, later, still, by the addition -of Cosin’s splendid Renaissance staircase—alterations which provided -covered access from Bek’s hall to Pudsey’s building at right angles -to it. The buildings just described are some of the most beautiful -and instructive remains of domestic architecture in England, and have -no military characteristics. The strength of the castle, however, was -not forgotten. No English castle, even when Bamburgh and Richmond -are remembered, presents a more formidable defence than the curtain, -pierced by a few spare openings and by the narrow western windows of -Bek’s hall, which revets and crowns the cliff above the Wear; while, in -the fourteenth century, Bishop Hatfield (1345-81) replaced the older -keep by a new and probably more lofty polygonal shell. - -[Illustration: Durham Castle; Doorway] - -At Durham the buildings of Pudsey and Bek alike stand upon basements, -which were used as cellars and store-rooms; and the preference for -first-floor halls in castles was doubtless due to the necessity of -providing plenty of room for magazines, both for provisions and arms, -within a confined space, and keeping the muster-ground in the centre -of the bailey as clear as possible. At Newark (157), where the ground -fell away towards the river, the hall was built on the slope, and was -entered from the level of the bailey, the slope being utilised for the -construction of a large vaulted basement, lighted by loops from the -river side, and communicating with the water by a sloping passage and -a gateway opening on a small quay. The use of every available space -for storage is illustrated at Carew castle in Pembrokeshire, where -the whole space beneath the lesser hall and its adjacent buildings -is occupied by cellars, while the basement of the greater hall, on -the opposite side of the courtyard, appears to have been used as -stables. At Pembroke a large natural cavern below the hall and its -adjacent buildings was turned to use as a lower store-house. A vice -was constructed in the rock from a ground-floor chamber north of the -hall, and the mouth of the cavern was closed by a wall, in which was a -gateway, opening upon a path from the water-side. - -[Illustration: DURHAM: arcading on south side of Constable’s hall] - -If Henry II. may be given the chief credit for the construction of -rectangular keeps in castles, Henry III. was almost as active in -building halls. The finest example of his work now remaining is at -Winchester. At the Tower of London, at Scarborough, and at Newcastle, -the name alone of his halls, rectangular buildings with high-pitched -roofs, remains. But, in and after his reign, the hall and the adjacent -domestic buildings became a fixed feature of the plan of the castle. -In castles which, up to this time, may have possessed small and -inconvenient halls, or possibly halls built merely of timber, new -and more permanent domestic buildings were constructed. Thus, at -Rockingham castle, the beautiful doorway of the thirteenth-century hall -(205), with deeply undercut mouldings and jamb-shafts with foliated -capitals, still forms the entrance to the house of the sixteenth -and seventeenth centuries, the hall of which is probably of the exact -dimensions of its medieval predecessor.[239] In castles which are the -most perfect examples of fortification, such as Caerphilly or Conway, -the hall forms an integral part of the plan, filling its natural place -in the design; and of these, Caerphilly was completed about the end of -the reign of Henry III. The enthusiasm of Henry for fine architecture, -domestic as well as ecclesiastical, was imitated by many of his -powerful subjects; and it is actually from this period that we may -trace that prominence of the domestic element in our castles which was -eventually cultivated at the expense of fortification. - -[Illustration: Rockingham Castle; Doorway of hall] - -In the dwelling-houses, often of palatial size, which grew up within -castles, and reached their perfect development in the thirteenth and -fourteenth centuries, the main apartments, in addition to the hall, -were the great chamber, the kitchen with its offices, and the chapel. -The normal plan, as already shown, was that of the first-floor hall, -with the great chamber at one end, and the kitchen at the other. The -plan of the chapel was not fixed, but, where it formed part of the -block of buildings, it is usually found in connection with the great -chamber end of the hall. - -The main points of the hall may be briefly recapitulated. The entrance -was invariably in the side wall next the bailey, at the end nearest -the usual place for the kitchen. This end was screened off from the -hall by curtains or by a wooden partition containing one or more doors. -This shut out draught; while the passage thus formed was generally -covered by its own ceiling, the space above forming a gallery, which -was entered from a vice at a corner of the end wall. At the further -end of the hall was the daïs with the high table, at right angles to -which were placed the long tables in the body of the hall. The hall -was covered by a high-pitched timber roof, the principals of which -were borne by corbels in the side walls. In early examples, warmth was -supplied by a large hearth in the middle of the floor, a little below -the daïs, the smoke from which escaped through a louvre in the roof -above; but it became customary to make a fireplace in one of the side -walls.[240] Light was admitted through window-openings in the side wall -next the ward; but, where the outer wall of the castle was secure from -attack, as at Warwick or Ludlow, windows were made there also. These -windows were usually of two lights, divided by a mullion, with simple -tracery in the head. They also had a transom, below which they were -closed by shutters, the upper part of the window alone being glazed. In -the hall at Ludlow, the date of which is about 1300, there were three -two-light windows next the ward, while the curtain was pierced by three -single-light openings. The hearth stood in the body of the hall just -below the daïs, and was carried by a pier in the cellar beneath. In the -fifteenth century the middle window next the ward was blocked, and a -fireplace inserted: the hearth was then removed. The hall formed the -chief living-room of the house, and in it the majority of the lord’s -retinue not only had their meals, but slept. - -The great chamber, as time went on, became the nucleus of a number of -private apartments. In the most simple examples, it is a rectangular -apartment behind the daïs, communicating with it directly through a -doorway on one side of the end wall. Where the hall occupied the ground -floor, a vice, or, as at Warkworth, a straight stair, furnished an -entrance to it. At Ludlow, where the kitchen was a detached building, -and at Stokesay (207), there was a first-floor chamber at both ends -of the hall. The domestic buildings at Ludlow are very symmetrically -arranged, the hall, in the middle, being slightly recessed between two -projecting blocks of building, each with a chamber on the first floor -(195). Of these, that at the east end of the hall, behind the daïs, was -evidently the more important; and, in the fifteenth century, it was on -this side that an additional block of private apartments was built. -From each floor of the great chamber block a large garde-robe tower was -entered: this tower projects from the north curtain of the castle, and -was added when the earlier hall was remodelled and the hall and its -adjoining blocks assumed their present shape. - -[Illustration: Stokesay] - -[Illustration: Manorbier Castle; Outer stair to Chapel] - -Manorbier castle contains an interesting example of the enlargement -of domestic buildings, with a solar block at either end of the hall. -The castle stands on rising ground in a deep valley, about half a -mile from the sea. The inner ward or castle proper is surrounded by -a curtain, with a gatehouse in the east wall. The dwelling-house is -upon the west side of the ward, at the end opposite the main entrance, -and consists of two distinct portions. The earlier consists of a -first-floor hall and great chamber above cellars. There was a floor -above the great chamber, probably forming a bower for the ladies of -the household, the hall corresponding in height to these two upper -stages. The present entrance to the hall is in the side wall at the end -next the great chamber, and was probably made, with the outer stair -against the wall, in the thirteenth century. The hall itself with its -adjacent buildings appears to be originally of the later part of the -twelfth century: the cellars below have semicircular barrel vaults. In -the second half of the thirteenth century a new block of buildings was -made at the opposite or south end of the hall. It was now probably that -the new entrance was made. The position of the daïs seems to have been -reversed, and a window in the south end-wall of the hall blocked by a -fireplace. Behind this wall, and entered by a doorway in its west end, -was the new great chamber, a long, narrow building, with its principal -axis at right angles to that of the hall, and with a floor above. At -each end of the south wall of this apartment is a passage. That at the -west end passes along the line of the curtain to a garde-robe tower -which projects at the south-west angle of the castle: the passage is -still roofed with flat slabs on continuous corbelling, and is well -lighted by loops in the curtain. The other passage, at the south-east -corner of the great chamber, forms a lobby to a large chapel, which -was built across the south-west angle of the ward, so that a small -triangular yard was left between it and the curtain. There is a -separate outer stair to the chapel (208), placed, like the stair to the -hall, at right angles to the wall. The whole group of buildings, with -its two outer stairs, is unexcelled for picturesqueness in any castle. - -The kitchen at Manorbier was placed, at any rate when the -thirteenth-century alterations were undertaken (probably about 1260), -at right angles to the hall and older great chamber, against the north -curtain. Owing to the confinement of the space within the curtain, and -the growing necessity of private accommodation, the position of the -kitchen was not fixed so regularly in the castle as in the ordinary -dwelling-house. At Berkeley (186), where the hall was built against the -east curtain of the inner ward, the kitchen is a polygonal building, -divided from the screens by a buttery, and occupying a more or less -normal place in the plan. At Warkworth (49), as we have noticed, the -kitchen is in its proper place, near the entrance end of the hall, but -may have been at first a separate structure. The original position of -the kitchen at Cardiff (191) seems to have conformed to this plan. The -desirability of placing the kitchen within easy reach of the hall is -obvious. At Kenilworth, where the magnificent hall, built towards the -end of the fourteenth century, occupies the whole north side of the -inner ward, and is on a first floor above a vaulted cellar, the private -apartments formed a wing against the west curtain of the ward, while -the kitchen was against the east curtain, and was within easy reach -of the stair to the hall, and the passage below it which led into the -cellar. The kitchen at Ludlow (106) was a separate building, opposite -the entrance to the hall and the western solar block, and placed -against the north outer wall of the small courtyard which covers the -keep. In the two great Edwardian castles of Conway and Carnarvon, where -the halls were large and the space limited, the kitchens were built -against the curtain opposite the hall.[241] - -The chapel was also a variable factor in the plan. It has already been -remarked that, in some early castles, the chapel was a collegiate -church, standing separately within the precincts of the castle, and -sometimes, as at Hastings, filling up, with the houses of the dean and -canons or their deputies, a very considerable part of the enclosure. -Indeed, nearly all the ruins left within the curtain at Hastings are -those of the large cruciform church and the buildings in connection -with it. At Ludlow the Norman chapel was a detached building in the -inner ward (106). This was the private chapel of the lord of the -castle, and in the sixteenth century was joined by a gallery to the -block of buildings at the east end of the hall: the nave was then -divided into two floors, so that the first floor formed a private -gallery or solar, while the household used the ground-floor. This -method of division of the west end of the chapel into two floors is -very usual: it was employed twice at Warkworth, both in the chapel -attached to the domestic buildings already described, and in the -chapel of the later tower-house on the mount. It may also be seen -in the chapel at Berkeley, and in many manor-houses, as at Compton -Wyniates. At Ludlow we have noticed that there was a second chapel for -the garrison in the outer ward, built in the fourteenth century: with -this the arrangement at the Tower of London may be compared, where -the royal chapel of St John is in the White tower, but the garrison -chapel of St Peter was built on the north side of the inner ward. The -chapel at Kenilworth was against the south wall of the outer ward. -There was a chapel on the south side of the inner ward at Alnwick. As -a rule, however, only one chapel would be provided. The chapels found -in tower-keeps have already been discussed: with the exception of -Newcastle and Old Sarum, they were, as a rule, private chapels or mere -oratories. - -In later castles, two considerations determined the planning of the -chapel. It was placed so that the altar should be as nearly as possible -against the east wall, and so that there should be direct access from -the private apartments to the gallery at the west end. These conditions -are met both in the earlier and later chapels at Warkworth: they can -be traced in the plan of Bodiam and other late medieval castles. At -Berkeley (186) where the solar block was at right angles to the hall, -against the south, or, more correctly, the south-west curtain, the -chapel fills the angle between the buildings, and the entrance is -masked by a vestibule from which a vice led to the private apartments. -The altar is placed rather north of east, against the wall at the back -of the hall daïs, and the gallery at the opposite end was entered -from the great chamber. The main axis of the chapel is at an obtuse -angle to that of the hall, and a vestry was made in the south-east -corner, where the wall dividing it from the hall is thickest. In the -plan of the great Welsh castles of the later part of the thirteenth -century the chapel was usually in close connection with the domestic -buildings. At Conway, where there is also a beautiful oratory, with -a vaulted chancel, on the first floor of the north-east tower, the -chapel was formed by screening off the eastern portion of the great -hall. At Harlech the chapel was built against the north curtain, the -solar block probably occupying the angle between chapel and hall. The -chapel at Kidwelly was in the two upper stages of the south-east tower -of the inner ward, and was in close communication with the hall and the -apartments adjoining it. The position of the beautiful little chapel at -Beaumaris is somewhat isolated, on the first floor of the tower in the -middle of the east curtain of the inner ward. The only communication -with the hall block on the north side of the court was through a long -and narrow passage in the thickness of the curtain; and the chapel is -too small to have served for the devotions of a large garrison. It was -so arranged, however, that, if the entrance to the tower were left -open, the service might be followed by worshippers in the bailey below. -Ample room, however, was given to the congregation in most cases: the -first-floor chapel at Manorbier is a chamber of considerable size. It -has a pointed barrel-vault and stands above a cellar, which also has a -pointed barrel-vault and contains a fireplace. The fashion of founding -collegiate establishments in castles did not cease until the end of the -middle ages. The chapel—the third within the castle—which was begun -during the fifteenth century at Warkworth bears witness to an intention -of this kind on the part of one of the earls of Northumberland; but the -actual details of the proposed foundation are not known, and probably -were never placed on paper. - - - - -CHAPTER IX - -CASTLES OF THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY: THE FORTIFICATION OF THE CURTAIN - - -The keep had a traditional importance in the scheme of the castle, -and the main energy of the castle-builders of the twelfth century -was directed towards strengthening its power of resistance. But the -improvement of siege artillery naturally turned their attention to the -strengthening of the outer defences as well. The day of the palisade -was past, and the stone curtain called for more scientific treatment -than it had yet received. In the thirteenth century, then, military -engineers began to concentrate their ingenuity upon the outer walls -and entrances of the castle. Their interest was transferred by degrees -from the keep to the curtain, while, at the same time, the domestic -employment of the keep ceased in favour of the more comfortable -quarters against the castle wall. In this way, as scientific -fortification developed, the keep dropped into a secondary position, or -was left out of the plan altogether. - -[Illustration: PEMBROKE: inner side of gatehouse] - -In tracing this gradual disappearance of the keep, it should be kept -in mind that the stone keep, when we first meet with it, is actually a -supplement of more permanent material added to a palisaded enclosure. -In early walled enclosures, like Richmond or Ludlow, the stone defences -made the special provision of a keep unnecessary: the whole castle, -protected by its stone wall, had in itself the strength of a keep. It -was only when it became likely that the stone curtain might show less -resistance than its builders anticipated, that, in both the castles -just mentioned, a tower-keep was provided. In both cases, the tower -stood in the forefront of the defence of the principal ward of the -castle. In the first instance it protected the curtain, while, if all -else failed, its use, the primary use of such buildings, as an ultimate -place of retirement for the defenders, could be demonstrated. During -the reign of Henry II., the stone keep, whether a tower or a shell on -the mound, was the dominating feature of the stone-walled castle. At -Conisbrough and Pembroke (181) the great tower still keeps its pride -of place, but the curtains of the ward in which it stands have -been built or reconstructed with a view to effectual flanking; while -the two semicircular towers which guarded the southern curtain of the -inner ward at Pembroke were evidently an addition, after the keep had -been built. In castles like Manorbier, the oldest parts of which are -of the later part of the twelfth century, the builders returned to the -original keepless plan of Richmond and Ludlow. The care, which, in the -earlier castles, had been expended upon a single rallying point in -the scheme of defence, was now applied to the whole outer wall of the -castle, so that it began to offer a connected front to an attack. - -During the transition, however, the keep, as we have seen, received -its full share of attention. At Château-Gaillard (163) it was an -integral part of one united design, the outer defences of which remain -to be described. The great tower is at the highest point of the inner -or third ward, which forms an irregular oval. But, before reaching -this ward, two outer lines of defence had to be forced. There was -only one possible approach for a besieging army, along the isthmus -on the south-east side of the cliff. On this side the castle proper -was protected by a powerful outwork, which offered a sharp angle to -the isthmus. When Philip Augustus began to use his machines against -the castle in February 1203-4, the round tower at the apex of this -horn-work[242] was the main object of his attack. The sloping sides -of the angle were flanked by two smaller round towers, while the -entrance, close to the north angle, was covered on one side by a -cylindrical tower, to which there was probably a corresponding tower -in the opposite curtain. The horn-work was surrounded by an outer -ditch. The strength of the curtain seems to have been little affected -by the siege-engines. Breaches, both here and in the inner ward, were -not made until Philip’s miners had weakened the masonry by boring -galleries beneath it. A very deep ditch with perpendicular sides, cut -in the chalk, stretched across the whole ridge, and divided the outwork -from the middle ward, which was capped at the angles by cylindrical -towers, and contained buildings of which the substructures, and some -cellars excavated in the chalk, are left. The curtain of this ward -was continued along the face of the precipice and the north-eastern -slope, so as practically to enclose the inner ward. The two wards, -however, were not concentric, for the inner ward occupied one end of -the space enclosed by the middle ward, from which it was divided -by a ditch. The wall of the inner ward was the most remarkable and -original of the defences of the castle. Its whole outer face, save on -the side next the precipice, was formed of a series of convex curves -intersecting with each other, so that no flat surface was left. The -wall is solid, and, looking at its fluted outer surface, we may well -admire Philip’s military skill, which found it a not too formidable -obstacle. A gateway in the east face gave access to the inner ward from -the narrowest portion of the middle ward, and the ditch at this point -was originally crossed by a stone causeway. The projecting spur of the -great tower faced the gateway. The whole formidable design was perfect -from the point of view of flanking, while the plan was a step towards -the concentric arrangement of one ward within another. The prominence -of the keep in the plan was, however, an archaic feature; and the -history of the siege of 1204 shows very clearly that the great tower -was practically a superfluity, and that the last hopes of the defenders -were centred in the wall of the inner ward. When Philip’s miners had -endangered its stability, and his engines were brought to play upon the -weakened stonework, their hope was lost.[243] - -The inventive skill shown in the inner wall of Château-Gaillard was not -displayed again in the same form. But a step in the flanking of the -curtain by round towers is seen in the wall of Conisbrough (217). Here -the inner ward is nearly oval, and the southern half of the curtain, -in which is contained the entrance from the outworks, is strengthened -by small solid towers with battering bases, projecting some two-thirds -of a circle from the wall.[244] Such solid projections for flanking -purposes are found at Scarborough and Knaresborough, and could be -easily added to an earlier wall, when necessity required. For the -convenience of the defenders, however, larger towers with rooms on each -floor were desirable; and the actual improvement of the defences of the -curtain is seen in the multiplication of such towers, so as to leave no -part of the wall unflanked. The circular or polygonal form was almost -universally adopted for them. - -[Illustration: CONISBROUGH: barbican of inner bailey] - -[Illustration: MANORBIER CASTLE from south-west] - -Warkworth (49) is an example of a twelfth-century castle in which an -approach was made to an adequately defended curtain, although with long -distances between the towers. The arrangement, however, is a complete -contrast to the haphazard projection of towers from earlier curtains, -as at Ludlow. The castle stands high on the right bank of the Coquet: -the river bends round it, so that the only level approach is from -the plateau on the west side, and the town climbs the tongue of land -between the castle and the river.[245] The mount is at the apex of -the castle site, immediately above the town. On the west side of the -enclosure the curtain, which is strong and thick, is unbroken by any -tower: against the inner face are the domestic buildings. The south -wall, which contains the gatehouse, is flanked by two angle-towers, -on the west by the tower known as “Cradyfargus,” and on the east by a -square tower, called the Amble tower. In the east wall, which commanded -the ascent from the town, is a half-octagon tower, in each face of -which is a huge loop for a cross-bow, so that a few archers could -effectually rake the path outside with their fire. Of these towers, -Cradyfargus projects into the castle enclosure with a blunt angle, -its walls on this side being a mere continuation of the curtain. The -basement was entered from the cellar behind the hall, the first floor -from the great chamber above, and the second floor by a stair in the -thickness of the wall from the vestibule or landing, west of the great -chamber. The projection of the eastern tower is entirely outward: its -internal face was flat. There was a basement and two floors: the first -floor had an external stair from the ward, but it does not appear how -the second floor was reached, though the jamb of a door may still be -seen. The east tower had a garde-robe near the entrance of the basement -and on the first floor: in Cradyfargus there are only traces of -garde-robe arrangements. Although the space enclosed by the walls was -large, and the flanking by no means perfect, the two most assailable -sides of the fortress were very secure. The gatehouse, a building of -about the year 1200 (221), formed an intermediate projection in the -south wall between Cradyfargus and the Amble tower: the gateway is -recessed between two half-octagon turrets. The preference of polygonal -forms for the defences of this castle is rather characteristic of the -north of England. There was, however, a conservative spirit in this -district, which is seen in the retention of the rectangular form for -the Amble tower. Even in a fourteenth-century castle like Dunstanburgh -the angle towers are rectangular in form; while the “pele-tower” of -the northern borders, throughout the middle ages, shows no important -variation from the square form. - -The importance given to the gatehouse at Warkworth was a sign of the -times. We have seen how, at Lewes and Tickhill, the first thought -of the builders was to provide their earthworks with a stone house -of entry. Norman gatehouses were very simple in construction. The -gatehouse at Warkworth, on the other hand, was anything but simple in -its arrangements, and all the forethought possible was taken for its -defence. There are three stories, the lowest of which is the vaulted -hall of entrance to the castle, flanked, in the ground-floor of the -half-octagon towers, by guard-rooms described in the survey of 1567 as -a porter’s lodge and a prison. The defences of the passage need close -attention. The entrance was closed by a gate which opened outwards, -and stood about 4 feet in advance of the portcullis: the space between -was commanded by arrow-loops in the walls of the guardrooms. The -herse of the portcullis seems to have been worked from the second -floor of the gatehouse:[246] the upper and broader portion ran in a -groove which ceases at the level of the string-course below the vault -of the passage, while the lower descended to the ground. Beyond the -portcullis, the passage was kept under observation through cross-loops -in the side walls. The vault stopped 5 feet short of the inner gateway, -and the passage was covered by a wooden roof. On each side of the inner -gateway were the entrances to the guard-rooms, which flanked the whole -passage. - -[Illustration: WARKWORTH: gatehouse] - -[Illustration: WARKWORTH: tower on mount] - -The plan of the castle gatehouse at Warkworth was that of the great -majority of medieval gatehouses, whether in castles or in the walls -of fortified towns. The ground-floor of the main block of building, -which generally had two upper floors, contained the hall of entry, and -was flanked by two cylindrical or octagonal towers, the lowest stories -of which were guard-rooms, and were pierced with loops commanding the -approach and the passage. Usually the gateway was placed at the back -of an arched recess, which formed a porch. The position of the gate -and portcullis at Warkworth was rather exceptional. Ordinarily the -portcullis descended in front of the gate, which opened inwards, and -was secured, when closed, by one or more draw-bars. This, however, was -impossible, where the gate, as at Warkworth, opened outwards, so that -the usual arrangement had to be reversed. But, while the actual plan -of the gatehouse kept its general characteristics with little change, -the defences of the entrance were multiplied. Thus the Byward tower, -the outer gatehouse of the Tower of London, had an outer portcullis -in front of a wooden door opening inwards, behind which was a second -portcullis, blocking the entrance to the inner and wider portion of the -passage, which had a timber ceiling. In addition to this, between the -outer portcullis and the gate, the vault was crossed by a rib, pierced -with three holes, which allowed the defenders to harass an attacking -party from above, and also could be used for strengthening the gate -in time of siege by a timber framework, the upper ends of which were -fixed in the holes. Such holes, which were not merely machicolations -in the vault, are found elsewhere, as in the gatehouses of Pembroke -and Warwick castles and the west gatehouse of the town of Southampton. -In this last case, a single rectangular gate-tower projected from the -inner face of the wall only, next the town. The gate of the passage -through the ground floor was defended upon its outer face by these -holes alone: there were two portcullises, but both were upon the inner -side of the gate. It is possible that such holes were originally -left to fix the centering of the vault when it was first built: -they converge towards one another, and probably were not filled up -afterwards, in view of their defensive use.[247] - -One prominent feature, however, of the defences of a gateway, as time -went on, was the provision of machicolations, in the shape of long -rectangular slits, in the vault of the passage and in the arch in -front of the portcullis. In some cases where they occur in connection -with a portcullis, they may have been used for a heavy wooden frame, -which could on occasion reinforce the iron herse of the portcullis. -At Warkworth there is no original arrangement of this kind: the wall -of the first floor above the gateway projects slightly upon a row of -corbels, but this was done merely to give it additional strength. -At a later date, however, the parapet at the top of the gatehouse -was corbelled out, and the spaces between the corbels left open for -machicolations. From the later part of the thirteenth century onwards, -the usual arrangement, as at Chepstow or Tutbury, was to carry the -parapet upon an arch in advance of the main face of the gatehouse, from -one tower to the other, and to leave the space between the parapet and -the main wall open, so that it commanded the field immediately in front -of the portcullis. The effect of recessing the front of the gatehouse -within a tall outer archway is magnificent, from the point of view of -design. The design of gatehouses reaches its highest point in the great -gatehouse of Denbigh, with its octagonal gate-hall, and in the King’s -gateway at Carnarvon, where the enclosing arch, recessing the two lower -stages of the gatehouse, bears the outer wall of the upper floor (253). - -[Illustration: Pembroke Castle; Interior of gateway] - -In some instances, as at Pembroke (224) and Kidwelly (225), where the -gatehouse passage was defended by inner and outer portcullises, there -are as many as three chases or slots in the vault between the outer -and inner entrances. At Pembroke, where the gatehouse has the unusual -feature of two flanking towers (213), of semicircular projection, on -the side next the ward, an arch was thrown out from one tower to the -other, some distance in advance of the inner archway. It is difficult -to see how this inner barbican, as it may be called, was intended to -be of use to an already strongly protected gateway; but the space -within it may have been covered by a wooden platform, accessible from -the first floor of the gatehouse, from which the interior of the castle -could be commanded, and an enemy who had forced an entrance could be -seriously annoyed. The vault of the entrance passage was generally a -pointed barrel-vault, strengthened by transverse ribs at intervals; but -the broader space in the centre of the passage was often ceiled, as -in the Byward tower, with timber. The entrance passages of the inner -gatehouses of Harlech (274) and Beaumaris (236) were roofed with wooden -ceilings, supported by transverse ribs of stone set with only a narrow -interval between them. - -[Illustration: Kidwelly Castle; Interior of gateway] - -The ground-floors of the flanking towers of the gatehouse were usually -vaulted. The lodges from which the towers were entered, upon each -side of the inner passage, had stone ceilings when the passage itself -was vaulted through its whole length, or when they formed one room -with the ground-floors of the towers. The ordinary plan, however, -was to treat the flanking tower as an outer guard-room, approached -from the inner lodge. If it was cylindrical in plan, the interior was -arranged as a polygon, and vaulted with ribs springing from shafts -in the angles.[248] This plan may be seen in the Byward tower and -Middle tower of the Tower of London. In both towers the inner part of -the passage was ceiled with timber, and the adjacent chambers formed -lobbies to the vaulted ground-floors of the towers. In the Middle -tower, however, the left-hand lobby was occupied by a vice leading to -the first floor; and in the same position in the Byward tower is a -square rectangular chamber with a ribbed vault. - -[Illustration: Rockingham Castle; Gatehouse] - -A good normal gatehouse, which may be taken as typical of the period, -is that of Rockingham castle (226). Its details indicate that it -belongs to the later part of the reign of Henry III. It is upon the -east side of the enclosure, and its projection is almost entirely -towards the field. The plan is, as usual, a rectangle with a passage -through the centre, and with semicylindrical towers projecting on -either side of the outer entrance. No vaulting was used. The passage is -entered through a porch beneath a drop arch—that is to say, a pointed -arch whose two segments are drawn from centres below the springing -line—and was guarded, just within the arch, by a portcullis in front -of a wooden door. At the inner end of the passage was another door. -Openings in the side walls of the passage communicated with rectangular -chambers;[249] and in the east walls of these were doorways into -semicircular chambers within the towers. There was only one upper -floor to the gatehouse and its towers. In this simple building, one -is reminded at once of the rectangular stone gatehouse of the early -Norman castle, with its upper chamber. Improvement is seen in the -substitution, for the original entrance, of a central passage flanked -by chambers upon the ground-floor; in the addition of flanking towers -of scientific form; and in the protection of the timber doors by an -iron portcullis. - -[Illustration: Newcastle; Black gate] - -The gatehouse at Newcastle, known as the Black gate (227), which became -the entrance to the castle in the thirteenth century, is an example of -a more elaborately constructed and exceptional type. The ground plan -is simplicity itself, a central passage flanked by towers containing -guard-chambers. The towers, however, are not merely projections from -a rectangular body, but flank the whole gateway with a wide convex -curve. There is a large single vaulted chamber on the ground floor -of each, lighted by loops which enabled the occupants to command the -castle ditch. The architectural details of the gateway are very simple, -but there is a short arcade of trefoiled arches in each of the side -walls, and the vaulting of the guard-rooms presents some ingenious -peculiarities. The upper portion of the gatehouse was much altered in -the seventeenth century. The original design, with its great segmental -flanking towers, may have been the prototype of the even more noble -gatehouse of Dunstanburgh, which is a work of nearly three-quarters of -a century later.[250] - -[Illustration: Walled town in state of siege] - -The upper floors of the gatehouse may be reserved for discussion -until we come to the concentric plan, in which the gatehouse became -a building of exceptional importance. For military purposes the one -necessary upper chamber was that in which the machinery controlling -the portcullis was worked. In the floor of this room was the upper end -of the groove, through which, by means of a pulley in the ceiling, the -iron frame was drawn up or down, hanging here when it was not in use -to close the entrance below. Many examples of a portcullis chamber -remain, as at Berry Pomeroy and in Bootham bar at York.[251] - -[Illustration: York; Walmgate Bar] - -The entrance of the castle, under improved conditions of fortification, -was defended by an outwork or barbican. The term “barbican,” which -seems to be of eastern derivation, was used indiscriminately to denote -any outwork by which the principal approach to a castle or a gateway -of a town was covered. The word “barmkin,” which is possibly, as -already noted, a corruption of “barbican,” was applied in the north -of England to the outer yard of a “pele,” or fortified (literally, -palisaded) residence. In many castles, as at Ludlow, Denbigh, or -Manorbier, the outer ward was an addition or supplement to the plan of -the castle, guarding the approach to the inner ward or castle proper, -and its curtain was subsidiary to the strongly fortified curtain of -the inner ward. Such outer wards or base-courts resemble the northern -“barmkins,” an exact parallel to which is seen in the base-court of the -fifteenth-century fortified house of Wingfield. Covering outworks were -by no means uncommon, and also served the purpose of a barbican. As at -Château-Gaillard, they might take the form of a walled outer ward, or, -as at Llandovery, they might be horn-shaped earthworks, thrown out at -an exposed point in the defences; in either case, they had their own -ditch, an extension of the main ditch of the castle. But the barbican -proper was a walled extension of a gatehouse to the field, confining -the approach to the limited area of a narrow passage. The most simple -instance is the barbican in front of Walmgate bar at York (229), where -a gatehouse, originally of the twelfth century, was strengthened by the -addition, upon the outer side, of two parallel walls at right angles -to the sides of the gateway. Thus, in order to force the gates, an -attacking party would have to traverse a long and narrow alley between -high walls, in which they were exposed to the missiles of the defenders -concentrated upon them from the ramparts of the gatehouse and the -adjacent wall. - -The barbican was, in fact, an application to the main entrance of the -castle of the form of defence hitherto applied most scientifically to -the fore-building of the keep.[252] Its general employment as an outer -defence was the direct consequence of the removal of interest from the -keep to the curtain. Not merely had the wall itself to offer a stout -resistance to attack, so that every point was simultaneously engaged -in active defence; but the main approaches had to be so arranged as -to involve an enemy in perplexity. In the protection of the main -avenues of access to the town or castle, we arrive at an unconscious -reproduction in stone of the methods employed by prehistoric builders -of earthwork. Experience taught the engineers of the thirteenth and -fourteenth centuries the lessons which she had taught the makers of -Maiden Castle, and the adoption of the concentric plan of fortification -followed as a matter of course. - -[Illustration: WARWICK: barbican] - -The contraction of the main entrance of the castle by a barbican is -well seen at Bamburgh, Conisbrough (217), and Scarborough (129). In the -first two instances, owing to the isolated position of the fortress, -and the nature of the ground outside, the main approach would have -to be in any case by a path made up the steep face of the hill, and -immediately below the curtain. Bamburgh was unusually well aided by -nature, and the gateway, flanked by two slender round towers, is at -a level considerably lower than that of the summit of the rock; in -this case, the rising road within the gateway, cut in the basalt, and -commanded by the curtain and the keep within the curtain, was the -barbican of the castle. The hill on which Conisbrough was set is merely -a steep knoll, with a wide outer ditch on its less precipitous side. -The outer ward, on the south-west side of the ditch, was apparently an -earthwork without stone walls.[253] A gatehouse was set on the edge -of the ditch, in advance of and at a lower level than the curtain of -the inner ward. Its arrangements, so far as they can be traced, were -not greatly superior to those of early stone gatehouses. Its lateral -walls, however, were prolonged up the edge of the slope to the entrance -of the inner ward. The left-hand wall joined an angle of the curtain -half-way up the passage; the wall on the right hand was continued so as -to cover the inner gateway, which was at right angles to the passage -thus formed.[254] As at Bamburgh, the approach in this case is a narrow -gangway between high walls, commanded throughout from the rampart of -the inner ward, and, for the second half of the distance, passing -immediately beneath it. A passage of this type, with a right-angled -turn at its far end, might easily become a death-trap for a besieging -force. - -At Scarborough the castle cliff is almost entirely separated from the -town by a deep ravine, and the approach is along the narrow ridge -between this chasm and the northward face of the rock. The gatehouse, -flanked by rounded towers, forms part of a small and irregularly shaped -walled outwork or barbican placed upon the outer curve of the ravine. -From this _tête-du-pont_, as it may be called, a straight passage, -walled on both sides, crosses the head of the ravine, passing over a -bridge on its way, and skirting, on the left hand, the sheer edge of -the cliff. On the further side, the space widens into the outer ward, -commanded and nearly blocked by the rectangular keep. The wall on the -left is continued along the edge of the cliff, while that on the right, -which, as being more open to attack, is much the thicker, bears away -with the curve of the slope, and joins the south curtain of the inner -ward upon its west face.[255] - -[Illustration: Warwick Castle; Barbican] - -The examples already given illustrate the precautions which -thirteenth-century engineers took to guard their castles from surprise -and storm; and the arrangements found in the Welsh castles of Edward -I.’s reign are even more remarkable. It will be noticed that in the -three castles just mentioned the main gatehouse is thrown forward to -the outer end of the barbican, which forms a narrow passage uniting -the gatehouse to the inner entrance. In late thirteenth and fourteenth -century castles, however, the barbican was, as we see it at Walmgate -bar in York, an addition to the front of a gatehouse. This method of -covering gateways by outer defences is seen at Kenilworth, where the -approach to the outer ward of the castle, across the lake formed by -the damming-up of two rivulets, was broken up into sections by three -lines of defence. First, an outer earthwork, segmental in shape, and -strengthened by round stone bastions, guarded the approach to the first -gatehouse. Beyond this gatehouse, which formed a _tête-du-pont_ like -the Middle tower at London, a long causeway or dam, with a wall on -its eastern face, crossed the lake to the strong gatehouse known as -Mortimer’s tower, which, guarded by two portcullises, stood upon the -end of the dam, in advance of the curtain. But the ordinary barbican, -which was characteristic of the castles of the fourteenth and fifteenth -centuries, was not a long and elaborately protected line of outer -defences, but a stone building thrown out in front of a gatehouse, so -as to concentrate the attacking force into a small space, and prevent -a combined rush on the principal gateway. The contracted approach thus -made was usually, in the later examples, as at Warwick (231), Alnwick -(243), and Porchester, all barbicans of the fourteenth century, a -straight lane between walls. At Porchester it is set in front of the -twelfth-century gatehouse of the inner ward, which was covered in -the early fourteenth century by a rectangular projection, pierced by -lateral doorways opening upon the scarp of the inner ward outside the -curtain. The barbican proper, somewhat later in date, is composed of -two parallel walls, guarding the drawbridge from the base-court or -outer ward. A loop cut obliquely through the west wall of this passage -opened towards the west gateway of the base-court, so that a surprise -of the barbican could be prevented. In this case, as at Alnwick, the -approach to the barbican was a drawbridge; but at Alnwick, where the -drawbridge crossed an outer loop of the castle ditch, the ditch proper -was crossed by a second drawbridge within the barbican. - -[Illustration: Mont-St-Michel; Châtelet] - -At Lewes, about the end of the thirteenth century, a barbican was added -to the front of a Norman gatehouse which was of much the same character -as the gatehouses at Porchester and Tickhill. The addition here took -the shape of a short passage with a wall on each side, finished at -its outer end by a new and lofty gatehouse, rising from the middle of -the outer ditch of the castle, and approached by a mounting roadway. -The shape of the new gatehouse is an oblong, with its main axis -perpendicular to the road, but its angles were capped by round turrets, -corbelled out at a point near the spring of the entrance archway (98). -Such turrets are known as bartizans, and are common in French military -architecture of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. They were not -so usual in England, and are seldom found on such a scale as at Lewes: -smaller bartizans, corbelled out at a point nearer the battlements -of the building in which they occur, may be seen in the gatehouse at -Lincoln, and at the angles of the towers of Belsay (313) and Chipchase -in Northumberland.[256] The parapet of the barbican gatehouse at Lewes -is brought forward from the wall on a row of corbels so as to allow -room for six formidable machicolations. The work bears some resemblance -to the _châtelet_ which covers the main entrance of the fortified abbey -of Mont-Saint-Michel (235).[257] In France an outer gatehouse like that -at Lewes, or an outer enclosure like that at Scarborough, bore the name -of _châtelet_ or _bastille_. All such defences in advance of a gateway, -whatever the special name they may bear, may be classed under the head -of barbicans. - -[Illustration: Beaumaris Castle; Gateway] - -[Illustration: TUTBURY: gatehouse] - -[Illustration: YORK: Micklegate bar] - -[Illustration: Carcassonne] - -In the highest examples of military skill in fortification—at Conway -(254) and Beaumaris (236), for instance—the greatest care was taken to -cover the gateways with oblique or right-angled approaches, so that -straight access should be impossible to an enemy. The same method of -hampering the path of an enemy with right angled turns is noticeable -in French examples of fortification, and notably in the gateways of -Carcassonne (239). In England, however, an entrance defended by a -barbican in a straight line with it was generally preferred; and, even -in castles like Caerphilly and Harlech, the strength of the entrances -depended upon the disposition of the concentric wards of the castle, -and they were guiltless of the devices and traps which are one leading -feature of Beaumaris. A good example of an oblique approach to a -thirteenth-century castle is at Pembroke, where the main gateway -is covered by an open barbican, forming a rectangular vestibule, the -entrance to which is in a wall nearly at right angles to the gateway. -The west gate of Tenby is covered by an almost semicircular barbican, -the original entrance to which, with a groove for a portcullis, is on -the north side, so that an angle had to be turned before the gateway -was reached. At a much later date other openings were pierced in the -outer wall of the barbican, and the curious arrangement is known -to-day by the misleading name of the “Five Arches.” The east side of -the chief ward of Carew castle was protected by a rectangular outer -court, entered from the field by a small gatehouse. The gatehouse of -the inner ward is in the south half of the east wall, and is flanked -by a round angle-tower and a tower which projects from the middle of -the wall. The outer faces of these two towers were joined by a wall -which thus covered the gatehouse, and was pierced by a doorway, set a -little to the north of the main entrance, with its jambs sloping to -the left. This gave access to a walled-in passage, with an upper floor, -leading obliquely to the inner entrance. As this side of the castle was -on level ground and was much exposed, special care was taken to guard -the approaches; there was, however, only one portcullis, at the inner -end of the main gateway; but the wooden doors, four of which had to be -passed before the portcullis was reached, were of great strength, and -each was closed with several very massive draw-bars. - -[Illustration: Tenby; West Gate] - -The town gateway at Tenby may be compared to the Porte de Laon at -Coucy, which was also covered by a semicircular barbican. While, -however, the Tenby barbican was directly attached to the wall, the -barbican at Coucy was separated from the gateway by the town ditch -and a bridge, and was altogether more elaborate. The bridge itself -crossed the ditch in two sections, describing an obtuse angle, at the -apex of which was a round tower. The road passed through the tower, -and turned the angle at its inner gate, from which the second section -of the bridge passed straight to the actual gateway. At Coucy all -the resources of fortification were displayed; while at Tenby the -application of the same principle was simple and unpretending.[258] -Equally masterly is the oblique entrance to the castle of Kerak in -Syria, beside which the entrances to Pembroke and Carew are of small -account.[259] The long rectangular castle of Kerak is divided into -two nearly equal wards by a wall parallel to its major axis. The main -gateway is on the east side of the junction of the cross-wall with -the outer curtain; but, instead of leading directly into the castle, -the path turns to the left after passing through the gateway, and -is confined within a long inner barbican, from the end of which a -gatehouse at right angles gives admission to the interior of the upper -ward. - -The importance attached, from the thirteenth century onwards, to the -gateway and its approaches, and the prominence of the gatehouse in -the concentric castle of Edward I.’s reign will now be understood. It -now remains to speak of the defences of the exposed face of curtain -between the towers, and of the towers themselves. The progress towards -effective flanking has been traced already, and the towered curtains at -Dover (126) or the Tower of London are examples of scientific flanking -achieved by long experiment. The towers rose above the level of the -curtain, and were entered on the first floor from the rampart-walk, -which they commanded. The walk, in fact, passed through the towers, as -it may still be seen passing through the gatehouses at York. Thus each -tower was the key to a section of wall; and, as the Crusaders found at -Antioch, the wall could be taken only by the capture of several towers, -each of which guarded a separate section. - -[Illustration: Outer stair to tower and rampart-walk in town wall] - -[Illustration: Carcassonne] - -[Illustration: ALNWICK: barbican] - -[Illustration: ALNWICK: gatehouse of keep] - -[Illustration: Shutter closing opening in wall or parapet] - -The rampart-walk between the towers occupied, as from the earliest -times, the top of the wall, and was defended by battlements upon the -outer, and sometimes by a low rear-wall on the inner side.[260] The -chief access to it was by stairs in the towers, but sometimes, as -at Alnwick, there was a stair from the interior of the castle, built -at right angles to the wall (241). In the shell-keep on the mount at -Tamworth, there is a small stair which ascends in the thickness of the -wall. The principal alterations which took place with regard to the -rampart-walk were concerned with the treatment of the parapet. The -division of the parapet into merlons or solid pieces by embrasures -has been explained already, and it has been seen that, in the first -instance, the embrasures are pierced at rather long intervals. The -tendency grows, however, to multiply embrasures and narrow down the -merlons between them, on the theory that the archer, discharging his -arrow through the embrasure, can shelter himself and re-string his -bow behind the merlon. The merlon, however, in works designed with a -purpose mainly military, is usually broader than the embrasure, and -is itself pierced with a small arrow-loop, splayed internally. This -may be seen in the town-walls of Aigues-Mortes (77) and Carcassonne -(78), where the merlons are of great breadth, and in such triumphs of -fortification as the castles of Carnarvon (246) and Conway.[261] The -merlons, however, were not always provided with loops, even in the -Edwardian period. The barbican at Alnwick (243), a work of the early -fourteenth century, is battlemented with plain merlons and embrasures. -In this case, there are two further points which deserve notice. The -embrasures at Alnwick were defended by wooden shutters, which hung from -trunnions working in grooves in the adjacent merlons. The shutters -could be lifted out at pleasure, and the embrasure left free: the -device may be noticed in some other instances.[262] Also, upon the -merlons at Alnwick stand stone figures of warriors, sometimes called -“defenders,” and supposed to be designed to strike terror into the -enemy. The present figures at Alnwick are comparatively modern; but the -fashion was not uncommon and was purely ornamental. Similar figures are -seen on the gatehouse of the neighbouring castle of Bothal, and upon -the gatehouses of York: among the figures on the merlons at Carnarvon -was an eagle, which gave its name to the famous Eagle tower. An enemy -who could be daunted by the illusion of a rather diminutive archer -or slinger balancing himself on a narrow coping, must have had very -little experience of warfare. The merlons were treated very plainly in -many French examples, as at Avignon, Aigues-Mortes, and Carcassonne -(242), where they are flat-topped and unmoulded, while the embrasures -have flat sills. In England they were generally finished off by a -gabled coping, as at Carnarvon, where the top of each is moulded with -a half-roll to the field (246).[263] The sill of the embrasure has -also an inner chamfer. It may be noted that the freedom with which -machicolations were employed in the parapets of French castles and -town-walls was unusual in England. Machicolated parapets were, as a -rule, confined to the fronts of gateways, until the later part of the -fourteenth century, when they began, as at Lancaster and Warwick, to -show themselves in the towers of the gateway and curtain. They are very -sparingly used in the Welsh castles, which are our noblest examples -of military architecture; and an _enceinte_, like the city wall of -Avignon, in which the whole parapet is machicolated and built out on -long corbels of considerable projection, is unknown in England. - -[Illustration: Carnarvon Castle; Crenellated parapet] - -What has just been said of the parapets of walls applies naturally to -the parapets of towers. Towers on the curtain had, as we have seen, a -double use. They flanked the wall, so that each pair could rake with -their shot the entire face of the _enceinte_ contained between them. -They also commanded the rampart-walk, so that an enemy who scaled the -wall was still exposed to their fire and confined to a limited area. A -distinction, however, must be drawn between the closed and open types -of tower, as they may be called. The ordinary rampart tower was of -two or three stages, divided into a basement and upper guard-room or -rooms. The basement was sometimes vaulted, as in the northern tower at -Pevensey (247) or towers at Alnwick. Fireplaces and garde-robe chambers -are often found in the upper rooms,[264] the garde-robes being often -placed at the junction of the tower with the curtain, and corbelled out -over the outer wall.[265] At Carew, where there was no keep, but the -castle formed a rectangular enclosure with drum-towers at the angles, -all the towers were provided with garde-robe chambers, which, with the -passages leading to them, are roofed by lozenge-shaped slabs, corbelled -out one above another. In the south-east tower, the first-floor chamber -has a pointed barrel-vault, and is entered by an outer stair from -the ward. In the east wall are two garde-robe chambers, entered by -elbow-shaped passages. Each had a door opening inwards, and was lighted -by a separate loop. The chambers were so planned that the seats were -placed on opposite sides of a partition wall, with a common vent. - -[Illustration: Pevensey; Vaulting in basement of north tower] - -The tower at Carew just mentioned is at earliest of late -thirteenth-century date, and has several advanced features. Though -its projection from the curtain is regularly rounded, its inward -projection is rectangular, so that its plan is actually an oblong -with a rounded end. It seems to have been intended to have been used -in connection with the gatehouse: its first and second floors had -no direct communication with each other, but both communicated with -the gatehouse, and the ground-floor of the gatehouse had a large -lateral opening in the direction of the first floor of the tower. The -corresponding tower at the north-east angle was used in connection -with the domestic buildings, and had a vaulted chapel (248) upon its -first floor, from the north wall of which open two rooms for the use -of the priest, with a garde-robe in the second. One tower, therefore, -was purely defensive, additional precautions having been taken, no -doubt, to guard a postern which opens from the basement upon the scarp -of the ditch; while the other was merely an annexe to one of the two -dwelling-houses within the enclosure. The use of the eastern and -south-western towers at Warkworth (49) was equally distinct. We have -seen that the south-west tower (Cradyfargus) was used in connection -with the domestic buildings: this may not have been its original -purpose, but it was certainly thus employed early in the fourteenth -century. The great feature of the east tower is the huge loop in each -of its five outer faces, designed for a cross-bow 16 feet long: these -loops, splayed throughout and fan-tailed at top and bottom, are the -finest examples of cross-loops left in England, and declare the main -purpose of the tower at once. In later years, when the cross-bow was -out of fashion, the interior of the tower was somewhat altered, and a -fireplace inserted. - -[Illustration: Carew; Chapel] - -[Illustration: Door of main gatehouse - -Chepstow Castle] - -[Illustration: Stair to vaulted chamber in outer bailey - -Chepstow Castle] - -The best examples of curtain-towers, both abroad and in England, form -complete cylinders, like the angle-towers at Coucy, or polygons, like -some of the towers at Carnarvon. But room was spared if the cylinder -or polygon was left incomplete, and its inner face made nearly flush -with the curtain. The two towers on the curtain of the inner ward -at Pembroke projected with semicircular curves into the outer ward, -but were flat at the back: the south tower covered the gateway of -the inner ward, which was not in the face of the wall, but round an -angle. The towers of the outer ward, on the other hand, are mostly -complete cylinders: the stairs were vices contained in rectangular -turrets on one side, the outer walls of which are curved to meet the -circumference of the towers (181).[266] Marten’s tower at Chepstow, -and the towers of the curtain of the fine early fourteenth-century -castle of Llanstephan, are cases in which the projection of the tower -is only external. The tower which caps the eastern angle at Llanstephan -is a half-cylinder, springing, not directly from the curtain, but -from a broad rectangular projection on its face.[267] The variations -which might be noticed in the attachment of towers to the curtain are -manifold: but, as time goes on, the ordinary curtain-tower, where it -was not placed at an angle of a ward, stood flush with the curtain on -its inner side (228). Where the tower stood on the curtain by itself, -unattached to other buildings within the castle, there was usually an -entrance to the basement direct from the bailey, on one side of which -a vice in a turret attached to the tower rose to the upper floors and -roof, communicating on the level of the first floor with the curtain. -The doorway opening on the curtain was fitted with a strong door, and, -in Marten’s tower at Chepstow castle, where the tower was of special -importance, standing as it does at the lowest and most vulnerable point -of the site, was provided with a portcullis. - -[Illustration: Fougères] - -There were cases, however, especially in walls of towns, where the -curtain-tower, although projecting outside and above the wall, and -covered with a timber roof, was left open at the gorge or neck, where -it was flush with the curtain, so that it was simply an open tower, -with a platform on the first floor, level with the rampart-walk, and a -rampart-walk of its own at the level of its battlements. Such a tower -could be actively employed in time of war, and had all the advantages -of the ordinary closed tower in flanking the wall and cutting the -rampart-walk up into sections. The numerous towers of the walls of -Avignon, between the gatehouses, were arranged thus.[268] At Conway, -the semi-cylindrical towers of the town walls, of which there are -twenty, and the similar towers which flank the gatehouses, are open to -the town: one tower only, on the south-west side of the town, where -the wall turns to join the castle, is walled at the gorge. The walls -of Chepstow provide further examples of open towers. At Carnarvon -(251), the round towers on the face of the town walls are open, but the -angle-towers were closed; and that at the north-west angle was entered -through the town chapel, which was built against the curtain at this -point. The open tower was not, as a rule, used in castles: even the -small towers which flank the outer curtain at Beaumaris have a wall -continued across the gorge. - -[Illustration: Carnarvon; Tower of town wall] - -Every large castle was provided with a postern or sally-port. This was -generally a small doorway, preferably in the base of a tower, but often -in the curtain, opening on the least frequented side of the castle. In -time of siege, in a castle of the ordinary plan, a postern might easily -be a source of danger; and its employment in the scheme of defence was -incompletely understood at first. But it was useful for the conveyance -of provisions to the castle; and a postern, as at Warkworth, is often -found in connection with a kitchen or store-room. Where a castle stood -near a river, a water-gate, communicating with a private wharf was -made. At Pembroke, where the castle stands between two water-ways, -there were two water-gates, one in the south side of the outer ward, -the other, as already mentioned, formed by walling in the mouth of -the cave below the great hall. For the scientific employment of the -postern, however, we have to look to the great castles of the later -part of the thirteenth century, in which the means of defence described -in this chapter were perfectly co-ordinated; and, with the introduction -of a new plan, the last signs of a merely passive strength vanished -from the castle. - - - - -CHAPTER X - -THE EDWARDIAN CASTLE AND THE CONCENTRIC PLAN - - -Castles like Carew, enclosing a rectangular area with round towers at -the angles, were the fruit of the transition in the course of which -the fortified curtain wall took the place of the passive strength of -the keep. At Carew the castle was protected upon its most exposed side -by outer defences of stone; but on all other sides it presented a -single line of defence, flanked by the four formidable angle-towers. A -castle thus defended was, like the early stone castles at Richmond and -elsewhere, a keep in itself; but its wall no longer depended merely -upon its passive strength, but was calculated to resist attacks on -which the builders of Richmond and Ludlow had no means of reckoning. - -The castle of the latter half of the thirteenth century, the golden -age of English military architecture, was, then, an enclosure within a -strong and well-flanked curtain wall. The keep, where the site was new, -was dispensed with: where an old plan was altered or enlarged, it took -a secondary position. The castles of this age may be divided into three -separate classes. First, there are castles without keeps, in which -the flanked curtain wall forms the sole line of defence. Secondly, -there are old castles, which, by extension of their site, have adopted -a concentric plan of defence. And thirdly, there are castles newly -planned, in which the defences are formed by two or more concentric -curtain walls. - -[Illustration: Carnarvon Castle] - -[Illustration: Conway Castle] - -I. The grand examples of the first class are the castles of Carnarvon -(253) and Conway (254). Conway was begun in 1285 by the orders of -Edward I. Carnarvon, in which more architectural splendour is shown, -was begun in 1283, and was not finished until 1316-22.[269] Both -castles were built in connection with walled towns, and occupied an -angle of the defences; and both stand on a point of land where a river -meets the sea, so that two faces of the site were defended by water, -while the base was separated from the town by an artificial ditch. -Carnarvon, however, is situated on low ground, and commands the town -only by the height of its curtain and its formidable towers; while the -promontory on which Conway stands is raised high above the greater part -of the town and commands the whole (256). - -The plan of both castles is very similar. The enclosure, in both cases -an irregular polygon of an oblong shape, was divided into two wards by -a cross-wall,[270] built at a point where the curtain is slightly drawn -in on both sides, and the site is consequently narrowed. At Conway the -main entrance is in the west or end wall of the lower ward, opposite -the cross-wall. The lower ward, thus entered, is a hexagon in shape, -flanked by six cylindrical or drum towers, one at each of the angles, -and occupies about two-thirds of the enclosure. The remaining third is -the upper ward, an irregular rectangle flanked by four drum towers, the -two towers to the west being common to both wards. The whole enclosure -is thus flanked by eight towers, four at the angles, and two on each of -the sides. - -The two wards at Carnarvon (253) were more nearly equal, the upper -ward, placed, as in Conway, at the end next the confluence of the river -and the sea, occupying about two-fifths of the site. The main entrance -to the lower ward, the King’s gateway, is in the middle of the side -wall next the town, and the wall of division between the wards crossed -the enclosure from a point close to the right of the inner entrance. -The curtain of the lower ward was built in five sections, with a tower -at each of the projecting angles between them. With these towers must -be reckoned the two splendid gatehouses, the King’s gatehouse at the -north-west, and Queen Eleanor’s gatehouse at the east angle of the -ward. The curtain of the upper ward was built in four pieces, and this -ward, with its cross-wall, forms an irregular pentagon, at the apex -of which is the famous Eagle tower, at the point where the town wall -joins that of the castle. There are nine towers in all, counting the -two gatehouses, and a turret on each of the north-east and south-east -sections of the curtain. The towers are polygonal in shape, the -straight faces being for the most part very broad, and the angles very -obtuse.[271] - -[Illustration: Conway Castle and Town] - -Of the two castles, Conway, which stands, as we have seen, on the -better site, was the more economically defended. The leading features -of the plan at Carnarvon are the two large gatehouses and the Eagle -tower at the western angle, which was virtually a strong tower or -keep. The King’s gatehouse formed the main entrance. Queen Eleanor’s -gatehouse stands at the highest point of the castle, and is now -inaccessible from outside: when in use, it must have been approached by -a steeply rising bridge across the ditch.[272] There is also a postern, -through which provisions were, no doubt, brought to the kitchen, in the -basement of the Well tower, which caps the angle of the curtain between -the King’s gatehouse and Eagle tower. At Conway, there was no separate -strong tower, nor was there a real gatehouse: the gateway is in a -narrow end-wall, and the towers on each side are in close connection -with its machicolated rampart-walk. There is also a second and smaller -gateway in the wall at the opposite end of the castle, opening on a -platform at the edge of the rock, from which a stair led to the water. - -Where the curtain was so well defended as in these two castles, a -double entrance was a source of strength rather than weakness. The -problem for the enemy was how to distribute his forces, so as to keep -the whole _enceinte_ under observation. To concentrate an attack -upon one gateway was to run the risk of being outflanked and taken -in the rear by a sortie from the other. Strong as Château-Gaillard -and other castles of the transition had been, they had simply met the -prospect of attack with successive lines of defence. Carnarvon and -the castles of the Edwardian period generally were not entirely a -refuge for a besieged garrison: they were shelters which provided a -base of operations for offensive as well as defensive stratagem. The -most imposing feature of the defences of Carnarvon castle is the long -irregular line of the south and south-west wall, fronting the river -Seiont (258). Here the curtain is pierced by three rows of loops, -one above another. The lowest open from a gallery in the thickness -of the wall: the middle row from an upper gallery, which is now open -internally, constructed on the top of the very massive lower wall; -while the top row is pierced in the merlons of the battlements (259). -The wall could be guarded simultaneously by three rows of archers, one -above another—not an inviting prospect to a besieging force. It is -obvious that such a castle, large enough to shelter an army, could also -be held by a relatively small body of men, so excellently was the area -of defence concentrated, and so readily could every part of the curtain -be reached from the interior of the fortress. - -[Illustration: Carnarvon] - -[Illustration: CARNARVON CASTLE: towers and rampart-walk] - -[Illustration: CARNARVON CASTLE: interior] - -While the actual defences of the curtain at Conway were more simple -than at Carnarvon, the isolation of the site was greater, and the -possibility of active movement in and out of the stronghold was less. -The attack was bound to be concentrated upon the one main entrance; and -consequently, next to the flanking of the curtain, the chief object -was the defence of the gateway. The end wall, in which the gateway -was pierced, is high above the adjacent town, and the level piece of -ground in front was broken short by a steep edge of cliff, at the -foot of which was the ditch. The entrance was therefore approached -by a well-guarded barbican at right angles to the gateway. This -outwork was reached from the town by passing along a rising causeway -with a drawbridge at the end, which gave access to the gateway of -the barbican, standing in advance of the north-west tower. A short -rising path then led through a doorway closed by a wooden door to the -platform in front of the gateway, along the west side of which, above -the ditch, was continued the outer wall of the barbican, flanked by -three small round towers, open at the gorge. The parapet above the -gateway was machicolated, and the large corbels still project from the -wall.[273] Into a narrow barbican like this, only a small detachment of -an attacking force could venture; indeed, the position is practically -impregnable. The north-west tower commands every inch of the approach; -and the drawbridge, the portcullis and upper gateway of the -barbican, and the oblique entrance to the gateway of the castle, formed -successive and intimidating obstacles. The main gateway was closed by a -portcullis, which was worked from a mural chamber, between the crown of -the arch and the rampart-walk. It may be noted that, while the oblique -entrance at Conway has some likeness to the ingenious entrances at -Beaumaris, the works of Conway have at least two points in common with -Harlech—the corbelling-out of the rampart-walk against the interior -face of the towers (261), and the carrying up of the stairs of the four -eastern towers into turrets above the level of the roof. The lofty -stair-turrets above the roof are also a prominent feature at Carnarvon. - -[Illustration: Conway Castle; Rampart-walk] - -The arrangements of the rampart-walks at Conway and Carnarvon were of -the usual type. At Conway, where the cross-wall between the wards is -still in existence, there is a walk along the top, so that no part of -the curtain is really distant from another. The domestic buildings -at Carnarvon unfortunately no longer stand; but the position of the -hall and kitchen in the inner ward is still known. Probably, as at -Conway, there was a large hall for the garrison in the outer ward. -The domestic arrangements at Conway can be easily followed, although -the kitchen, against the north curtain of the lower ward, is gone. The -great hall, which is built against the south curtain, and follows the -obtuse angle formed by it, stands above a cellar, but its floor was on -a level with the surface of the ward. Its timber roof was built upon -stone transverse arches, spanning the hall: the east end was screened -off and formed a chapel. The buildings surrounding the smaller or -upper ward formed a separate mansion, distinct from the great hall and -its appendages. The chief features of this set of apartments were the -smaller hall, against the south curtain, the separate withdrawing-rooms -called the King’s and Queen’s chambers, and the small chapel or oratory -in the north-east tower (263). This chapel was entered from the -main stair of the tower, but a straight stair also led to it in the -thickness of the east wall from the postern-gate, and communicated with -a similar stair in the other half of the wall, leading to the King’s -chamber and the lesser hall. Water at Carnarvon was supplied from a -well in the tower west of the kitchen: at Conway a cistern was made -near the south-east corner of the lower ward. - -[Illustration: Conway Castle; Fireplace in hall] - -[Illustration: Conway Castle; Oratory] - -II. There are old castles, however, which were adapted to the new -form of fortification with an ingenuity equal to that shown on new -sites at Conway and Carnarvon. In alluding to the lessons learned by -the Crusaders in the east, we have noticed the concentric form of -fortification which they saw at Constantinople. The city was girt by -a triple wall, each ring of which was higher than the one outside it. -The advantage of this was obvious: while three successive lines of -defence were provided, the three could also be used simultaneously, -each row of defenders discharging its missiles over the heads of the -next. The Crusaders, the variety and ingenuity of whose castle plans -deserve much admiration, profited by the concentric method of walling -a stronghold; and none of their fortresses is so remarkable as Le -Krak des Chevaliers (176), rebuilt early in the thirteenth century, -where the curtain of the inner ward rises high above the curtain of -the outer _enceinte_.[274] Approximations to the concentric plan were -not unknown even in England at an early date. The earthen defences of -Berkhampstead castle (42) are concentric, although no attempt was made -to correlate them by giving the inner banks command of the outer.[275] -In the plan of the cylindrical tower-keep at Launceston, we have a -striking application of the concentric plan to a small area. In France, -Château-Gaillard, where the inner ward is nearly surrounded by the -curtain of the middle ward, was an approach to concentric methods; -but the leading idea was still the exclusion of an enemy by lines -of defence arranged upon an elongated plan, with the donjon as the -culminating point. Even at Coucy, where the defensive provisions are so -elaborate, the donjon is the great point of interest, and the castle -is not concentric in plan. In fact, the concentric plan, although long -known in the east, was not adopted as a basis of planning in the west -until the thirteenth century was far advanced. The fortifications of -Carcassonne, where the plan was applied to a town (264), were begun by -St Louis, and finished by Philip III.: begun earlier than Caerphilly, -their erection covered most of the time in which our chief concentric -castles were built.[276] - -[Illustration: Carcassonne; Plan] - -The concentric plan may be described as follows. The site on which -the castle was built was surrounded, as usual, by a ditch. The inner -scarp was crowned, and sometimes partly reveted, by a wall, flanked by -towers at the angles and, in the largest castles, on the intermediate -faces. Within this wall, and divided from it by a narrow space of open -ground, rose a second and much higher wall, also flanked by towers -at the angles and on the faces. This inner wall enclosed the main -ward of the castle, the intermediate space forming the outer ward -or “lists.” There was no keep: here, as in the plan of Conway and -Carnarvon, reliance was placed on the curtains. The entrances, however, -were elaborately defended by large gatehouses and by sundry ingenious -devices, as at Beaumaris, for perplexing a foe; and the castle was -sometimes reinforced, as at Caerphilly, by special outer defences -both of earth and stone. An enemy, attacking such a fortress, was -exposed first to a double fire from the two curtains. If he effected an -entrance, he had to fight every step of his way into the inner ward; -while, if he was driven, by determined resistance at the gateway, into -the narrow space of the outer ward, he was not merely in danger from -the archers on the inner wall, but also might find his way blocked -by one of the cross-walls which broke up the space in which he was -confined. - -[Illustration: Kidwelly Castle; Plan] - -Such a plan, although it might lack some of the advantages of a plan -worked out on a new site, could be applied to the new defences of an -old castle. Both at Dover and the Tower of London during the reign of -Henry III., additions were made which gave each castle a concentric -plan.[277] The effect at Dover was to ring the imposing keep about -with a double wall: the inner circuit, however, is largely of the same -date as the keep, and the outer is spreading and irregular in plan. -At London the defences were more closely planned in harmony, and one -feature of the additions is that, when the buildings are examined close -at hand, the White tower, originally the most important feature of the -fortress, becomes comparatively insignificant in the defensive scheme. -The inner and outer curtains, with their towers, are of more than one -date, from the end of the twelfth to the sixteenth century; but the -most important work was done in the reign of Henry III., during which -the concentric plan of the fortress was developed. The best idea of -the fortifications can be obtained from the open space before the west -front. Between the city and the castle lies the formidable ditch, which -runs round three sides of the fortress, the fourth side being guarded -by the Thames and a narrower ditch. Dug by the Conqueror’s workmen, -the ditch was widened and deepened by Richard I.’s chancellor, William -Longchamp: it originally seems to have admitted water at high tide. -The entrance to the castle is at the south-west angle. A gatehouse, -called the Middle tower, which was covered by an outer ditch[278] and -outwork, stands on the counterscarp of the great ditch, on this side -120 feet broad, and gives access to a stone bridge. This crossed the -ditch to the Byward tower, a gatehouse at the south-west angle of the -outer curtain. This curtain has been much altered, and its angles along -the north face are capped by bastions which belong to the age when -the cannon had taken the place of the catapult. Along its south face, -towards the narrow ditch, the quay, and river beyond, it is flanked by -towers, the chief of which is St Thomas’ tower, the water-gate of the -castle, well known by its name of Traitors’ gate, and, like the Byward -and Middle towers, originally a work of the thirteenth century.[279] -From the bridge leading to the Byward tower, the curtain of the inner -ward, flanked by three towers, the Beauchamp tower in the middle, the -Devereux and Bell towers at the angles,[280] can be seen commanding -the narrow outer ward. This approach was apparently defended by three -rows of archers, like the south curtain of Carnarvon. The highest row -occupied the rampart-walk and towers of the inner curtain. Loops were -made in the face of the same curtain, below the rampart-walk, for a -second row, on the raised ground-level of the inner ward; while a third -row could be stationed behind loops in the outer curtain. The outer -ward varies in breadth, but the passage to the gateway of the inner -ward, along the south face of the inner curtain, is very narrow, and is -flanked by the Bell tower and Wakefield tower.[281] The inner gateway -is in the ground-floor of the Bloody tower, which joins the Wakefield -tower; and is immediately opposite the water-gate in St Thomas’ tower. -At intervals the outer ward was traversed by cross-walls, so that an -unhindered circuit of it was impossible: one of these crosses it on the -east side of the Wakefield tower, and is continued across the ditch to -the river bank.[282] The well-flanked approach from the Byward tower, -arranged so that the gateway to the inner ward must be entered by -a right-angled turn, may be compared with the entrances at Conway -and Beaumaris, or with the earlier approach to the main bailey at -Conisbrough. - -[Illustration: Chepstow; Basement chamber] - -In some respects, the alterations undertaken at Chepstow (104) towards -the end of the thirteenth century give it a place among concentric -castles. The ridge on which the castle stands, between the town -ditch and a sheer cliff above the Wye, was too narrow for concentric -treatment, and the actual plan shows us four wards on end, each -on higher ground than the last. The first and lowest ward was the -Edwardian addition. The second ward formed the lower part of the -bailey of the early castle. The third ward, at a very narrow point in -the ridge, was almost filled by the great hall, which was virtually -the great tower or keep of this castle; and there is only a narrow -passage mounting the slope between the hall and the low curtain above -the river. The fourth ward, at the highest point, and divided from -the third ward by a deep rift in the rock, contains a wide gateway, -which, as at Kidwelly—the nearest parallel—was the back entrance to -the castle. We have only to imagine the ditch next the town filled up, -and the outer curtain continued so as to embrace the second ward and -great hall, and to unite the first and fourth wards; and we have what -is virtually the plan of Kidwelly (267). Free ingress and egress for -the garrison, so well studied in concentric plans, was provided by the -two gateways at Chepstow. The exposed condition, however, of the lower -ward, at the foot of the ridge, prompted an addition to the plan which -recalls the Eagle tower at Carnarvon, or the strong towers at the later -manor-castles of Raglan and Wingfield. Projecting from the lowest angle -of the curtain, commanding the approach from the town, and covering -the gateway, is the tower now called the Marten tower, rounded to the -field and flat at the gorge. This tower, entered from the ground-level -of the ward, had its own portcullised gateway, and a doorway, also -portcullised, from the first floor to the rampart-walk of the curtain. -Its three floors were very amply planned, and, projecting from the -second floor, and partly built on the battlements of the curtain, is -a small chapel or oratory, with an east window containing geometrical -tracery. The Marten tower is a valuable example of the protection of -a dangerous angle. Its flanking capacities were improved by a spur or -half-pyramid built against the base: this may be compared with the -rectangular plinths of the two western angle-towers at Carew, from -which spurs rise against the rounded surfaces of the towers themselves. -The first ward at Chepstow contains a lesser hall and other domestic -buildings on the side next the river: these, with the vaults below them -(268), contain work of great beauty. All the Edwardian work at Chepstow -has that simplicity and adequacy of design, admitting here and there of -beauties of detail, which is found in the best military work of the age -(249).[283] - -[Illustration: Caerphilly Castle; Plan] - -III. The castles, however, of the last twenty years of the thirteenth -century, planned with a system of concentric defences, may be taken, -with Carnarvon and Conway, as reaching the highest pitch of military -science attained in medieval England. The earliest of these, Caerphilly -(270), which was begun before the end of the reign of Henry III., was -also the most elaborate.[284] The castle proper was placed in the -middle of a lake, formed by the damming up of two streams; and in -this respect the situation was not unlike that of Kenilworth, which -was defended on the south and west by an artificial lake, and was -irregularly concentric in the ultimate development of its plan.[285] -The sides of the island were enclosed within strong retaining walls, -which rose to form the curtain of the outer ward. This curtain was -low, and was flanked, not by towers, but by curved projections forming -bastions at the angles. Within this outer defence rose the rectangular -inner ward, the lofty curtain of which was flanked by drum towers at -each angle, and by a very large gatehouse with two drum towers in each -of the east and west sides. The outer ward had also a front and back -gatehouse, flanked by small drum towers, in its east and west curtains: -these were directly commanded by the inner gatehouses, and the entrance -was not oblique. The inner ward was spacious and cheerful. In the -centre is the well: the great hall (272), the excellent stonework of -which is sheltered from the weather by a modern roof, was built against -the south curtain, and the chapel was at right angles to it at its -east end. The kitchen was contained in a projecting tower south of the -hall, which blocked the outer ward at this point: beneath the kitchen -was a postern communicating directly with the lake. The place of the -rampart-walk in the curtain next the hall was supplied by a gallery -running in its thickness, and looped to the field. At the east end of -the hall were apartments, through which the rooms in the first floor of -the east gatehouse could be reached. - -[Illustration: Caerphilly Castle] - -This plan, in which the military and domestic elements were so well -combined, is interesting upon its own account. But more interesting -still were the outer defences by which the castle was surrounded. The -whole east face of the castle on the outer edge of the lake was guarded -by an outer wall, which had in the centre, nearly opposite the inner -gateways, a large gatehouse, and was returned at the ends into clusters -of towers, the larger of which, on the south, covered a postern. A -wet ditch divided this outer line of defence from the village of -Caerphilly, and in its centre was a pier on which the two sections -of the drawbridge met. North of the gatehouse, the outer curtain was -defended simply by the rampart-walk: on the south side, however, there -was a narrow terrace left in the rear of the curtain, by which access -was obtained to the castle mill and other offices. These two portions -of the curtain were separated from each other by the gatehouse and a -dividing wall, which, in case of the capture of one part of the curtain -by besiegers, gave the defenders a distinct advantage. The inner lake -was crossed from the platform in front of the main gatehouse by a -drawbridge, which probably was worked by a counterpoise from the island -side. - -[Illustration: Caerphilly Castle; Hall] - -[Illustration: Harlech Castle] - -[Illustration: Harlech Castle; Gatehouse] - -[Illustration: Harlech; Inner side of gatehouse] - -The lake on the north side of the castle was divided into an inner and -outer moat by a bank of earth which sprang from the platform of the -outer gatehouse, and curved round the north side of the island. This -bank ended at a second and smaller island, the sides of which were -reveted by a stone wall, covering the west face of the stronghold. This -horn-work or ravelin was connected by drawbridges across the outer -and inner moats with the mainland and with the western gatehouses of -the castle. It is evident that a fortress like this, in which every -resource of the defenders’ art has been brought into action, gave a -besieger very few opportunities. Every entry was guarded: if he once -effected an entrance, defence after defence had to be forced, while the -resources of the several lines of defence could all be used against him -at once. Moreover, he had to be careful to cut all communications off -from the rear entrance and posterns; and this was a difficult matter, -where the defenders of the castle had so much freedom of movement and -could assail him from so many different points. It is not surprising to -learn that the impregnable fortress of Caerphilly is almost without a -history. Constructed to defend the lower valley of the Rhymney and to -cover the coast castles round Cardiff from an attack from the Welsh of -the valleys which slope southwards from the Brecon Beacons, it endured -no important siege;[286] and it was not until the civil war that its -military capacity was really tested—and then only in an age which had -outgrown the methods responsible for its scheme of defence.[287] - -Of Edward I.’s castles in North Wales, Harlech (273) and Rhuddlan, with -lofty inner curtains and cylindrical angle-towers, have much in common -with each other and with Caerphilly. The general plan of Harlech is -nearly identical with that of the island defences of Caerphilly. Its -situation on a lofty rock, however, does not call for elaborate outer -defences. The rock was isolated from the mainland by a dry ditch cut -across the east face. A causeway and a drawbridge led to the gatehouse -of the outer ward, which was flanked by bartizans. The wall of the -outer ward, like that at Caerphilly, is low, and has no towers: three -of its angles form bastions, while the other, at the least accessible -point, is simply curved. The unusually lofty curtain of the inner -ward, some 40 feet high, towers above the comparatively slight outer -defences; while the centre of the east side is occupied by the great -gatehouse (274), projecting far back into the inner ward. The entrance -is flanked by two semi-cylindrical towers; and in the rear of the -gatehouse are two round turrets, rising high above the roofs. Rhuddlan, -which stands on the right bank of the Clwyd, had a fairly broad outer -ward defended by a deep and wide ditch on the three faces on which the -site is fairly level. The inner ward had two gatehouses, of equal size -and importance, placed diagonally to each other at the north-east and -south-west angles of the curtain. Each of these was flanked by two -large drum towers; while each of the two remaining angles was capped by -a single tower. - -There were at Harlech a hall and other domestic buildings against the -curtains; but the gatehouse was also a complete mansion in itself, -with its own small chapel or oratory above the gateway. There was an -outer stair to the bailey from the main hall of the gatehouse. Exactly -the same arrangement occurs at Kidwelly, while the importance of the -gatehouse as a dwelling reaches its climax in the hall of the northern -gatehouse at Beaumaris.[288] The dual arrangement of a hall, kitchen, -etc., for the garrison, and a private dwelling-house for the constable -or the lord of the castle, has already been noticed at Conway, whilst -its growth has been traced in connection with the castle of Durham. - -Harlech presents two or three important points of interest. (1) -The outer ward was not blocked at any point, as at Caerphilly, by -projecting buildings, but was continuous: it was crossed, however, in -at any rate one place, by a wall which barred an enemy’s progress. (2) -Owing to the nature of the site, only one gatehouse was built. But a -small doorway in the centre of the north wall of the inner ward opened -directly opposite a postern, flanked by half-round bastions, in the -outer curtain. From this point an extremely steep path, now hardly -to be traced, followed the edge of the rock, rounded the north-west -bastion of the outer ward, and passed close beneath the west curtain -to the south-west angle of the rock. Here, doubling on itself, it -descended through a gateway into a long passage between the slope of -the rock and the outer wall, and ended at the water-gateway of the -castle, at the foot of the great crag and near the present railway -station. The wall which protected the outer face of this tortuous -passage, formed an outer curtain to the castle, descending the rock -from the south-west angle of the outer ward, continuing round the -foot of the rock on its north side, and climbing it again to meet the -north-east bastion.[289] (3) The rampart-walk had no machicolations -and, as at Conway (261), was continued round the inner faces of the -angle-towers on corbelling. This left the interior of the towers -free, while their doorways and stairs gave them ready command of -the rampart-walk. The walls are not only lofty, but very thick. The -section of the jambs of the hall windows and the small north postern -points to the fact that the lower part of the walls was thickened, -probably as an afterthought, when their present height was determined -upon. The upper part of the walls is homogeneous, and is evidently a -heightening. (4) Although vices in the angle-towers communicated with -the rampart-walk, freedom of action was given to the defenders of the -towers by the provision of a separate stair for those told off to guard -the intermediate ramparts. This stair is reached through the basement -doorway of the south-east tower, and, branching off from the internal -stair a few feet above the entrance, reaches a small external platform. -Here a narrow outer stair, with a rear-wall, is carried up the face -of the flat gorge of the tower, and, turning along the south curtain, -at length reaches the rampart-walk. The planning of this stair, with -its carefully covered ground-floor entrance, is very interesting and -curious. - -[Illustration: Beaumaris Castle; Plan] - -Nowhere, however, can the beauty of the concentric plan be so well -appreciated as at Beaumaris (278), one of Edward I.’s latest Welsh -castles.[290] The site is flat and low, on a tongue of land at the -northern entrance to the Menai straits. There is no attempt at any -elaborate outer system of defence, such as we see at Caerphilly. The -defences consisted of a ditch, filled with water at high tide, and an -inner and outer curtain, the inner curtain, as usual, commanding the -outer. The inner ward is square: it has a drum tower at each of the -angles, and another in the centre of each of the east and west sides. -The north and south curtains are broken by gatehouses, also flanked -by drum towers.[291] The north gatehouse was the largest, and upon -its first floor was an imposing hall. The curtain of the outer ward, -surrounding the inner curtain, was adapted to the projection of the -intermediate drum towers and the gatehouses of the inner ward by the -construction of each face with a salient angle in the centre (277). -There are no traces of any cross-walls barring the passage of the outer -ward. The outer curtain, which, owing to the flat site, is not the -mere low bastioned wall of Caerphilly or Harlech, has a drum tower at -each angle. On each of the north, east, and west curtains, there are -three smaller drum towers, the central one of which caps the salient. -The plan is thus of a most symmetrical and uniform kind. The south -curtain of the outer ward, however, has no intermediate drum towers, -and its salient is nearly capped by the outer gateway. This gateway, -however, flanked by rectangular towers,[292] is set obliquely to the -wall. Entering the outer ward, immediately on our right is the small -rectangular barbican, pierced with cross-loops, which covers the inner -gateway, so that two right-angled turns must be made before the inner -ward is entered (277). - -[Illustration: Beaumaris Castle] - -This entrance, most carefully protected, shows even higher skill than -the barbican of Conway and the elaborate passage from the water-gate at -Harlech. But there are two further remarkable defences in this castle. -We have seen that, as at Caerphilly, there is a large gatehouse at -either end of the inner ward. The rear gatehouse, which, as already -noted, is the more important, has no barbican. The rear gateway of -the outer ward is set obliquely to it, in the north curtain east of -the salient, and is simply a large postern in the wall. Outside it, -however, the wall is reinforced by four buttresses, each of which is -pierced by a loop; the outer buttresses are looped to the field, the -inner towards the gateway. The westernmost buttress projects beyond -the rest, and it is clear that the design was intended to conceal and -protect the postern from attack, and that the western side, in the -direction of the interior of Anglesey, was that on which an attack -was most to be expected. The other defence is the spur-wall, which, -running almost at right angles to the south wall of the outer ward, -shut off the main entrance and the beach on which it opened from the -beach on the eastern side of the castle. The wall is pierced by a -passage, is looped in both faces, and is flanked by a half-round tower -on the west face. - -Although, at first sight, the towers of Beaumaris, on its absolutely -level site, look low and unimportant, and present an extraordinary -contrast to those of Harlech, Carnarvon, or Conway, the area of the -castle is actually large, and no other Edwardian castle presents -so perfectly scientific a system of defence. The outer curtain, in -addition to the rampart-walk, has loops pierced at regular intervals -in its lower portion; the rampart-walk is partly carried by continuous -corbelling upon the inner face of the wall. The inner curtain, -moreover, is pierced, on the level of the first floor of the gatehouses -and towers, by a continuous vaulted passage, looped to the field. This -extends round the whole ward, and is broken only at the north-west -angle, where it meets the northern gatehouse. Everywhere in the walls -of the castle where a loop could be of use, it was made. Of the points -noticed, both the entrances are unusual, and the design of the postern -at the rear seems to be unique. The spur-wall, though less elaborately -treated, is found covering a main entrance at Kidwelly and elsewhere; -and the long passages in the thickness of the wall are found in -portions of the defences at Caerphilly and Carnarvon. The towers at -Beaumaris are entered by straight stairs from the gorge; and throughout -the castle, in the gatehouses, great hall, and basements of the -towers, the method of carrying a wooden roof upon detached stone ribs -prevailed, which is very noticeable also at Conway and Harlech. - -Kidwelly castle[293] (267), another late thirteenth-century building, -stands on a steep hill, the east side of which slopes abruptly to -the Gwendraeth Fach river. The castle is on the opposite side of the -river to the town of Kidwelly, and a long base-court, of which part -of the gatehouse remains, descended the slope towards the bridge. At -the head of this ascent a barbican and drawbridge formed the approach -to a strong gatehouse, flanked by two battering towers, and further -protected by a spur-wall across the end of the ditch. The gatehouse is -in the extreme south-east angle of the outer ward, which, describing -a wide curve, covers three sides of the nearly square inner ward, and -is separated from the suburb of Kidwelly on this side the river by the -ditch. The site was narrow, as at Chepstow, and the eastward slope so -steep that the outer ward was not completed along this side, but its -curtain was continued by the eastern drum towers and curtain of the -inner ward. Three half-round towers were made in the curving curtain of -the outer ward; at the opposite extremity to the gatehouse, near the -north-east angle, a postern, flanked by small drum towers, gave access -to a northern earthwork, which may be compared with the horn-work at -Caerphilly, but had no retaining wall. - -Kidwelly, with its outworks in front and rear, at once recalls -Caerphilly. The irregularly concentric plan, with the inner ward on -one side of the interior of the outer, is very unusual, but provides -a link between the concentric plan and the extension of the early -plan of Chepstow. The provision of both front and rear gateways is a -feature of Caerphilly, Chepstow, Beaumaris, and Conway; and, as at -Caerphilly, Rhuddlan, and Beaumaris, the inner ward also has front -and rear entrances. These, however, at Kidwelly, are mere doorways in -the wall. The inner ward was small, with very large and perfect drum -towers at its angles: the domestic buildings arranged on either side -of it left only a narrow passage through the middle. A tower, of which -the two upper stories formed the chapel, was built out upon the east -slope, from the corner of the ward next the south-east drum tower. The -gatehouse, then, which here, as at Harlech and Beaumaris, contains a -large hall and other apartments, and, in addition to a vice to the -upper floors, has an outer stair and landing against its north face, -was on the outer, not the inner, line of defence, and was protected by -the ditch, the barbican, and the base-court beyond. There are remains -of buildings, probably intended for the garrison, in the outer ward. -The basement of the gatehouse, which is below the level of the ward, -contains vaulted chambers. In one of these is a lower vault, which has -had a domed roof, and may have been used for stores or a reservoir: in -another there appear to be indications of the mouth of a well. - -[Illustration: Kidwelly Castle; Tower at south-west angle of inner ward] - -The defensive precautions taken at Kidwelly were not so thorough as in -the other great Welsh castles of the time, and the chief reliance of -the builders was in the strength of their walls and towers. The outer -curtain has the peculiarity, rare in English castles of the date, of -possessing a stair built against it from the level of the ward.[294] -The inner ward has several curious features. The stair to the curtain -was a straight flight of steps protected by the west wall of the main -entrance from the outer ward. A path along the back of the rampart of -the south curtain led into the south-west drum tower, from the second -floor of which the rampart-walk was gained. The walk, though much -overgrown by ivy and other weeds, still keeps its rear-wall, and is -continued through the towers and round the inner ward. The two western -drum towers are interesting. The upper part of that on the north, where -it faces the ward, is not a simple curve, but is broken into two convex -curves, with a recess between: the reason of this is not apparent.[295] -The south-west tower (281), standing at an angle from which it commands -the inner face of the great gatehouse, has the most unusual peculiarity -of having all its stages covered with vaulting: the vaults themselves -are shallow domes, rather rudely constructed. It is probable that the -engineers may have intended to establish a catapult on the tower in -time of siege. The situation of the tower would have been excellently -suited for that purpose, but its unusual strength may be due merely -to its position in the line of attack. The basements of all the towers -are vaulted, but that of this particular tower, instead of being -entered from the ward or one of the domestic buildings directly, is -entered by a long and dark passage in the thickness of the south wall, -from the left-hand side of the doorway of the inner ward. The unusual -precautions taken with regard to this tower and its entrances give it a -prominent position in an account of the castle; and, although it is no -larger or loftier than the other angle-towers of the inner ward, it has -something of the special importance of Marten’s tower at Chepstow or -the Eagle tower at Carnarvon. - -[Illustration: Carcassonne] - -Although the Edwardian castle in Wales has many points of interest, -and provides a highly-developed scheme of defence, yet its devices -are simple when compared with the highest achievements of French -fortification. The elaborate care bestowed upon the outer defences -of Caerphilly, and the variety of ingenuity manifested at Beaumaris, -are exceptions to this general statement; while the general plan of -Carnarvon is as imposing as that of any castle in Europe. But such -carefully contrived approaches as the barbican of Conway and the -long ascent from the water-gate at Harlech take a second place when -compared with such a work as the outer approach to the castle of -Carcassonne, as restored with approximate faithfulness in the drawings -of Viollet-le-Duc (283). The castle stood within the inner wall of -the town, occupying a rectangular site on the south-west side of this -masterpiece of concentric planning. The entrance from the town was -guarded by a semicircular barbican; but the approach which called -for the most watchful defence was that from the foot of the hill, on -the edge of which the city stands. Where the hill meets the plain, -therefore, below the castle, a great barbican was constructed, within -the outer palisade and ditch of which was a great round tower, not -unlike the great tower on the mount at Windsor, surrounded by a wet -ditch. The centre of this _châtelet_ was open to the sky: the walls -were pierced with two rows of loops below the rampart. This tower -guarded the entrance to a walled and carefully protected ascent, -which, after making a right-angled turn, led upwards in a straight -passage,[296] commanded by the rampart of the outer curtain of the -town. Where it met the curtain, it turned to the right, along the foot -of the wall, and so reached a gateway into the outer ward or “lists” of -the town. But here the passage, passing through a covered vestibule, -turned back on its own course, and entered an inner barbican, with two -upper stages. Not until this was passed, were the lists entered, and -the chief gateway of the castle, in the inner curtain, reached. As we -trace this passage, we recall the ascent at Harlech and the traps set -for an enemy at Beaumaris; but their combination here is on a scale -undreamed of in those fortresses, minutely calculated though their -planning was. - -[Illustration: Domfront; Casemates] - -The wall-galleries, again, at Carnarvon and Beaumaris, are a device -of great utility, unusual in English castles, and are planned at -Carnarvon with exceptional skill; while, at Caerphilly, the gallery in -the south wall, between the hall and the moat, is a solution of the -defence of a point which the somewhat crowded plan of the domestic -buildings threatened to leave unguarded. But the covered gallery -below the ramparts was not a prominent feature of medieval defence in -England. On the other hand, it was used freely in France. Two examples -of the defensive use of covered galleries may be given here. One is -from Domfront, where, as at Coucy, the castle was separated from the -walled town by a very formidable ditch. On the side next the castle, -the rock was covered by a retaining wall flanked by two round towers at -the ends, and a polygonal tower near the centre. At some time in the -middle ages, probably late in the thirteenth century, the rock behind -the wall was pierced by a long gallery, communicating with all three -towers, and by stairs at intervals with the upper ward above. Loops -were made in the retaining wall, so that the approach upon this side -was thus provided with a line of defence below the level of the towers -and curtain. The gallery is not on one level throughout, but forms a -series of separate vaulted casemates, connected with one another by -short flights of stairs[297] (284). - -In the second case, at Coucy, we have a case of a closed gallery, -without loops, which was designed as a counter-mine against the efforts -of the sappers of an attacking force. Remains of such galleries exist -in more than one part of the castle, forming a remarkable addition to -defences which, by themselves, were strong enough to discourage attack. -Towards the end of the fourteenth century, the curtain of the donjon, -the strongest tower in Europe, was thickened by the addition of a talus -or battering base, which was pierced by a passage. The main object of -this work was to cover in a spring which had its source in the ditch at -the foot of the curtain: the passage communicated at one end with an -earlier and well-guarded passage leading from the domestic buildings to -a postern in the wall which crossed the west end of the ditch, while, -at the other, it communicated by a stair with the rampart-walk of the -curtain and gatehouse of the inner ward. But it did not merely form a -convenient means of access to the spring. It afforded an opportunity -to the defenders of counteracting the miners of the enemy; while, if -the miners pierced their way through the talus, they would be met by -the thick curtain on the other side of the passage. The passage itself, -well protected at both ends, would be commanded by the defence; while -the spring in the middle, to those not acquainted with the geography of -the place, would form a dangerous barrier in the darkness. - -To such finished achievements of military art as these, which have -been quoted as specimen examples, our English castles can afford no -exact parallel. In the military, as in the ecclesiastical architecture -of France, principles were worked out with a logical precision and -completeness, which, in its practical effect, provokes our wonder. -The effort manifested in the Edwardian castle is more humble; the -achievement more limited. This, however, is true rather of the scale -of the castle and the details of its defence than of the general idea. -The main object, of flanking the curtain effectually and completely, -is as fully realised as in any foreign example; while it may be safely -said that in no country were the advantages of concentric lines of -defence better exhibited than in the Welsh castles, whose main features -have been indicated in this chapter. The walls of Carcassonne may -provide us with the concentric plan on its largest scale; but the -Welsh castles show at least an equal understanding of the value of -concentric fortifications. The difference lies in the fact that the -French engineer proceeded to strengthen his defences by the addition of -intricate refinements and subtle devices; while the Englishman stopped -short at this point, and was satisfied when his aim of providing and -combining adequate towers and walls of defence was achieved. - - - - -CHAPTER XI - -MILITARY ARCHITECTURE IN THE LATER MIDDLE AGES: FORTIFIED TOWNS AND -CASTLES - - -The strengthening of the curtain of the castle was perfected in the -concentric plan, in which also was established, for the time being, the -superiority of defence to attack. But the very fact that the castle had -reached a point at which further development in the existing condition -of things was impossible, was fatal to its continued existence as -a stronghold. A castle like Caerphilly did not put an end to local -warfare: it merely warned an enemy off a forbidden track. Its own -safety was secured, because its almost impregnable defences made any -attempt at a siege ridiculous. Other circumstances, however, combined -to render the castle obsolete. The rise of towns and the growth of -a wealthy mercantile class hastened the decline of feudalism. The -feudal baron was no longer the representative of an all-important -class, and his fortress was of minor importance compared with the -walled boroughs which were symbolical of the real strength of the -country. But, in addition to this social transition, there took place -a change in warfare which had a far-reaching influence upon castle -and walled town alike. Fire-arms came into general use in the early -part of the fourteenth century.[298] Missiles, for which hitherto the -only available machines had been those involving discharge by torsion, -tension, or counterpoise, could now be delivered by the new method -of detonation. This produced an artillery which could be worked with -greater economy of labour, and discharged the missiles themselves with -greater force. Not merely can a ball of stone or iron be projected -with greater impetus than can be given by the older methods; but -the direction which it takes is more nearly horizontal than that -given to it by the mangonel and kindred machines. It is true that, at -first, the power of cannon remained relatively weak; but their gradual -improvement made the old systems of defence useless. Lofty walls, which -could resist the catapults of the past, were easily dismantled by -cannon-shot (288). Harlech, with its lofty curtains and angle-towers, -was an ideal stronghold, as long as explosives were not employed for -attack and defence. But, when cannon are directed against such defences -(273), and the surface of the walls is pounded with shot, the height -of the fortifications becomes a danger; and, in order to plant the -cannon of the defence on the walls, those walls have to be as solid as -possible to avoid the constant vibration arising from the discharge, -and as low as possible to increase their stability and to place the -enemy within range. The change is obvious, if we contrast the lofty -and comparatively slender towers of Carcassonne or Aigues-Mortes with -the massive drum towers of the French castles or walled towns of the -fifteenth century, like those of the castle of Alençon (289) or of -the town of Saint-Malo (290). Later still, the flanking of the walls -of towns and castles shows a transition from the round tower to the -bastion; and we find massive projections like the Tour Gabriel at -Mont-Saint-Michel (291), which rise little, if at all, above the level -of the adjacent wall. The ultimate outcome of this transition is the -bastion pure and simple, flanking the low and solid earthen bank -with its reveting wall, as at Saint-Paul-du-Var, or, later, at our -own Berwick-on-Tweed.[299] A step further brings us to the scientific -fortification of the seventeenth century, to Lille and Arras, and those -magnificent fortresses which the progress of the nineteenth century has -already made of historical, rather than practical, interest.[300] - -[Illustration: Gatehouse, Barbican, and Curtain wall of Town battered -by cannon-shot] - -[Illustration: Alençon] - -[Illustration: Saint-Malo; Grande porte] - -[Illustration: Mont-St-Michel; Tour Gabriel] - -With these modern developments we have no concern in this book; and in -these two concluding chapters we can trace merely the later history, -from a defensive point of view, of that type of fortification whose -advance we have hitherto pursued, and of the gradual amalgamation -of the medieval castle with the medieval dwelling-house. The old -distinction between the castle and the _burh_ still asserted itself. -During the greater part of the middle ages, from the Norman conquest to -the fourteenth century, the castle, the stronghold of the individual -lord, was the highest type of fortification, and the town, as at -Berwick in the reign of Edward I., or at Conway or Carnarvon, was, when -walled, little more than an appendage or outer ward to the castle. With -the introduction of fire-arms, the town began once more to take its -place in the van of the defence. Warfare, from the time of the wars -of Edward III. in France, and even earlier, ceased to be an affair -of sieges of castles. Battles were fought more and more in the open -field, and the reduction of the fortified town, not of strongholds -of individuals, became the chief object of campaigns. The castle, -relegated to a secondary place, developed more and more on the lines of -the dwelling-house; and, finally, as the castle disappeared, the town -with its citadel became all-important as the object of attack and the -base of operations. In brief, the steps in the history of fortification -after the Conquest are these. The timber defences of the Saxon _burh_ -became of secondary importance to the timber defences of the Norman -castle. These were subordinated to the keep, the symbol of the dominion -of the feudal lord. The keep reached its climax in the stone tower. At -this point the revulsion began. The strengthening of the stone curtain -made the keep obsolete; and, finally, the perfection of the curtain -of the castle once attained, military science applied itself to the -strengthening of the wall of the town, until, aided by social changes -and scientific improvements, the castle itself became altogether -unnecessary. - -[Illustration: NEWCASTLE: town wall] - -[Illustration: SOUTHAMPTON: town wall] - -The principles of defence of the walled town are those of the castle; -and hitherto we have drawn illustrations from both with little -discrimination. In both cases the same methods of attack are provided -against by the use of the same means. But it must be remembered that -the area of the town is larger than that of the castle, and that -while, in the castle, the bailey is the common muster-ground from -which every part of the curtain can be easily reached, there can be -no such open space enclosed by the walls of a large inhabited town or -city. Thus, while the market-place, in or near the centre of the town, -would serve as a general rallying-ground,[301] it was necessary also -to keep a clear space at the foot of the inner side of the walls, so -that free communication between every part might be preserved. From the -continuous lane which was thus formed between the wall and the houses -of the town, and was crossed at intervals by the main thoroughfares -leading to the gates, access was gained to the rear of the flanking -towers, and to the stairs by which, from time to time, the rampart-walk -was reached. Most towns which have been walled retain traces of this -arrangement. At Southampton the _pomerium_,[302] as this clear space -is called in medieval documents, survives on the east side of the -town in the lane still known as “Back of the Walls.” At Carnarvon it -is nearly entire, except on the west side of the town. At Newcastle -(293) it remains in a very perfect state on the north-west side of the -enclosure, where the walls and their intermediate turrets are also -fairly perfect; and it can be traced in a paved lane on the west side, -where the walls are gone.[303] Nearly the whole extent of the inner -city walls of Bristol, of which little remains, can be easily traced -by the survival of the _pomerium_ in a series of curved lanes. The line -of the east wall of Northampton can be recovered in the same way; and -although, as at York, modern encroachments have in many places removed -the _pomerium_, it usually survived to mark the site of town walls, -even long after those walls had been destroyed. - -[Illustration: Conway; Porth Isaf] - -During the epoch at which fortification reached its highest point, the -wall of a town was systematically flanked by towers, which, as we have -seen at Conway and Avignon, were left open upon the side next the town. -Gates were made in the wall, where main roads approached the place. -Thus the gates of Coucy were three, admitting the roads from Laon, -Soissons, and Chauny. At Conway (256) there were three gates; but of -these one communicated merely with a quay, while another gave access to -the castle mill: the third or north-western gate alone was the direct -entrance to the promontory on which the town and castle were built. At -Chepstow, where the town also formed a _cul-de-sac_, there was only one -main gateway, at the north-west end of the town. The main gateway of -Carnarvon was on the east side of the town; while, opposite to it, in -the west wall, was a smaller gateway opening, like the Porth Isaf[304] -(295) at Conway, upon the quay. Not all towns, however, occupied -positions like Chepstow, Conway, and Carnarvon, where water takes so -large a share in the defence. Great centres of commerce like London and -York, towards which a number of roads converged, had many gates, not -counting the posterns in their walls. Four of the gates of York remain, -Micklegate bar on the south-west, through which the road from Tadcaster -entered the city, Walmgate bar on the south-east, admitting the road -from Beverley and Hull, Monk bar on the east, through which passed -the road from Scarborough, Bootham bar on the north, which was the -entrance from the direction of Thirsk and Easingwold. The gatehouses -are all rectangular structures, the plan and lower portions of which -are of the twelfth century, and recall the stone gatehouses of early -castles: the upper stages, however, are of the fourteenth century, -and have tall bartizans at the outer angles. The great Bargate at -Southampton, through which the road from the north entered the circuit -of the walls, is similarly a rectangular Norman gatehouse, enlarged and -supplied with flanking towers in the fourteenth century: the outer face -was further strengthened, within a century of these additions, by a -half-octagonal projection, the battlements of which were machicolated. -There was another gate on the east side of Southampton, which now has -disappeared. In the west wall the rectangular water-gate and a postern -remain; while, on the quay at the south-eastern angle of the walls, -there is another gate, covered by a long spur-work which projects -from the wall at this point and crossed the town-ditch. For smaller -gatehouses like the western gatehouses of Carnarvon and Southampton, -the old rectangular form was sufficient; but the principal entries of -towns needed effective flanking. As a rule, town gatehouses of the -Edwardian period and the fourteenth century generally were flanked -by round towers at the outer angles, like those at Conway (295), -Winchelsea, or the West gate at Canterbury. In the fifteenth century, -the warlike character of the defences of English towns was considerably -lessened. The Stonebow or southern gatehouse at Lincoln, a long -rectangular building with slender angle turrets of no great projection, -had no special provisions for defence beyond the gates by which it was -closed. Here and there, when the need of military defence ceased to -exist, churches were built upon the walls and gateways of towns. Thus -above the St John’s gate of Bristol, on the south side of the city, -rise the tower and spire which were common to the churches of St John -the Baptist and St Lawrence; while churches were built close to or -immediately above the east and west gates of Warwick. - -[Illustration: Monmouth; Gatehouse on Monnow bridge] - -Where one of the main approaches to a town crossed a river, the defence -of the passage was of course necessary. In the case of the St John’s -gate of Bristol, already mentioned, the course of the narrow river -Frome, on which it opened, was defended by an additional wall on the -other side of the stream; and in this wall, covering St John’s gate, -was the strongly fortified Frome gate. The case of York, where the -river nearly bisects the walled enclosure, is most unusual. In other -instances, the town was confined to one side of the stream, and the -approach from the river was protected by a barbican, which could take -the form either of an outer defence to the gateway itself, or of a -_tête-du-pont_ on the opposite side of the stream, or of a fortified -passage across the bridge. Of barbicans in general much has been -said already; and we have seen at York and Tenby something of town -barbicans, while in the Porte de Laon at Coucy, we have had an instance -of a barbican acting as a _tête-du-pont_ on the further side of a town -ditch. The arrangement of the south-western approach to Kenilworth -castle is a good instance of the combination, in castle fortification, -of _tête-du-pont_, fortified causeway, and gatehouse with barbican. -Fortified bridges were not uncommon in the middle ages, but those which -remain are few. The finest example of all is the fourteenth-century -Pont Valentré at Cahors (Lot), a noble bridge of six lofty pointed -arches, divided by piers which are supplied with the usual triangular -spurs or cut-waters. At each end of the bridge is a massive rectangular -gateway tower, battlemented, with pyramidal roofs, and machicolated -galleries below the battlements; while in the middle of the passage is -a third tower, the ground-floor of which was gated and portcullised. -The brick bridge, called the Pont des Consuls, at Montauban -(Tarn-et-Garonne), was somewhat similarly defended. Examples from -other countries are the thirteenth-century covered bridge at Tournai, -the bridge of Alcantarà at Toledo, and the bridge of Prague, which -was defended about the middle of the fourteenth century with a tall -rectangular gate-tower at one end, and a gateway, flanked by towers of -unequal size, at the other. In England two small examples of fortified -bridges remain. Upon the bridge at Monmouth (297) is a gatehouse with a -machicolated battlement and a gateway which was closed by a portcullis: -this stood well in advance of the Bridge gate of the town, which was -at a little distance from the stream. At Warkworth, on the side of the -bridge next the town, is a plain rectangular gatehouse, the arch and -ground-floor of which remain intact. The triangular patch of land, -south of the Coquet, on which Warkworth is built, was well defended on -two sides by the river, and on the third side by the castle, and the -gatehouse at the bridge was its only stone fortification. - -[Illustration: WELLS: gatehouse of bishop’s palace] - -The progress of the art of defence under Edward I. was accompanied -by the enclosure within defensive walls of areas and houses not -originally intended for military purposes. Disputes between the -cathedral priory and the citizens of Norwich led to the enclosure of -the monastery within a fortified precinct:[305] the royal licence for -the construction of the water-gate bears date 27th July 1276.[306] On -8th May 1285, the dean and chapter of Lincoln obtained their first -licence for the enclosure of their precinct with a wall 12 feet -high;[307] and ten days later a similar licence was issued to the -dean and chapter of York.[308] On 10th June the dean and chapter of -St Paul’s,[309] and on 1st January following the dean and chapter of -Exeter,[310] had letters patent to the same effect. Bishop Burnell -had licence to wall and crenellate the churchyard and close of Wells, -15th March 1285-6,[311] while he was busy building his strong house -at Acton Burnell. Licence to crenellate the priory of Tynemouth, -on its exposed site, was granted 5th September 1295.[312] Bishop -Walter Langton had licence to wall the close of Lichfield, 18th -April 1299.[313] Licence to the abbot and convent of Peterborough to -crenellate the gate of the abbey and two chambers lying between the -gate and the church was granted 18th July 1309.[314] At Lincoln, where -a large portion of the close walls may still be seen, there was some -delay in building. Two licences, confirming the letters patent of -1285, were granted by Edward II. in one year.[315] On 6th December -1318, the licence was again renewed: the wall might be raised to a -greater height than 12 feet, and might be crenellated and provided -with crenellated turrets.[316] Further, on 28th September 1329, Bishop -Burghersh received letters patent, permitting him, in the most liberal -terms, to “repair, raise, crenellate, and turrellate” the walls of the -bishop’s palace.[317] Thus, in the reign of Edward III., there were no -less than three fortified enclosures within the circuit of the walls -of Lincoln—the castle, the close round the cathedral, and the bishop’s -palace. To-day, as we stand in the open space at the head of the Steep -Hill, to our left is the gatehouse of the castle; while to our right -is the Exchequer gate, the inner gatehouse of the close. This is a -lofty oblong building of three stages, with a large central archway, -and a smaller archway on each side for pedestrians. On the west or -outer side the face is plain, but on the eastern side it is broken by -two half-octagon turrets, containing vices. There was also an outer -gatehouse, some yards to the west.[318] The south-eastern gatehouse of -the close, known as Pottergate, still remains, a rectangular building -with an upper stage. At Wells, Salisbury,[319] and Norwich, the -_enceinte_ of the close may still easily be traced; while at Wells, -close by the gatehouse of the close, is the outer gatehouse of the -bishop’s palace. The palace itself retains its wet moat, and is still -approached by its drawbridge and through a formidable inner gatehouse, -which is flanked by two half-octagon towers (300). - -[Illustration: Thornton Abbey; Gatehouse] - -[Illustration: Thornton Abbey; Plan of gatehouse] - -Of gatehouses of abbeys and priories, many still remain, some of which, -like those at Bridlington, Tewkesbury, and Whalley,[320] are of -great size, and were capable of offering defence, if necessary. But -by far the most important of monastic gatehouses is that at Thornton -abbey in Lincolnshire, a magnificent building of brick with stone -dressings (302). The licence to the abbot and convent to “build and -crenellate a new house over and beside their abbey gate” bears date -6th August 1382.[321] The gatehouse is an oblong of three lofty stages -with half-octagon turrets at the angles. The single archway on the -ground-floor is approached through a narrow barbican, set obliquely to -the building (331). On each side of the entrance is a bold half-octagon -buttress. The inner face of the entrance is flanked by half-octagon -turrets, in the southern of which is the vice which gives access to the -upper floors. There are no straight side-passages as in the Exchequer -gate at Lincoln, where the porters’ lodges are between the main and -lateral entrances; but at Thornton an archway was built in the south -wall of the central passage, and a diagonal side entrance constructed, -with a wide inner archway. The outer entrance (303) was protected by -a portcullis, and the lodges and turrets on either side had loops to -the field. On the first floor of the gatehouse is a spacious room, -which communicates by mural passages with the first floor of the -angle-turrets and with galleries in the adjacent walls. These are -all provided with loops, so that the approach to the monastery was -effectually commanded. This gatehouse is nearly contemporary with the -West gate of the city of Canterbury, which was begun by Archbishop -Sudbury about 1379;[322] but the Canterbury gateway takes the orthodox -form of a central passage recessed between two round towers, which are -bold projections from a rectangular plan, and its architecture cannot -compare with the moulded archways, elaborate ribbed vaulting, and -canopied niches of Thornton.[323] - -[Illustration: STOKESAY: hall] - -[Illustration: STOKESAY CASTLE from south-west] - -Fortified closes, abbeys, and bishop’s palaces bring us back to the -castle, in the history of which is the epitome of the art of defence. -The concentric plan displayed the resources of the defenders in their -most scientific form, but the concentric plan, as we have seen, is -not very common, and its systematic use in English architecture was -practically confined to a single period. The site, as at Kidwelly, -did not always allow of the full extension of the outer ward, so as -completely to encircle the inner. As a rule, we find that the English -castle of the fourteenth century consists, like Richmond and Ludlow in -their earliest form, or like Carew or Manorbier, of a single bailey -without a keep. This enclosure is flanked by towers at adequate -intervals, and is entered through an imposing gatehouse between two -drum towers. No English castle of this type can compare with the -fourteenth-century castle of Saint-André at Villeneuve d’Avignon (307), -which kept watch upon the castle of the popes on the opposite bank of -the Rhône, or with the Breton castles of Fougères (250) and Vitré. The -castle of Caerlaverock (364), near Dumfries, not the famous castle -besieged by Edward I., but a castle founded in 1333 on a new site, is -a good instance of a simple plan, in which a single ward is surrounded -by a flanked curtain. The castle stands on low and marshy ground near -the Solway firth. An island, surrounded by a broad wet ditch, which, -in the rear of the castle, assumes the proportions of a small lake, is -enclosed by three sections of curtain forming an equilateral triangle. -A drum tower, low and of rather slender proportions, covered each angle -of the base;[324] while at the apex was a lofty gatehouse, flanked -by drum towers, and approached by a drawbridge. The interior of the -castle is somewhat confined, and the older domestic buildings were -much enlarged in the sixteenth century by a mansion, somewhat in the -style of the French Renaissance, which was built against the curtain to -the left hand of the entrance. The old hall occupied the base of the -triangle, while the kitchen offices were against the right-hand curtain. - -[Illustration: Villeneuve d’Avignon] - -Licences to crenellate mansions are common in the Patent rolls of the -Edwards and Richard II. In this way, many private dwelling-houses -reached the rank of castles, while still retaining strongly marked -features of their domestic object. The fortified house of Stokesay -(306) in Shropshire, which Lawrence of Ludlow had licence to -crenellate, 19th October 1290,[325] is a case in point, where the -moated manor-house, with its strong tower, well deserves the name -of castle. At the same time, many of the houses for which licences -of crenellation were granted were never more than manor-houses to -which were added fortifications of a limited kind. This was the case -with Henry Percy’s houses of Spofforth, Leconfield, and Petworth, -the licence for which bears date 14th October 1308.[326] Markenfield -hall in Yorkshire, for which a licence was granted 28th February -1309-10,[327] is still one of our most valuable examples of domestic, -as distinct from military, architecture. Such fortifications as these -houses had or still have were not designed to stand a siege, but to -ensure privacy and keep off casual marauders. Even in the sixteenth -century, dwelling-houses like Compton Wyniates in Warwickshire or -Tolleshunt Major in Essex were surrounded by a moat or simply by a wall. - -Against these minor fortifications, however, we must put the cases -in which the process of crenellation definitely meant conversion -into a castle. Dunstanburgh, which Thomas of Lancaster had licence -to crenellate in 1315,[328] is a military stronghold of the most -pronounced type. Its exposed position upon the Northumbrian coast was -one reason of its strength: coast castles needed strong defences, and -we find that, during the period of the wars with France and later, -the fortification of castles like Dover was a constant method of -precaution against invasion.[329] Dunstanburgh has much in common with -the ordinary strong dwelling-houses of Northumberland. Its base-court -is a very large enclosure, occupying most of the area of the promontory -on which the castle is situated; while the actual castle consists of a -small and gloomy bailey. A wall, flanked at each end by a rectangular -tower, shut off the enclosed space from the mainland. In the wall -between the two towers rose the great gatehouse, which, standing in the -front of attack, gave access to the smaller ward, and contained upon -its upper floors the chief domestic apartments. Strongly defended as -this gatehouse was, with two drum towers of great size flanking the -entrance, the immediate access which it gave to the heart of the castle -was evidently a source of danger. At a later date, the entrance was -walled up, and a new gateway made in the curtain at a point near by. -The gatehouse thus was practically turned into a keep, and the process -which had taken place at Richmond towards the end of the twelfth -century was virtually repeated, with this exception, that the actual -fabric of the gatehouse remained, and was not superseded by a new form -of strong tower. Precisely the same thing happened at Llanstephan -in Carmarthenshire. This castle, one of the most imposing of Welsh -strongholds, stands on a steep and almost isolated hill, where the Towy -enters the Bristol Channel. It is divided by a cross-wall into a large -outer ward and an inner ward which occupies the top of the sloping -summit of the hill. The chief buildings were in the outer ward, and the -finest of them was the great gatehouse, situated at the head of the -landward slope of the hill, and concealed from the river by the convex -curve of the curtain and by a large tower at the eastern angle of the -enclosure. This gatehouse is of trapezoidal form: the gateway and its -drum towers front the field, but the building spreads inwards, and has -two much smaller round towers at its inner angles. It was undesirable, -however, that the gatehouse, which, from the military and domestic -point of view alike, was the principal building in the castle, should -be the point on which the besiegers could concentrate all their force. -Consequently, the gateway was blocked not long after it was built, and -a new entrance was made beside it in the curtain. The way into the -higher ward at Llanstephan was closed by a small rectangular gatehouse, -built near one end of the dividing curtain. - -Thus at Dunstanburgh and Llanstephan, castles in which the system of -defence was not founded upon the concentric plan, but relied upon -the strength of an adequately flanked curtain, gatehouses which are -worthy of Caerphilly and Harlech, and stand upon the outer line of -defence,[330] reverted to the condition of keeps. The possible use of -a keep as an ultimate refuge never ceased altogether to have weight -with castle-builders. The Percys, after their purchase of Alnwick early -in the fourteenth century,[331] although there was ample room for a -large mansion in one or other of the wards, built their dwelling as -a cluster of walls and towers round a courtyard on the mount between -the two wards. Some part of the substructure, the gatehouse with its -octagonal flanking towers, and the curious triple-arched recess at -the head of the well (310), are the most that remains to us of the -early fourteenth-century mansion; but with these is incorporated -twelfth-century work, which shows that the Percys built their house -upon the lines of an older house upon the mount.[332] Thus the -dwelling-house at Alnwick is in reality a keep of unusual form, a -large building with flanking towers built upon a mount which has been -considerably levelled to allow of more room for the house and its -internal courtyard (115). - -[Illustration: Alnwick Castle; Well-head] - -[Illustration: RABY CASTLE, DURHAM - -GROUND PLAN.] - -The strong tower, representing the survival of the keep, is found in -another great northern castle of the fourteenth century, Raby, the -castle of the Nevilles, where in other respects the domestic element -is very prominent (311).[333] Raby, like Alnwick, is occupied to-day, -but no such drastic changes as have converted the house on the mount -at Alnwick into a comfortable modern residence were necessary here. -There is an outer gatehouse slightly in advance of the north angle of -the castle, which was surrounded by a moat and is nearly rectangular. -The buildings are clustered round a main courtyard, the entrance to -which is a gatehouse with a long vaulted passage behind it in the west -block of buildings. At either end of the west front are two massive -rectangular towers: Clifford’s tower, at the north end, is almost -detached, and covers the north angle immediately opposite the gateway. -The remaining tower, known as Bulmer’s tower, projects on five sides -from the south angle of the building, and is the strong tower or keep -of the castle. The kitchen, in the north block, is also contained -within a strong tower, which does not project, however, from the rest -of the buildings. But it was in the north of England that the keep -survived most persistently. Middleham castle received much alteration -at the hands of its Neville owners in the fourteenth century; but -the twelfth-century keep was retained as the central feature of the -enclosure. The rectangular keep of Knaresborough is entirely of the -fourteenth century: it stood between an outer and inner ward, and its -great peculiarity is that the only passage from one to the other was -through the first floor of the keep.[334] - -[Illustration: BELSAY CASTLE] - -The tradition of the rectangular tower, however, was systematically -preserved in the buildings known as pele-towers. These formed the -chief defensive structures of enclosures called “peles,” a word -derived from the Latin _pilum_ (a stake). The twelfth-century tower -of Bowes, a large and important rectangular tower which guarded the -pass over Stainmoor from the valley of the Eden to that of the Tees, -is an early instance of the pele-tower; and probably a large palisaded -enclosure or “barmkin” was attached to it. In the fourteenth century -we find large pele-towers like those at Belsay (313) or Chipchase, -or the great tower-house of East Gilling, the proportions of which -recall the rectangular keeps of a century and a half earlier. Belsay, -with its traceried two-light openings on the first floor, and large -bartizans corbelled out at the angles of its battlements, is the most -handsome building of its kind in the north of England. The ordinary -pele-tower, however, is of a rather later date, and the large majority -of Northumbrian examples are of the fifteenth, and now and then of -the sixteenth century.[335] Halton tower, near Aydon castle, and the -small tower in the corner of the churchyard at Corbridge,[336] are -well-known examples; while one of the most imposing specimens is the -oblong tower of the manor-house of the archbishops of York at Hexham. -The normal elevation was of three stories. The ground-floor, in which -was the doorway, was vaulted as a protection against fire; it may have -been used as a stable, and certainly was used as a store-room. The door -was of wood, but its outer face was protected by a heavy framework -of iron. The first floor, reached by a mural stair, was the main -living-room. The second floor was a sleeping-room; and the battlements -at the top were generally machicolated. Garde-robes are usually found -in these towers; but they can hardly be called comfortable residences, -and had all the disadvantages of the twelfth-century tower-keep, -without its roominess. They are found, not only in Northumberland, but -throughout the northern counties and the south of Scotland, while, in -the hill country of Derbyshire, the pele seems to have been a favourite -form of stronghold. The twelfth-century tower of Peak castle is one of -those examples which allies the pele-tower to the normal tower-keep; -while Haddon hall gradually developed from an enclosure which was -neither more nor less than a pele with a tower at one angle.[337] - -In this connection a word should be said about the fortification of -churches. Ewenny priory church in Glamorgan, with its crenellated -central tower and transept, is our only important example of -fortified religious buildings such as were common in the centre and -south of France—the cathedral of Albi (Tarn), the churches of Royat -(Puy-de-Dôme) or Les-Saintes-Maries-sur-la-Mer (Bouches-du-Rhône).[338] -None of our abbeys is protected by a donjon, like that of Montmajour, -near Arles. There are, however, a certain number of churches, in -districts exposed to constant warfare, the architecture of which, -if not exactly military, was yet possibly constructed with a view -to defence. The massive structure of some twelfth-century towers, -like Melsonby in north Yorkshire, is probably due to the idea that -they could be converted into strongholds, in case of a raid from -the Scottish border. In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, -when Scotland was dreaded as a constant foe, the habit of giving -additional security to the church towers in this district was common. -Some otherwise simple church towers, as at Bolton-on-Swale and Danby -Wiske in north Yorkshire, have their lowest stage vaulted, probably -to minimise the danger of fire. The doorway to the tower-stair at -Bedale was defended by a portcullis, and there are a fireplace -and garde-robe upon the first floor. At Spennithorne, in the same -neighbourhood, the battlements of the tower borrowed an ornament from -military architecture, and are crowned with figures of “defenders.” -In border districts it is not unusual to find the ground-floor of the -tower roofed with a pointed barrel-vault, as at Whickham in county -Durham, where the church stands on a high hill near the confluence of -the Tyne and Derwent. This is a very general custom in South Wales, -where the towers are usually massive and unbuttressed, and stand upon -a battering plinth.[339] In Pembrokeshire a more slender type of tower -prevails, which usually batters upwards through its whole height: the -ground-floor is vaulted, and in many cases the whole church, or, at any -rate, the nave, is ceiled with a barrel-vault. It does not follow that -the object of this form of construction is defensive: lack of timber, -and the consequent employment of local stone for rubble vaulting, is -partly responsible for it. But in no part of the country are military -and ecclesiastical forms of architecture so closely allied. The -barrel-vaults of Monkton priory church and St Mary’s at Pembroke are -similar to those of the chapel and its substructure which occupy the -north-west corner of the inner ward of Pembroke castle: those of the -church at Manorbier have their counterparts in the vaults of the castle -chapel and the large room on its ground-floor. - -If the pele-tower may be regarded as a direct survival of the -rectangular keep in a simplified form, it is probable that the -rectangular keep, with its angle turrets, also had a share in the -origin of a type of castle or strong house, which became common, -especially in the north of England, during the fourteenth and fifteenth -centuries.[340] The plan of this species of castle is a rectangle, -which, in the largest examples, as at Bolton in Wensleydale, has an -open courtyard in the centre; but its distinguishing feature is the -provision of four towers, each at an angle of the structure. Such -keeps as those of Colchester and Kenilworth, where the turrets are of -considerable size and projection, suggest this plan; and some of the -earliest examples, like Haughton on the north Tyne, the oldest parts of -which are of the thirteenth century, have little to distinguish them -from the ordinary rectangular keep. The angle-towers at Haughton are -of no great prominence; but, in the early fourteenth-century castle -of Langley, to the west of Hexham, they are a striking feature of the -building, and one is entirely devoted to a series of garde-robes, -arranged in three stories, with a common pit in the basement. A -building with a somewhat similar plan to these northern castles is the -manor-house or castle which Robert Burnell, bishop of Bath and Wells, -and chancellor of England under Edward I., built at Acton Burnell, -in Shropshire.[341] Here, however, the building is of a thoroughly -domestic type, with large two-light window-openings of great beauty, -which at once remove any suspicion as to its military character. The -castle of the Scropes at Bolton and that of the Nevilles at Sheriff -Hutton represent the highest development of this quadrangular plan. -The licence to crenellate Bolton was granted in 1379:[342] the licence -for Sheriff Hutton bears date 1382.[343] Both castles are large -buildings with a central courtyard, and in both the military ideal -was uppermost. Sheriff Hutton is now in a complete state of ruin, but -Bolton is fairly perfect; and from its structure one important fact -may be deduced. While the usual precautions for defence were carefully -preserved, and the outer openings in the walls interfered little with -the general solidity of structure, the domestic buildings round the -courtyard formed part and parcel of the fabric itself. They were not -merely built up against or within the curtain, but the curtain was -actually their outer wall, and not simply their defensive covering. In -fact, the manor-house in these cases was not a separate building within -the enclosure of the castle; but the castle was also the manor-house. -The same combination of military with domestic aims is noticeable in -the contemporary castle of Raby (1378), of which the plan, already -described, approximates irregularly to the type.[344] Castles akin -to Bolton and Sheriff Hutton are Lumley, the licence for which was -granted in 1392,[345] and Chillingham, the angle-towers of which are -of a much earlier date than is usual in castles of this plan.[346] -At Chillingham the medieval work is somewhat obscured by alterations -made in the seventeenth century, but the original plan is retained. -Survivals of the quadrangular plan may be traced in some of the great -manor-houses of the early Renaissance period. It is not difficult to -detect in the plan of Hardwick hall (1587), while the ground-plan -of Wollaton hall (1580) is probably derived from a similar source. -Smaller houses like Barlborough hall, near Sheffield, or Wootton lodge, -near Ashbourne, have a kinship with it, although in these cases, and -especially in the first, the elevation is more tower-like than is usual -in medieval buildings of the type. It is needless to say that these -Renaissance buildings are without any military character. - -The traditional form of the rectangular keep was also responsible, no -doubt, for the great tower-house which formed the principal feature, -and is now the only portion left, of the castle of Tattershall in -Lincolnshire. The discussion of this building belongs more properly -to the last chapter of this book, for its general construction and -architectural features are those of an age in which the military -architecture of the middle ages was already little more than a -survival. This age of transition begins in the last quarter of the -fourteenth century; and, as already pointed out, castles like Bolton -and Raby clearly show its influence. During the later half of the -fourteenth and the fifteenth century, outside the north of England, it -is rare to find a castle which actually deserves the name. The large -private residence, with a certain amount of defensive precautions, -became increasingly common; and, where alterations were made to -existing castles, they were generally entirely in the direction of -domestic comfort. - -[Illustration: WARWICK: Guy’s tower] - -[Illustration: Warwick Castle; Cæsar’s tower] - -There are, however, a few striking exceptions which belong to the later -part of the fourteenth century. The two polygonal towers, Guy’s tower -(319) and Cæsar’s tower (321), which cover the angles of the eastern -curtain at Warwick and flank the gatehouse with its barbican, are cases -in point. Few castles show features of the military architecture of -all periods to such advantage. The plan is that of an early Norman -mount-and-bailey castle, which has in course of time been surrounded -with a stone curtain;[347] while a magnificent residence, in the -main a building of the fourteenth century, has grown up on the south -side of the bailey next the river.[348] The most commanding military -features, however, are the towers just mentioned, 128 and 147 feet high -respectively. The whole character of these towers is French rather -than English. Their great height may be contrasted with that of the -contemporary rectangular towers at Raby, the loftiest of which is only -81 feet high, and depends for its defence almost entirely upon the -thickness of its walls. The nearest parallel to the Warwick towers, on -the other hand, is such a building as the fifteenth-century Tour Talbot -at Falaise, a lofty cylindrical tower built at an angle of the donjon, -as is generally stated, during the English occupation of northern -France.[349] The chief characteristics of the towers at Warwick are the -bold corbelling out of their parapets, with a row of machicolations, -and the provision of a central turret, rising some distance above the -level of the rampart-walk—a feature common in France, but most unusual -in England.[350] The vaulting of both towers throughout is also a -French feature; and in every respect they bear traces of an influence -which, beginning in the cylindrical donjons of Philip Augustus’ castles -and of Coucy, survived to a late date in France, and may have affected -English military work in that country, but had little result in England -itself. While, throughout the fifteenth century, the French castle -maintained its character as a stronghold, and even kept that character -when Renaissance influence was strong in that country, the military -character of the English castle steadily diminished. The wars of the -Roses were a succession of battles in open field, in which castles and -walled towns played very little part. And while the military character -of Warwick continued to be emphasised during the period of transition, -the neighbouring castle of Kenilworth, in common with most English -castles, was transformed, during the same period, from a stronghold -into a palace. - -[Illustration: HURSTMONCEAUX: gatehouse] - -[Illustration: BODIAM: north front and gatehouse] - -The most imposing of our later castles, which may be considered -primarily as military buildings, is Bodiam in Sussex (323). On 21st -October 1385, Sir Edward Dalyngrugge had licence to crenellate his -manor of Bodiam “by the sea,” and “to make a castle thereof in defence -of the adjacent country against the king’s enemies.”[351] The main -object of this licence was evidently to provide against a French -attack upon the ports of Rye and Winchelsea, at the mouth of the -Rother: in the following March, Sir Edward was named first upon the -commission appointed by letters patent to fortify and wall the town of -Rye.[352] Bodiam stands upon the left bank of the Rother, some miles -above Rye, and commands from its site, at some little height above the -valley, a long stretch of marsh in the direction of the mouth of the -river. The walls of the castle descend sheer into a lake, formed by the -damming up of a stream. The castle is simply a rectangular enclosure -surrounded by a lofty curtain. Each angle is capped by a cylindrical -tower, and in the middle of each face is a rectangular tower: the great -gatehouse, however, in the north face, has two rectangular towers, one -on each side of the entrance. The tower in the centre of the opposite -face is the lesser gatehouse of the castle. The plan bears a striking -analogy to that of the castle of Villandraut (Gironde), built about -1250: Nunney in Somerset (1373) and Shirburn in Oxfordshire (1377) -are coeval English examples. The interior is surrounded by domestic -buildings. Against the south curtain were the hall and kitchen: the -screens at the west end of the hall formed a passage to the lesser -gateway. The wall dividing the screens from the kitchen still remains, -with the three doorways which gave access to the kitchen, pantry, -and buttery (326). The private apartments were returned along the -east curtain, and at their north end was the chapel, which had the -usual arrangement of a western gallery, entered from the chambers on -the first floor of this range of building. Servants’ quarters and -barracks occupied the west side of the enclosure. All the buildings -were plentifully supplied with garde-robes in the towers; and the upper -portion of the south-west tower was arranged as a pigeon-house. - -In spite of the ample space given to the domestic buildings, the -defensive nature of the works at Bodiam is very clearly apparent, not -only in the strength of the walls, the height of which (40 feet) is -equal to the height of the walls at Harlech, but in the provision made -for the defence of the approaches. The main gateway was protected by -a barbican, which occupied a small island in the lake, some 54 feet -in front of the gatehouse. A causeway, which is in part, at any rate, -original, connected the gateway with the barbican; but it is probable -that this had a bridge at one or both ends. A bridge, spanning a gap -of 6 feet, connected the outer end of the barbican with an octagonal -island in the middle of the broad moat. The straight causeway by which -this island is now reached from the mainland does not represent the -original approach; but a longer and more tortuous approach was planned -from a pier set against the west bank of the moat and joined, probably -by a double drawbridge, to the octagonal island, which thus stood at -a point where the road, commanded throughout by the curtain and its -flanking towers, turned at a right angle towards the north gatehouse -of the castle. The approach to the smaller or south gate has now -disappeared; but two walls project into the moat on each side of the -entrance, and against the south bank of the moat remains the pier on -which the outer drawbridge dropped. - -[Illustration: Bodiam Castle; Courtyard] - -The labour and pains which were taken to strengthen this castle are -shown by the revetting of the earthwork, not only of the main island, -but also of the lesser islands in the moat, and of portions of the -causeways of approach. The isolation of the castle in the middle of a -lake may have been suggested by the plan adopted, at a much earlier -date, at Leeds in Kent. The great barbican of Leeds, however, divided -by wet ditches into three separate parts, forms the approach to the -main bridge across the moat. It is, in fact, the _tête-du-pont_ of the -castle, and does not occupy a separate island, as at Bodiam, between -the mainland and the gateway. - -The gatehouse of Bodiam is an imposing building, and the -castle-builders, from the days of Edward I. onwards, paid an attention -to their gatehouses almost equal to that which the late Norman builders -had given to their tower-keeps.[353] To the same twenty-five years -within which Bodiam was built and the two great towers at Warwick -were completed, belongs the greatest of English gatehouses, that of -the castle of Lancaster. It is known to have been built as late as -about 1405; for the arms of Henry V. as prince of Wales appear on a -shield above the gateway. It is therefore one of the latest military -works in the castles of the duchy, and the last of the series of -gatehouses which owed their origin to lords of the house of Lancaster, -and includes the noble structures at Dunstanburgh, Tutbury, and the -great tower between the wards at Knaresborough. The castle to which -it was added was surrounded by a curtain, largely of twelfth-century -date,[354] and contained a tower-keep and domestic buildings which -appear to have been in the main of the thirteenth century. Situated -at the head of a very steep hill, and flanked by two huge octagonal -towers, this gatehouse is the perfection of the type which is seen, -with more slender flanking towers, at Bothal and in the keep of -Alnwick. The window openings towards the field are few and small: the -battlements are boldly corbelled out, and machicolations of large size -are left between them and the wall. In a corner of each of the flanking -towers rises a turret, the interior of which apparently served as a -magazine for ammunition. The interior of this gatehouse, although the -space is ample, is fully in keeping with its sombre exterior. Each of -the two upper floors contains three rooms, one in the central block of -the gatehouse, the others in the towers at the sides. These rooms are -large and lofty, and their original wooden ceilings still retain traces -of colour; but they are gloomy and ill-lighted to the last degree. The -apartments on the first floor communicate directly with one another, -but those on the second floor are entered from an outer passage, which -passes between them and the inner or west wall of the gatehouse. The -guard-rooms on the ground-floor are approached in the usual way, by -doorways near the inner entrance. The main stair is a vice in the -south-west corner of building. - -In the important additions made to the castle of Warkworth about 1400, -the compromise attained between the requirements of defence and comfort -is very striking. The plan of this castle, throughout its history, like -the plan of Warwick, remained that of the original mount-and-bailey -fortress. We have noticed already the addition of the stone curtain to -the bailey, and the building of a large mansion against its western -and southern faces. It is probable that a shell-keep was added to the -mount, when the stone curtain was made; for the foundations of the -present strong house on the mount are of masonry of an earlier and -rougher character than the elaborately dressed stonework of the house -itself. This house (221), which combines the features of keep and -private residence in a most unusual way, appears to have been built -by the first earl of Northumberland, who died in 1407.[355] The shape -is that of a square with chamfered angles; but from the centre of -each face projects a bold half-octagon, so that the ground-plan is a -Greek cross with short arms and a large central block. The elevation -consists of a basement and three floors. The basement contains tanks -and a vault with a corbelled roof, which was certainly a prison, and -bears a strong likeness to a similar vault in the inner gatehouse at -Alnwick. There is no basement stair, communication with the vaults -being through trap-doors in the floor above. On this floor are a number -of dark vaulted store-rooms, one of which was the wine-cellar, and -has its own stair to the daïs end of the hall on the floor above. The -two upper floors are comparatively cheerful and well lighted: a shaft -in the centre of the building gave light to the inner passage between -the hall and kitchen. The main stair is in the south half-octagon, -the chief doorway being in the west face of this projection, on the -first floor. From the lobby on the second floor, at the head of the -stair, two doorways open. That on the right leads into the hall, which -occupies the south-east angle of the central block, and is of the -full height of the two upper floors. That on the left leads to the -servants’ quarters and the kitchens, which occupied the western part -of the second floor, and communicated by separate doorways with the -hall and chapel. The great kitchen filled the north-west angle of the -central block, and, like the hall, was two stories in height. The north -half-octagon and the north-east angle of the main block adjacent to it, -were divided into two floors. The lower room in the half-octagon was -probably the private room of the master of the house, communicating -with the lower room in the main block, which was probably the common -room of his immediate retinue. Similarly, upon the upper floor were a -ladies’ bower and a separate room for the countess of Northumberland’s -own use. Between the private apartments and the hall, occupying the -centre of the east side of the main block and the half-octagon beyond, -was the chapel. The chancel, in the half-octagon, was the height of -both floors; but the western part of the chapel was in two floors, the -upper forming a gallery, with a doorway from the ladies’ bower. From -the south-east corner of this gallery, another doorway opened upon a -narrow stone gallery, formed by the internal thickening of the lower -part of the east wall of the hall: this may have served the purpose of -a minstrels’ gallery, or may have been used by the ladies of the house, -when they wished to watch the festivities below. The wall beneath this -gallery is pierced by a long vestry or priest’s chamber, opening out -of the south wall of the chapel, and built with a rising floor, in -order to give head-way to the stair from the wine-cellar below. The -ground-floor of the chapel also communicated with the hall and the -men’s apartments. In addition to the rooms already mentioned, there -were third-floor rooms in the south-west angle of the main block and -in the western half-octagon, which communicated with the gallery of -the chapel. The area covered is not large, but the ingenuity of the -plan is remarkable; and the disposition of the various apartments must -have required an amount of thought and skill, which no other medieval -dwelling-house shows in so high a degree. - -[Illustration: RAGLAN CASTLE] - -[Illustration: THORNTON ABBEY: gatehouse and barbican] - -While the lower portions of the walls of the strong house at Warkworth -are of great solidity and strength, the upper floors are lighted by -large traceried window-openings, and the tall oblong windows of the -hall, and those of the chancel of the chapel, convey no idea of the -military purpose of the building. It is a curious fact that, in spite -of the pains which were evidently expended upon this tower-house, the -period of its employment as a residence seems to have been unusually -short. The various lords of Warkworth were never satisfied with one -residence for any length of time; and there is evidence that when -John, duke of Bedford, was sent by his father, Henry IV., to pacify -the north after Northumberland’s rebellion, he took up his quarters at -Warkworth in the gatehouse. Later in the fifteenth century, the old -mansion, already described, in the bailey, was restored and altered: -a porch-tower was made at the north-east end of the hall, and a -stair-turret intruded in the south-east angle. The dwelling-house, -which had been built within the castle about 1200, was converted, -in fact, into a stately mansion; and the house on the mount was -practically abandoned. No better instance could be found of the gradual -weakening of the military ideal in favour of domestic comfort. All the -castles of the later fourteenth and fifteenth centuries are examples -of this in some degree. At Warwick the domestic buildings are at -least of equal importance with the defences. The dwelling-house at -Ludlow gradually increased in size and splendour, while nothing was -added to its military defences. Even the outer walls of Bolton, a -strong and well-guarded castle, are pierced with windows which admit -a considerable amount of light. Bodiam and Raglan (331), relying on -the great breadth of their moats, have large outward window openings. -In all these instances, however, the dwelling-house, even at Raglan, -is still regarded as a house within a castle. In the planning of the -tower house at Warkworth the military and domestic ideals were both -present to the minds of the builders. Neither can be said to prevail: -the building was equally useful as house and castle. The hall at -Warkworth, on the other hand, when it was rebuilt, was treated with -an architectural splendour quite apart from any idea of its position -within the walls of a place of defence. Those walls had become -obsolete, and the house was the one object present to the aims of the -restorers. A step further was taken at Hurstmonceaux (323), where the -great brick house has the semblance of a castle, but little of its -reality. At Carew in Pembrokeshire, three stages in the development -of the domestic ideal as applied to military architecture can be -studied in close proximity. On the east side of the ward are the -earlier domestic apartments, somewhat cramped and gloomy, with outer -windows which, wherever they occur, as in the chapel (248) and adjacent -rooms, admit daylight very faintly. On the west side is the great hall -built in the fifteenth century by Rhys ap Thomas, with its imposing -porch-tower and entrance stair, a large and amply lighted room. On the -north are the additions made in the sixteenth century by Sir John -Perrott. The eastern rooms are those of a house within a castle: the -western hall is that of a house which, although military considerations -have had no part in its planning, is still confined within an earlier -curtain. On the north side, however, the curtain has been broken -through, and a series of apartments has been built out beyond its -limits, proclaiming, with their long mullioned windows piercing the -walls from floor to roof, that the day of castles is over, and that the -dwelling-house has the field to itself. - - - - -CHAPTER XII - -THE AGE OF TRANSITION: THE FORTIFIED DWELLING-HOUSE - - -Some account has now been given of the change which came over the -English castle in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. The life -of the feudal warrior in his stronghold gradually became the life of -the country gentleman in a house whose fortification, such as it was, -was of a merely precautionary character. It now remains for us to say -something of those domestic buildings which are the principal feature -of the English castles of the later middle ages, and of those houses -which, while preserving the name and to some extent the appearance of -castles, were designed primarily as dwelling-houses. In these examples -the main lines of the normal dwelling-house plan, which have already -been described, were preserved. The hall still formed the nucleus of -the buildings and the centre of the life of the household: the kitchen, -buttery, and pantry still took their place at the end of the hall next -the screens, while the two-storied block, with the great chamber on -the first floor, was found at the other end behind the dais. But, with -the increase of comfort and splendour, came the desire for more space -and greater privacy. The great hall at Ludlow (96), reconstructed in -the early part of the fourteenth century, had a first-floor chamber -at either end of the hall; and the additions made to these domestic -buildings in the fifteenth century considerably increased the number -of private apartments in a house which was already of great size. At -Manorbier (208) the whole dwelling-house was enlarged and the number -of rooms increased by a reconstruction in the second half of the -thirteenth century. The dwelling-house in the inner ward of Conway, -the hall and its adjacent rooms at Caerphilly, were planned on a more -liberal scale than had been thought necessary in the castles of the -eleventh and twelfth centuries. The essentially military character, -however, of the Edwardian castle cramped the free development of -domestic buildings within the precinct; and it was not until the middle -of the fourteenth century that the plan of the dwelling-house in the -castle had reached the stage at which it began to be considered for its -own sake, apart from the curtain wall which protected it. - -The development of the private mansion within the castle is well -illustrated at Porchester. The outer defences of the castle, the -twelfth-century great tower, the curtain of the inner ward, the -fourteenth-century barbican, were all kept under repair; for the French -wars of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries made the defence of -Portsmouth harbour a desirable factor in English strategy, and the -considerations which prompted the building of Bodiam also demanded that -the military character of Porchester castle should be preserved. The -barbican, however, was the last important addition to the defences. The -later work included the remodelling of the twelfth-century hall against -the south curtain.[356] This was in great part rebuilt, the hall on the -first floor being supplied with large traceried windows towards the -interior of the bailey: late in the fifteenth century, a porch with -an upper floor was added at the end next the screens. Along the west -side of the inner ward, between the great hall and the keep, a smaller -hall was added late in the fourteenth century, the towers upon the east -curtain were converted to domestic purposes, and a range of buildings -was eventually added upon this side of the bailey (97). - -[Illustration: Carew Castle; Entrance to great hall] - -Externally, Porchester castle is simply a fortress: internally, the -domestic buildings rivet the attention, and only the imposing mass of -the keep (131) reminds us of the military origin of the stronghold. -Similarly, in the Cornish castle of Restormel, where the one ward -is nearly circular in shape, and is surrounded by a deep ditch, the -whole interior face of the curtain is covered by a series of domestic -buildings, with partition walls radiating from the centre of the plan. -The position of the hall, kitchen, and great chamber can easily be -traced: the chapel was on the east side of the ward, separated from the -hall by the great chamber, and the chancel, with a substructure, formed -a rectangular projection from the curtain at this point. Here, too, -as at Porchester, Ludlow, or Manorbier, the dwelling-house was masked -by the fortress. But there are also castles in which the importance -of the dwelling-house, as time went on, began to overshadow its -military surroundings. At Tutbury the strong position of the castle, an -entrenched stronghold which was probably ditched about for the first -time long before the Conquest, the high mound raised by the Norman -founder of the castle, and the fine fourteenth-century gatehouse[357] -(237), approached by an ascent which was commanded by the whole length -of the eastern curtain, strike the visitor far less than the remains of -the great hall and its adjacent chambers. This beautiful work, often -attributed, like so much else in castles of the duchy of Lancaster, -to John of Gaunt, is probably of the middle of the fifteenth century: -there is a remarkable similarity between the details of the stonework -here and at Wingfield, a house the date of which is well known to be -somewhat later than 1441. As a whole, the castles which, like Tutbury, -became merged in the possessions of the house of Lancaster, and came -to the Crown on the accession of Henry IV., furnish us with some of -the best examples of castle dwelling-houses on a palatial scale. At -Pontefract, for example, a range of buildings, known later as John -of Gaunt’s buildings, rose upon the site of the eastern mound. The -drawings of Pontefract and of Melbourne in Derbyshire, preserved -among the duchy records, show us castles which have utterly changed -their aspect, and have become palaces. Nowhere, however, is this more -noticeable to-day than at Kenilworth, where the erection of the great -hall may be fairly attributed to John of Gaunt.[358] The whole of the -north and part of the west side of the inner ward, on the summit of -the raised ground on which the castle stands, are covered by a splendid -series of late fourteenth-century buildings, chief among them the hall, -probably the finest apartment of its date in England, Westminster hall -alone excepted (337). Later still, just as at Carew, the transformation -of the stronghold was completed by the addition, in Henry VIII.’s time, -of apartments, which have now disappeared, along the south side of the -ward; and, in the reign of Elizabeth, the south-west angle was filled -by a tall block of buildings erected by the earl of Leicester. - -[Illustration: Kenilworth Castle; Entrance to hall] - -One may compare the growth of the domestic element at Kenilworth -with that of the French château of Blois, where the military aspect -of the building was obliterated by degrees. To the great hall in the -north-east corner of the castle bailey[359] were added, first, the -buildings of Charles of Orléans (1440-65) on the west face.[360] Then -came the late Gothic work, on the east, of Louis XII. (1498-1502). In -the sixteenth century the hall was joined to Charles of Orléans’ block -by the Renaissance pile of building raised under Francis I. and Henry -II. The castle by this time had become a palace, and the transformation -was completed in the seventeenth century (1635) by the erection of the -tall range of Palladian buildings in the north-west angle, which is the -most prominent feature in the northern view of the château.[361] A -similar work of transformation took place at Amboise under Louis XII. -and Francis I. In both these instances, however, the chief changes -were made at a period when the Renaissance was exercising a powerful -influence on French life and thought. As a rule, French castles of -the fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries, while increasing in -splendour, preserved much of the character of the feudal stronghold. -The two splendid halls and the northern range of buildings at Coucy, -built by Enguerrand VII., lord of Coucy, in the last quarter of the -fourteenth century, were added without detriment to the strength of -the fortress; and to this same period belongs the talus covering the -spring at the foot of the donjon curtain, a work of purely military -character.[362] In the châteaux of Méhun-sur-Yèvre (Cher), built by -John, duke of Berry, between 1370 and 1385, and Pierrefonds (Oise), -built by Louis, duke of Orléans, between 1390 and 1420, the splendour -of the palace was equally balanced by the strength of the fortress. - -In tracing the development of the castle until it is merged in the -manor-house, we must not forget that the fortified dwelling-house was -not merely the creation of an age which was ceasing to build castles. -Many of the strongholds to which allusion has been made, especially -in the north and west of England, were dwelling-houses rather than -castles. Acton Burnell, Aydon, Markenfield, Haughton, or those -houses which, like Mortham in Yorkshire or Yanwath in Westmorland, -have pele-towers attached to them, whether as part of their original -equipment or as a later addition, are all fabrics in which military -precautions had to be taken, but the everyday needs of the occupants -were first considered. A castle is a military post which may include -one or more dwelling-houses within its walls: the house which may -be turned into a castle, when occasion requires, is on a different -footing. Bishops’ palaces, such as Auckland, Cawood, Wells, or Lincoln, -are examples of the large manor-house in which fortification was -merely a measure of precaution. The splendid houses of the bishops of -St David’s are not the least remarkable of the remains of medieval -architecture, half-domestic, half-military, which are common in -south-west Wales. Bishop Henry Gower (1328-47) developed at Swansea -castle, and at his manor-houses of Lamphey and St David’s, a type of -architecture which deserves mention on account of its originality. The -three houses mentioned are somewhat different from each other. - -[Illustration: HADDON: upper courtyard and tower] - -[Illustration: Lamphey Palace] - -Swansea castle is a large block of building, obviously military in -character, and in general appearance not unlike the earlier castle -which so nobly commands the town of Haverfordwest. Bishop Gower’s -hall at Lamphey is a plain building, the chief architectural feature -of which is the great cellar on the ground-floor: this was covered by -a pointed barrel-vault, originally strengthened by heavy transverse -ribs, most of which have fallen away. The vast palace of St David’s, -on the other hand, displays in all its details, and especially in the -ogee-headed doorway of the porch of its larger hall, a sumptuousness -of decoration which is not often found in the domestic architecture of -the time. The great hall on the west side of the courtyard, the smaller -hall and private apartments on the south side, the vaulted cellars -which occupy the whole of the basement in each range, are planned upon -a scale equal to that of a castle of first-rate size. But, although -these buildings differ so much in general character, they have a common -feature in the parapet, pierced with a row of wide pointed arches, -and corbelled out above the top of the walls. Comparatively rough and -coarse at Swansea and Lamphey (341), this parapet at St David’s is -treated with much delicacy, and the jambs of the arches are furnished -with slender shafting. Whether there was any thought of its employment -in war is a doubtful point; although it might be useful in such a -case, it was probably intended in the first instance merely as an -ornament. The corbelling is very slight, without machicolation. The -whole design of the parapet is a curious feature which deserves special -notice. There is another and later hall at Lamphey, west of the earlier -building; and adjoining this on the north is the handsome chapel, built -by Bishop Vaughan early in the sixteenth century. The gatehouse at -Llawhaden, another manor of the bishops of St David’s, appears to be -of the fifteenth century, and, with its flanking towers, rounded to -the field, has a more distinctly warlike appearance than anything at -Lamphey or St David’s. - -[Illustration: HADDON: chapel] - -We may now take a few typical examples which illustrate the change -from the fortified residence to the large dwelling-house, which -was accomplished by the beginning of the sixteenth century. At a -comparatively early date, a divorce between military and domestic -architecture is manifest in such a house as Stokesay (306). Here the -hall and its adjacent buildings are those of a private house pure -and simple; and the defensive portion of the plan is confined to the -polygonal tower at the south end of the range of buildings, which, -in time of war, could be used as a separate stronghold, and was -ingeniously planned and well lighted.[363] But at Stokesay (207) the -tower appears to be a somewhat later addition to a thirteenth-century -dwelling-house. Defensive precautions are added. Of the opposite case, -in which they disappear, Haddon hall (340), the most attractive and -most thoroughly preserved of English medieval houses, is the best -example. In its earliest state, it appears to have been a mere pele, -occupying a portion of its present site, with a tower at its north-east -and highest corner. The chapel (343), in which large portions of -twelfth-century work still remain, was probably built outside the -palisade, as the parochial chapel of the hamlet of Nether Haddon. -As time went on, the fortified enclosure enlarged its boundaries. A -wall was built round it, and the chapel was taken into the line of -circumference.[364] In the fourteenth century the present hall was -built between the upper and lower courts.[365] At its north end were -the screens, forming the communication between the two courts, with -the pantry, buttery, and passage to the kitchen leading directly out -of them. At the south end, behind the dais, was the cellar with the -great chamber above. Later on, a porch with an upper chamber was built -at the entry to the screens. During the fifteenth century, the upper -courtyard was gradually surrounded by buildings; a new chancel and -octagonal bell-turret were built to the chapel; and, at the end of this -period, the old curtain wall, between the chapel and the great chamber, -was covered by an outer wall on either side, and reduced to the state -of a mere partition wall on which wooden upper buildings were carried. -Wide windows were opened in the west walls of the cellar and the great -chamber, and the cellar was turned into a private dining-room at the -back of the hall. Early in the sixteenth century, the buildings round -the entrance court were completed, and the timber stage east of the -chapel was rebuilt in stone. Finally, in the reign of Elizabeth, came -the addition which marks the last stage in this transition from pele -to dwelling-house, when, on the south side of the upper courtyard, -was built the long gallery, with its row of wide mullioned windows, -and deep bays projecting towards the garden. While the manor-house at -Wingfield, not many miles distant, is practically all of one period, -and illustrates a definite compromise between war and peace, Haddon is -a growth of from four to five centuries, and from an early date showed -a tendency to rid itself of its military character. - -[Illustration: Wingfield Manor; Plan] - -Wingfield manor is probably the most striking example of a later -English manor-house with certain defensive features. It was begun by -Ralph, Lord Cromwell, between 1441 and 1455. Its position is naturally -strong. From an almost isolated hill, with steep slopes to the east, -north, and west, it commands the valley in which it stands, but is -itself commanded by the much higher hills which separate it from the -Derwent valley on the west.[366] The buildings are arranged round two -courtyards (346). The outer and larger court, which is entered by -a wide gateway, with a postern on one side, at the south end of the -east wall, contained store-houses and farm-buildings, with a large -barn on the south side. This base-court, like the “barmkin” of a -fortified house in the north of England, would be useful in time of war -for the protection of tenants and their flocks and herds, who had no -other means of defence. A gatehouse in the north wall gives admission -to the second court, which was surrounded by buildings on all sides -but the east. The whole length of the north side was covered by a -magnificent block of buildings, which included the hall, kitchen, and -chief private apartments (349). These buildings have not received the -full attention which they deserve, but they obviously belong to two -periods of work, the great kitchen block at the west end being added -as an afterthought.[367] The plan is curious and unusual. The hall -occupies the eastern extremity of the block. Although the roof and a -large part of the south wall are entirely gone, and the north wall was -mutilated by the later partition of the hall into two floors and a -number of rooms, the porch, with its upper chamber, and the bay-window, -at opposite ends of the south wall, are still fairly perfect. The hall -was the full height of the block, and had a high-pitched roof, with -large window openings in the gables: it is not certain whether the -fireplace was in the centre of the room, with a louvre in the roof for -the smoke, or in the south wall. The porch led into screens at the -west end, over which was probably a minstrels’ gallery. At the north -end of the screens was a lobby, from which a vice led to the upper -floor of the building dividing the hall from the kitchen; while a wide -and well-moulded doorway opened upon a stair which descended into the -garden behind the hall. On this side the slope of the ground is very -abrupt, and the hall is built upon a very large and handsome cellar -(348), divided into two longitudinal halves by a row of five columns. -The aisles thus formed are vaulted in oblong compartments upon broad -four-centred ribs. The bold wave-mouldings of the ribs and the carving -of the bosses at their junction are carved with a masculine vigour of -design which gives this cellar a place among the chief architectural -masterpieces of its age. There is a short vice with broad steps at -each corner of the cellar: those at the north-east and south-east -corners communicated directly with the dais and sideboard of the hall, -the entrance to the south-east stair being a lobby opening on the -bay-window. The south-west vice was entered from the courtyard, while -the north-west stair opened into a room on one side of the passage from -the hall to the kitchen. - -[Illustration: Wingfield Manor; Cellar of hall] - -[Illustration: WINGFIELD: bay-window of hall] - -The kitchen and its offices were not entered in the usual way, -directly from the screens. A block of buildings, with its main axis -at right angles to that of the hall, intervenes. There are, however, -three doorways, as usual, in the west wall of the hall. Of these, -the middle and largest was that of a central passage leading to the -kitchen. A smaller doorway, on either side of this, gave access to two -ground-floor rooms, beneath which were cellars. The whole floor above -these, entered by a vice from the large lobby at the garden end of the -screens, was the great chamber, which had a high-pitched roof, and -was lighted, towards the courtyard, by a large window-opening of four -lights, with good rectilinear tracery and transoms, beneath a segmental -arch. It need hardly be said that the position of the great chamber, -at the entrance end of the hall, is most unusual. The best parallel -example is found in connection with the hall of the thirteenth-century -bishop’s palace at Lincoln. Here the slope at the north end of the hall -prevented the construction of a large block of buildings on that side. -At the south end the ground fell away almost vertically, and here, upon -a vaulted substructure, was built a block of two stories, the lower -of which contained the pantry, buttery, and passage to the kitchens, -while the upper was the great chamber. The kitchen was contained in a -detached tower, between which and the intermediate block was a bridge, -with a covered passage on the first floor. The two-storied block has -now been converted into the bishop’s chapel, of which the windows of -the great chamber form the clerestory; while the passage across the -kitchen bridge has been turned into a vestry. - -At Wingfield the great chamber was evidently placed at the entrance end -of the hall to avoid the type of construction which had been adopted -as a _pis aller_ at Lincoln, and the side of the hall was chosen where -the ground was comparatively level. Nevertheless, at the dais end of -the hall, where there is a fall of several feet in the ground, there -are considerable remains of buildings on the lower level; and it is -possible that the first kitchen buildings may have been planned at -this end. The position, with easy access to the large cellar, and, -by a stair which still partly remains, to the hall, would not have -been inconvenient, and expense in building would have been saved by -this reversal of the usual arrangement, which placed the more costly -great chamber block on level foundations, although at the far end of -the hall. The four stairs of the cellar made it easy, whatever the -position of the kitchen might be, to serve food directly to the dais, -or through the screens to the lower end of the hall. However, whether -this was the original arrangement or not, the kitchen block west of -the great chamber was an addition made probably a few years after the -original planning of the house.[368] The central passage below the -great chamber was continued to the kitchen, passing between a large -pantry and buttery. Its south wall, next the buttery, is pierced by -two broad arched openings, forming a buttery hatch upon a magnificent -scale, through which drink would be served. There were upper floors to -the buttery and pantry; but the kitchen itself, which contained three -fireplaces, filled the whole west end of the block. Its floor is sloped -and grooved, to facilitate drainage: the floor-drains were emptied -through spouts in the west wall. - -The use of the buildings on the south side of the inner courtyard, -on either hand of the gateway, cannot be determined with certainty; -but the west side of the court is covered by an important range of -buildings, between the kitchen on the north and the high tower at the -south-west corner of the enclosure. Of these buildings, which belong -to the original fifteenth-century work, little remains but the west -and the foundations of the east wall, in which were two bay-windows. -They were probably a suite of private rooms, containing a smaller hall -or private dining-room, such as is found at Conway and Porchester, and -in most of our castles from the later thirteenth century onwards.[369] -At the south end of this block stands the one distinctively military -feature of the manor-house, the tall tower of four stories, which, -containing comfortable apartments in time of peace, could be isolated -and converted into a stronghold in time of war.[370] - -[Illustration: WINGFIELD: strong tower] - -This provisional arrangement for defence is characteristic of the -age. The primary object of the house at Wingfield was comfort and -pleasure; and its type is as far removed from the military perfection -of Caerphilly or Harlech as it can possibly be. The need of a -perpetual garrison was not felt; for, in case of war, siege would -be only the last resort of an attacking force. Consequently, the -defences of the house, apart from the accommodation for barracks and -the safety of refugees in the base-court, and from ordinary strength -of the gateways,[371] were restricted to the provision of a tower as -a last resource. The house, however, which the builder of Wingfield -constructed at Tattershall in Lincolnshire between 1433 and 1443, on -the site of an earlier stronghold, took the shape of a brick tower -of four stages, with a basement half below the ground (356). There -is an octagonal turret at each angle, the vice which leads from the -ground-floor to the roof being contained in the south-east turret -(357). The walls are of considerable thickness throughout, but are -pierced above the basement with large two-light windows, two in each -stage of the west wall. In the east wall are the chimneys of the -fireplaces on the ground-floor and first floor; but behind these the -wall is pierced by mural passages, lighted to the field. The north -wall on the first and third floor also is pierced by passages. These -communicated with chambers in the turrets and with garde-robes. The -internal features, the vaulted stairs and passages in the thickness -of the walls, and the stone fireplaces on the upper floors, with -rectangular mantels ornamented with shields of arms,[372] are elaborate -and sumptuous; but the tower is a shell, and the floors above the -vaulted basement are gone. A peculiar feature of the tower, however, is -the covered gallery which is corbelled out on stone arches above each -wall of the building between the turrets: the floor is machicolated -between the corbels, and the gallery has rectangular windows opening to -the field. Such a gallery is seen in French military architecture, as, -for example, in the Pont Valentré at Cahors, but appears to be unique -in England.[373] In the same part of Lincolnshire, and about the same -period, towers of the type of Tattershall are not uncommon. Kyme tower, -in the fens north-east of Sleaford, Hussey tower, on the north-east -side of Boston, and the Tower on the Moor, between Tattershall and -Horncastle, are cases in point: none of these, however, can compare -with Tattershall in beauty and size, or can show anything like the same -union of defensive with purely domestic arrangements. - -[Illustration: Tattershall Castle] - -[Illustration: BASEMENT - -GROUND FLOOR - -FIRST FLOOR - -SECOND FLOOR - -THIRD FLOOR - -FOURTH FLOOR - -Tattershall Castle; Plan] - -Brick-work was employed in all these Lincolnshire towers: they lie in -a district where stone was not abundant, and where brick-making on the -spot was a more simple process than the conveyance of building-stone -from Ancaster or Lincoln. In the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, -brick was very freely used for domestic architecture in the eastern -counties; and houses like Oxburgh in Norfolk or the rectory at Hadleigh -in Suffolk, with their gatehouse towers, are prominent examples -of late fifteenth-century work.[374] The old hall at Gainsborough -in Lincolnshire is a large mansion of the fifteenth and sixteenth -centuries. This again is chiefly of brick, but with a considerable -amount of timber and plaster employed in the hall and one of the wings; -while the bay-window of the hall is of the grey Yorkshire limestone in -large blocks, which was much used in the churches of the lower Trent -valley. At one corner, however, is a polygonal tower entirely of brick, -with cross-loops in the walls of the ground-floor, and battlements -at the top. These battlements are corbelled out, so as to give an -impression of machicolation: there is, however, no machicolation at -all, and the spaces between the corbels are arched and filled with -simple tracery. The principle here is the same as that at Wingfield -and Tattershall: the residence is provided with its strong tower, -which, at Tattershall, as at Warkworth, is identical with the residence -itself. But while, at Warkworth, considerations of safety and comfort -were fairly balanced, with perhaps a slight inclination of the scales -to safety, at Tattershall, in spite of the covered gallery with its -machicolated floor, the balance is on the side of comfort. Both at -Tattershall and Wingfield the splendid residence is studied in the -first instance, while the defensive stronghold is a secondary idea. The -tower at Gainsborough is simply an imitation of the strong towers of -the past, conceived in admiration of their strength and conservative -love of their beauty, but with no serious idea of practical -utility.[375] - -The fine manor-house of Compton, in a secluded Devonshire valley a few -miles west of Torquay, was probably built about 1420 by one of the -family of Gilbert. The main entrance, in the centre of the east front, -beneath a tall archway including the ground-floor and first floor in -its height, is flanked by bold rectangular projections finishing in -corbels some feet above the ground. It does not lead, however, into a -vaulted passage barred by portcullises and flanked by guard-rooms, but -into one giving direct access to the hall. This no longer exists, and -a modern building covers part of the site, but the weathering of the -high-pitched roof still remains, and at its south end we can still see -the entrances of the kitchen and buttery, and the stair-door of the -minstrels’ gallery. The courtyard and domestic buildings are enclosed -by a wall with a continuous rampart-walk, from the parapet of which -are corbelled out at intervals machicolated projections which are so -arranged as to be directly above doorways and windows, and thus to -protect the most vulnerable points of the house, such as the large -four-light east window of the chapel, north of the hall. The house -was not surrounded by a ditch; but the space between it and the road -probably formed a base-court, although any remains of fortification -have disappeared. The whole building is a good example of the reversal -of the usual process. The dwelling-house has not grown up within a -castle, but has been converted by a very thorough process of walling -and crenellation into a fortified post to which the name of castle may -well be applied. The situation is anything but commanding, but the -house lying hidden in its valley, might be a formidable obstacle, like -the neighbouring castle of Berry Pomeroy, to marauders pushing their -way inland from Tor Bay. - -[Illustration: Hurstmonceaux Castle; Chapel] - -The character of house first, and castle afterwards, which is -remarkable at Wingfield, is also prominent in two of the great -Yorkshire residences of the house of Percy, Spofforth and Wressell, -princely manor-houses dignified by the name of castle. But perhaps the -best example in England of a castle which is one only in name is the -brick house of Hurstmonceaux in Sussex. This splendid building was -begun about 1446 by Sir Roger Fiennes. Its position, in a sheltered -hollow at the head of a small valley, has no military advantages: it -may be compared with the secluded site of Compton Wyniates, or with -the low sites, within easy reach of water, which the builders of -Elizabethan houses were fond of choosing. The house was surrounded by -a wet ditch—a feature shared by Compton Wyniates, Kentwell, and other -Tudor houses.[376] The imposing gatehouse is in the centre of the south -front, a rectangular building flanked by tall towers,[377] with its -portal and the room above recessed beneath a tall arch which at once -recalls the machicolated archways that guard the entrance to castles -like Chepstow and Tutbury. The gatehouse has certain military features: -its rampart and that of the towers is machicolated, and the entrance -was closed by a portcullis (323). If cannon had made the curtain of -comparatively little importance, it was still advisable to defend the -gatehouse. There was no base-court, like that at Wingfield, in advance -of the main buildings. The castle was simply a collection of buildings -arranged round a series of courtyards, none of which was of any great -size, or corresponded to that distinctive feature of the military -stronghold—the open ward or bailey, which served as the muster-ground -for the garrison. The hall was in its usual position, on the side -of the first court opposite the main entrance. Most of the private -apartments were against the east wall, from which the chancel of the -chapel (359) projected in a half-octagonal apse. - -An unrivalled opportunity for studying the progress of the castle -in England is provided by a comparison of Hurstmonceaux with its -neighbours at Pevensey and Bodiam. Pevensey, taking us back, in its -outer circuit, to the Roman era, is, so far as the actual castle -area is concerned, a Norman mount-and-bailey stronghold, with stone -fortifications chiefly of the thirteenth century. Bodiam represents -one of the last and highest efforts of perfected castle building in -England. Hurstmonceaux is a house designed for ease and comfort, -but keeping something of the outer semblance of the stronghold of -an English landowner. A further step was taken at Cowdray, near -Midhurst. Here the house, nominally a castle, was built about 1530 by -Sir William Fitzwilliam: the battlements of the great hall and its -beautiful porch-tower are the only relic of military architecture -which it retains; and these are really no more military in character -than the battlements of a church tower or clerestory. The comparison -and contrast between these Sussex buildings may be further extended -by including in the list the early fortresses of Lewes and Hastings, -and the episcopal castle of Amberley.[378] In these, with what remains -of the early castle of Arundel, we have as perfect an epitome of the -history of the rise and decline of castle architecture in England as -any county can afford. - -Castle building, after the fitful examples of later Plantagenet times, -ceased altogether under the powerful monarchy of the Tudors, when -prominent subjects were made to feel the reality of the influence of -the Crown. Only once again, during the civil wars of the seventeenth -century, were castles generally resorted to as strongholds. The three -sieges of Pontefract, the operations of the royal troops in the Trent -valley, between the castles of Newark and Belvoir and the fortified -house of Wiverton, the defence of Denbigh, Rockingham, and Scarborough, -show that the private fortress could still be used on occasion; while -such a mansion as Basing house proved itself capable of stubborn -resistance. To this belated castle warfare we owe much destruction: it -was followed by the “slighting” of defences, and the general reduction -of castles to their present state of picturesque ruin. In concluding -this account of military architecture, it may be useful to gather, from -some of the surveys drawn up in the reign of Henry VIII., the state -of some of our principal castles at a period when medieval ideas were -disappearing. The coloured drawings, already mentioned, of castles -among the duchy of Lancaster records, which probably belong to the -early part of the reign of Elizabeth, may owe something to fancy. But -of the general accuracy of these verbal surveys, apart from inadequate -measurements, there can be less doubt. They all show clearly that -castles, as military strongholds, were obsolete, and that not merely -their defences, but even their domestic buildings, were allowed to -go to decay in time of peace. A survey of Carlisle castle, returned -22nd September 1529, is eloquent of the neglect of the fortress by -its constable, Lord Dacre. The wooden doors of the gatehouse of the -base-court had rotted away: the lead of the roof had been cut away, -probably with an eye to business, so that the rain soaked through the -timber below, and had leaked through the vault into the basement, which -was at this time used as the county gaol. The gatehouse of the inner -ward was in a not much better state; but the gates were of iron and -offered more resistance to the weather. The domestic buildings, on the -east side of the inner ward, had been roofed with stone slates: the -roof of the great chamber had fallen in, and the gallery or passage -between the great chamber and hall was “clean gone down.” The chapel -and a closet adjoining were partly unroofed: the closet chimney had -fallen, and the parlour beneath was in a ruinous state. The hall itself -was “like to fall”: the kitchen and some of its offices had fallen, and -the bakehouse and pantry were on the point of falling, while rain had -gone through the pantry floor into the buttery, which in this case was -apparently on a lower level. The great tower, “called the Dungeon,” -was, through the decay of the leaden roof, open to rain, and the floors -of its three “houses” or stages were gradually rotting. The castle -was supplied with artillery, but this was of “small effect and little -value.” It included twenty-three iron serpentines or small cannon, six -of which were provided with iron axletree pins or trunnions for use -on gun-carriages; a small brass serpentine, a foot long; nine other -serpentines; forty-five chambers; one iron sling for discharging stone -shot; four “hagbushes” (arquebuses or hand-guns); and two bombards or -mortar-shaped cannon. The ammunition for the serpentines and arquebuses -consisted of 560 leaden bullets: there was also some stone shot and -gunpowder. Some gun-stocks, bows, and arrows complete the list of -artillery.[379] - -Sheriff Hutton castle in Yorkshire, surveyed during the same year, was -better off as regards its dwelling-house; for this, as we know from -contemporary history, had been occupied with little intermission from -the end of the fourteenth century onwards. There were three wards, -the outermost being evidently a large base-court, and the middle ward -probably, as at Carew, a small court in advance of the inner gatehouse. -The hall, kitchen, buttery, pantry, bakehouse, chapel, and lodgings for -the lord were in the inner ward. In the base-court were the brew-house -and horse-mills, with stables, barns, and granaries. The lead on the -roofs was in a generally bad state, and the gutters and spouts wanted -mending; but the timber of the inner roofs was still fairly good. The -walls and towers of the inner ward, the plan of which, as we have seen, -was akin to that of the contemporary Bolton castle, were “strong and -high, but must be mended with lime and sand.” Three tons of iron were -required to mend the gate of the inner ward. The “mantlewall” of the -middle ward was defective and partly in ruin; while the base-court was -“all open,” its walls decayed, and its gates gone. In the inner ward -was a well, and ponds “for baking and brewing” were near the outer -walls. The artillery included “six brass falcons with their carts” and -twenty-one arquebuses, for which six barrels of powder and ten score -iron shots were provided, bows, bowstrings, and arrows, and two bullet -moulds.[380] - -[Illustration: CAERLAVEROCK CASTLE] - -[Illustration: MAXSTOKE CASTLE] - -After the attainder and execution of the third duke of Buckingham in -1521, two royal escheators took a survey of his lands and houses. -Their return, contained in a book of eighty-eight pages,[381] supplies -details as to eleven manor-houses and castles. Of these, Caus castle, -in west Shropshire, was a mere ruin. Huntingdon castle was decayed, -but a tower was reserved for prisoners. The description of Oakham -castle might be repeated at the present day. It was “all ruinous, being -a large ground within the mantell wall.” The hall, however, was in -excellent repair, “and of an old fashion”: the escheators recommended -its preservation, because the courts were held there. The three -towers of the castle of Newport next the Usk are mentioned, with the -water-gate below the middle tower, “to receive into the said castle a -good vessel”: the hall and other lodgings were decayed, especially in -timber, but the stone could be renewed with a quantity of freestone -and rubble stored in the castle. Here, as at Carlisle, Launceston, and -elsewhere, the basement of the gatehouse was used as a prison; and its -maintenance is therefore insisted upon. The hall at Brecon castle had -a new and costly roof with pendants: it was “set on height,” with -windows at either end, and none upon the sides. As a matter of fact, -the remains of this hall stand above a twelfth-century substructure, -which was vaulted from a central row of columns: the south side wall -still remains, and is pierced with a row of lancet windows, so that -the statement of the survey may refer to a newer hall which has -disappeared. There was a new hall in the inner ward at Kimbolton, which -had been built some sixty years before by the duke’s great-grandmother. -The old curtain against which it stood was in a bad way, and threatened -to ruin the hall. Round the inner ward was a moat: the base-court on -the outer edge was overgrown with grass, but the barn and stables were -in good condition. - -“The strongest fortress and most like unto a castle of any other -that the Duke had” was the castle of Tonbridge, a mount-and-bailey -stronghold whose shell-keep is still one of the finest examples of the -type. The keep or “dungeon”—no mention of the mount is made—was at this -time covered with a lead roof, half of which was gone. Otherwise, the -castle and its curtain were in good repair, the rampart-walk keeping -its battlemented outer parapet and rear-wall. The gatehouse, on the -north side of the castle, was “as strong a fortress as few be in -England”: on the east curtain was a square tower called the Stafford -tower, and at the south-east corner, next the Medway, was the octagonal -Water tower. The river constituted the chief southern defence of the -castle, and there was no south curtain: the substructure of the hall -and lodgings, 26 feet high and built of ashlar, was on this side, but -the buildings themselves had never been finished. - -Castles of a later type were Stafford, and Maxstoke (364) in -Warwickshire. Stafford castle at this time consisted of a single block -of lodgings with two towers at either end and another in the middle -of the south front. The hall was in the centre of the block, with the -kitchen, larder, buttery, and pantry beneath it: at one end of the -hall was the great chamber with a cellar below, and at the other was a -“surveying chamber,” or service-room, to which dishes would be brought -from the kitchen. Each of the five towers contained three rooms, in -each of which was a fireplace. The towers were machicolated, “the -enbatelling being trussed forth upon corbelles.” Outside the house -were the chapel, gatehouse, and another kitchen; but this front court -was apparently without defensive walls. Maxstoke, originally a castle -of the Clintons, which was built and fortified in or after 1345,[382] -had been largely repaired by the duchess Anne, the builder of the -hall at Kimbolton. There was a base-court with a gatehouse, stables, -and barns, which were walled with stone and covered with slate. Round -the castle, “a right proper thing after the old building,” was a moat. -The house, with a tower at each corner, was built round a quadrangle, -and in the side next the bridge over the moat was a gatehouse tower, -with a vaulted entry. The hall, the chapel, the great chamber, and -the lodgings generally were in good condition, although they were not -entirely finished and much glazing was still necessary. The provision -of fireplaces is specially mentioned, as well as a point in the -planning of the house—the convenient access to the chapel, or, rather, -to its gallery or galleries, from the various first-floor rooms at “the -over end” of the hall and great chamber. - -The moated manor-house of Writtle in Essex can hardly be counted among -castles: it was a timber building round a cloistered quadrangle. There -was no hall, but “a goodly and large parlour instead.” Thornbury castle -in Gloucestershire, however, which was in great part of the duke’s own -building, was one of those houses in which some semblance of military -architecture was kept. There was no moat, but a base-court and an inner -ward. The buildings of the base-court itself had been set out, but -were in a very incomplete state, and little had been finished beyond -the foundations of the north and west sides. The entrance to the inner -ward was in the west face of the quadrangle; but of the west and north -blocks only the lower story had been completed. This was of ashlar, -while in the base-court ashlar had been used only for the window -openings, doorways, and quoins. The hall and kitchen offices formed the -east block, “all of the old building, and of a homely fashion”; but -the south block, of the newer work, was “fully finished with curious -works and stately lodgings,” and from it a gallery of timber cased with -stone, with an upper and lower passage, crossed the south garden to the -parish church and the duke’s chapel therein. A magnificent feature of -this house, which became more and more characteristic of the palaces of -noblemen of the age, were the great parks to the east of the castle, -and the gardens on its east and south side. Between the east garden -and the New park was the orchard, “in which are many alleys to walk -in openly,” and round about the orchard were other alleys on a good -height, with “roosting places,” covered with white thorn and hazel. - -Thornbury castle had reached this degree of unfinished splendour only -a few years before the survey was made. The gateway of the outer ward -still bears an inscription with the date 1511, while at the base -of the moulded brick chimneys of the south block is the date 1514. -Remains may still be seen of most of the buildings mentioned in these -surveys. Thornbury and Maxstoke are still occupied, and of Thornbury -in particular the details of the survey still hold good. The great -value of these descriptions is the fact that they tell us something, -on the eve of the Renaissance period, of the state of a series of -fortresses which represented almost every type of an architecture -that had grown up under the influence of conditions rapidly becoming -obsolete. At Tonbridge we see the mount-and-bailey fortress of early -Norman times, built to meet needs which were purely military, and -strengthened with a stone keep and walls and towers of stone as those -needs became more pressing. At Carlisle we have the fortress with its -compact inner ward and great tower, approached through the spacious -base-court which served the needs of the garrison and might shelter -flocks and herds in time of war. No castle of the most perfect type, -planned in the golden age of military architecture, is represented. At -Brecon, however, we can study the growing importance of the domestic -buildings of the castle. At Sheriff Hutton we have the quadrangular -castle of the fourteenth century with its angle-towers, and its walled -base-court serving the purposes of a farm-yard. Stafford castle, the -plan of which has been imitated in the modern house on the site, is -a fortified residence built in a single block, to which some of the -strong houses of the north of England are analogous. The moated house -of Maxstoke preserves the quadrangular plan, and has its provisions for -defence; but its domestic character was the first aim of its builders, -and its walls and towers are without the formidable height and strength -of Sheriff Hutton and Bolton. Here and at Thornbury the base-court -was still retained; but at Thornbury the energy of the builders was -concentrated in the beautiful mansion, and the idea of the defensive -stronghold had almost departed. The day of the castle and the walled -town was over, and, in the face of methods of attack of which the -builders of Norman castles had never dreamed, military engineers were -beginning to move along new lines to which architectural considerations -were no longer a matter of great importance. An architecture which, -developed from earthwork in the beginning, reproduced in stone, at -its height, the disposition of the concentric earthworks of primeval -times, gave place in its turn to a science in which the employment of -earthwork and the natural resources of a defensive position played an -increasingly prominent part. - - - - -FOOTNOTES: - - -[1] Plan in Allcroft, _Earthwork of England_, 1908, p. 647. The -same feature is well seen in the fine camp of Bury Ditches (6) in -Shropshire, between Clun and Bishops Castle. - -[2] The defences of Old Sarum are now in process of excavation, and the -plan of the medieval castle, in the centre of the early camp, has been -recovered. See _Proceedings Soc. Antiquaries_, 2nd series, vol. xxiii., -pp. 190-200 and 501-18. - -[3] It is well seen at Bury ditches (6), where the diagonal entrance is -also a feature of the south-west side of the camp, and on the west side -of Caer Caradoc, between Clun and Knighton. - -[4] The effect of similar conditions on the construction of early -Norman castles will be noticed in a later chapter. - -[5] Plan in Allcroft, _op. cit._, p. 686; the camp is described fully -pp. 682-97. - -[6] See Bruce, _Hand-Book to the Roman Wall_, 5th ed., 1907 (ed. R. -Blair), pp. 19-21. - -[7] The list from the _Notitia Dignitatum_ is given, _ibid._, pp. 11, -12. - -[8] The bank is, strictly speaking, the _agger_, the _vallum_ being the -rampart on the top of the bank. - -[9] The large villas of Romano-British landowners, as at Bignor -(Sussex), Chedworth (Gloucestershire), Horkstow (Lincolnshire), were -within easy reach of the military roads, but were not directly upon -them. - -[10] The topography of Roman Lincoln is described by Dr E. M. Sympson, -_Lincoln_ (Ancient Cities), 1906, chapter I. - -[11] See _Archæologia_, vol. liii., pp. 539-73. - -[12] See below as to the blocking of the main gateways at Cilurnum -after the building of the great wall. The small single gateways at -Cilurnum are on the south side of the wall. At Amboglanna both gateways -were south of the wall. - -[13] Borcovicus is described by Bruce, _u.s._, pp. 140-60. - -[14] Plan in Besnier, _Autun Pittoresque_, 1888. The north-west and -north-east gateways of the Roman city remain, but the centre of the -city was shifted in the middle ages. - -[15] Plan in Allcroft, _u.s._, p. 322. As Burgh Castle had the sea on -its west side, it possibly had no west wall. Another tower, on the east -side of the north gateway, has fallen away from the wall. - -[16] At Pevensey the foundation of the wall is of chalk and flint, -covered in one part by an upper layer of concrete, composed of flints -bedded in mortar. Below the foundation is a layer of puddled clay, -in which oak stakes were fixed vertically at intervals. See L. F. -Salzmann, F.S.A., _Excavations at Pevensey_, 1906-7, in _Sussex -Archæol. Collections_, vol. li. - -[17] Cilurnum is described by Bruce, _u.s._, pp. 86-119, with plan. See -also the description and plan in _An Account of the Roman Antiquities -Preserved in the Museum at Chesters_, 1903, pp. 87-120. - -[18] This was not invariable. At Cilurnum the main street was from east -to west, and this was also the case at Corstopitum (Corbridge-on-Tyne). - -[19] In this case, the first cohort of the Tungri. - -[20] The tenth cohort of the legion had its quarters here: hence the -name. - -[21] Or the east and west gateways, as already noted, at Cilurnum. The -_forum_ occupied the centre of Cilurnum, the _praetorium_ forming a -block of buildings east of the centre. The first wing or squadron of -the Astures was stationed at Cilurnum. - -[22] Prof. Haverfield holds the view that this southern extension is -post-Roman. See _Archæol. Journal_, lxvi. 350. - -[23] The same thing happened at Lincoln, where the eastern wall of -the city followed a line now covered by the eastern transept of the -cathedral. - -[24] Wat’s dyke, of which remains can be traced south of Wrexham and -near Oswestry, was to the east of Offa’s dyke. - -[25] _A.-S. Chron._, anno 547. - -[26] Bede, _Hist. Ecc._, iii. 16. - -[27] It may be noted that not all names in “borough” and “bury” are -derived from _burh_ and _byrig_. Some are merely derived from _beorh_ -or _beorg_ = a hill (dative _beorge_). - -[28] See Oman, _Art of War_, p. 120. - -[29] In Germany the word _burg_ is also applied to the citadel of a -town or to a castle. In England and France more careful discrimination -was made between the two types of stronghold. - -[30] References to _burhs_ wrought by Edward and his sister Æthelflæd -will be found in _A.-S. Chron_. under the dates mentioned in the text. -There is some variety of opinion with regard to the exact accuracy of -these dates. - -[31] _A.-S. Chron._, sub anno. - -[32] _A.-S. Chron._, sub anno. The true date seems to be 837 or 838. - -[33] The chief authority for the early invasions of the Northmen in -France is the _Annales Bertinenses_, of which the portion from 836 to -861 is attributed to Prudentius, bishop of Troyes. - -[34] _Timbrian_ is the ordinary Anglo-Saxon word for “to build,” but it -indicates the prevalent material used for building. - -[35] This is the main contention of the theory so attractively -enunciated by the late G. T. Clark, and endorsed by the authority of -Professor Freeman. - -[36] Nottingham castle is, in fact, considerably to the west of the -probable site of the Saxon _burh_, which was more or less identical -with the “English borough” of the middle ages, the western part of -Nottingham being known as the “French borough.” - -[37] The Danes were again at Tempsford in 1010, and, if the earthwork -is of pre-Conquest date, it is more likely to have been thrown up -during the earlier than during the later visit. - -[38] The story (_A.S. Chron._, sub an. 755) of the murder of Cynewulf -and its consequences, mentions the _burh_ or _burg_ of Merton with its -gate: the house in which the king was murdered within the _burh_ is -called _bur_ (_i.e._, bower, private chamber). - -[39] Dr J. H. Round, _Feudal England_, 1909, p. 324, points to the -phrase _hoc castellum refirmaverat_ in the Domesday notice of Ewias, -as indicative of the existence of the castle before the Conquest, and -gives other reasons for the identification. - -[40] Domesday, i., f. 23; “Castrum Harundel Tempore Regis Edwardi -reddebat de quodam molino xl solidos,” etc. “Castrum Harundel,” -however, applies to the town, not the castle; and it does not follow -that the name was given to the town before the Conquest. - -[41] Ord. Vit., _Hist. Eccl._, iii. 14; “id castellum situm est in -acutissima rupe mari contigua.” The phrase may be used generally to -describe a site which, in Ordericus’ own day, had become famous for its -castle. - -[42] Ord. Vit., _Hist. Eccl._ iv. 4. - -[43] The Tower of London was outside the east wall of the medieval -city. Baynard’s castle was at the point where the west wall approached -the Thames. - -[44] Ord. Vit., _op. cit._, iv. 4; “pinnas ac turres ... in -munimentis addebant vel restaurabant ... Portæ offirmatæ erant, -densæque turbæ in propugnaculis et per totum muri ambitum prostabant.” - -[45] The foundation of these castles is noted by Ord. Vit., iv. 4, 5. - -[46] The word “bailey” (_ballium_) literally means a palisaded -enclosure. The synonym “ward,” applied to the various enclosed -divisions of a medieval castle, means a guarded enclosure. The term -“base-court” (_basse-cour_) is also applied to the bailey. - -[47] It should be noted that at York there were not two distinct -_burhs_ or fortified towns, such as are found in the earlier cases. The -river passed through and bisected the _burh_, which was surrounded by -an earthen bank, save at the point where the Foss formed the boundary -of the city. - -[48] Domesday, i. 248 _b_. - -[49] An example of this is the fine earthwork at Lilbourne, in -Northamptonshire. There are many other instances, and the lesser bailey -at Clun partakes of this character. - -[50] There are cases, of course, which give rise to perplexity. Thus -at Earls Barton, in Northamptonshire, the famous pre-Conquest church -tower stands on a site which appears to be within the original limit -of the ditch of the adjacent castle mount. It is doubtful, however, -whether the mount was ever ditched on this side; and the church does -not encroach upon the mount. - -[51] Cæsar, _De Bell. Gall._, vii. 73; “huic [vallo] loricam pinnasque -adiecit, grandibus cervis eminentibus ad commissuras pluteorum atque -aggeris, qui ascensum hostium tardarent.” See p. 60 below. - -[52] See Enlart, ii. 494. - -[53] Domfront, however, on its rocky site, may, like Richmond, have -been surrounded by a stone wall from the first. - -[54] L. Blanchetière, _Le Donjon ou Château féodal de Domfront (Orne)_, -1893, pp. 29, 30. - -[55] See note above, p. 45. - -[56] Ord. Vit., iii. 5. - -[57] The essential portions of these texts are quoted by Enlart, ii. -497-9. - -[58] The “lesser donjon” at Falaise, which contained the great chamber, -is a rectangular projection of two stories from the great donjon. - -[59] Mrs Armitage in _Eng. Hist. Review_, xix. 443-7. - -[60] Ord. Vit., viii. 12; “fossis et densis sepibus.” - -[61] _Ibid._, viii. 24; “Hic machinas construxit, contra munimentum -hostile super rotulas egit, ingentia saxa in oppidum et oppidanos -projecit, bellatores assultus dare docuit, quibus vallum et sepes -circumcingentes diruit, et culmina domorum super inhabitantes dejecit.” - -[62] Ord. Vit., viii. 13; “Callidi enim obsessores in fabrili fornace, -quæ in promptu structa fuerat, ferrum missilium callefaciebant, -subitoque super tectum principalis aulæ in munimentis jaciebant, et -sic ferrum candens sagittarum atque pilorum in arida veterum lanugine -imbricum totis nisibus figebant.” - -[63] See J. H Round, _Castles of the Conquest_ (_Archæologia_, lviii. -333). - -[64] _Adulterinus_ = spurious, counterfeit. - -[65] Cæsar, _Bell. Gall._, vii. 68 _seq._ Alesia, near the modern -village of Alise-la-Reine, is in the Côte d’Or department, some 36 -miles N.W. of Dijon. - -[66] Cæsar, _De Bell. Civ._, ii. 1 _seq._ - -[67] A detailed account of this siege is given by Oman, _Art of War_, -pp. 140-7. - -[68] Enlart, ii. 413, 414. - -[69] Ord. Vit., vii. 10. - -[70] _Ibid._ “Rex itaque quoddam municipium in valle Beugici construxit -ibique magnam militum copiam ad arcendum hostem constituit.” - -[71] _Ibid._, viii. 2. - -[72] _Ibid._, viii. 23; Roger of Wendover. - -[73] Thus Henry I., in his wars with Louis VI., conducted one blockade -by building two castles, which the enemy called derisively Malassis and -Gête-aux-Lièvres (Ord. Vit., xii. 1). So also (_ibid._, xii. 22) his -castle of Mäte-Putain near Rouen. Many other instances might be named. - -[74] Oman, _Art of War_, pp. 135, 139: his authority is Guy of Amiens, -whose poetical rhetoric, however, may not be altogether accurate in -description. - -[75] Ord. Vit., viii. 24. _Cf._ viii. 16, where Robert of Normandy, -another great Crusader, besieging Courcy-sur-Dives in 1091, caused -a great wooden tower or belfry (_berfredum_) to be built, which was -burned by the defenders. Robert of Bellême was also present at this -siege. - -[76] See below, p. 99. - -[77] Suger, _Gesta Ludovici Grossi_ (ed. Molinier, pp. 63-66). - -[78] Pent-houses were sometimes elaborately defended. Thus Joinville -describes the large “cats” made by St Louis’ engineers to protect -the soldiers who were making a causeway across an arm of the Nile -near Mansurah (1249-50). These had towers at either end, with covered -guard-houses behind the towers, and were called _chats-châteaux_. - -[79] See the account of the sieges of Boves and Château-Gaillard -by Guillaume le Breton, _Philippis_, books ii. and vii. At the -siege of Zara in the fourth Crusade, after five days of fruitless -stone-throwing, the Crusaders began to undermine a tower which led to -the surrender of the city (Villehardouin). - -[80] Abbo: see the account of the siege of Paris above. - -[81] Ord. Vit., ix. 15: “Machinam, quam ligneum possumus vocitare -castellum.” It was strictly a belfry (see below). - -[82] _Ibid._ - -[83] _Cf._ the account of the operations at the siege of Marseilles -(Cæsar, _De Bell. Civ._, ii. 11): “Musculus ex turri latericia a -nostris telis tormentisque defenditur.” - -[84] The _porte-coulis_ is literally a sliding door. Its outer bars -fitted into grooves in the walls on either side. See pp. 227, 229. - -[85] Vitruvius, _De Architectura_, x. 13, § 3, mentions among Roman -scaling-machines, an inclined plane, “ascendentem machinam qua ad murum -plano pede transitus esse posset.” - -[86] Guillaume le Breton, _Philippis_, book vii. This poem is an -important source of information for the wars of Philip Augustus, and -for the siege of Château-Gaillard in particular. - -[87] Ord. Vit., ix. 13. - -[88] _Ibid._, ix. 11. - -[89] _Ibid._, xii. 36. - -[90] This is the usual distinction. But the use of the names varies. -In Vitruvius (_op. cit._, x. 10, 11) the _catapulta_ or _scorpio_ is a -machine for shooting arrows, while the _ballista_ is used for throwing -stones. The pointed stakes at the siege of Marseilles (Cæsar, _De Bell. -Civ._, ii. 2) were shot from _ballistae_. Vitruvius indicates several -methods of working the _ballista_ by torsion: “aliae enim vectibus et -suculis (levers and winches), nonnullae polyspastis (pulleys), aliae -ergatis (windlasses), quaedam etiam tympanorum (wheels) torquentur -rationibus.” - -[91] For the injuries inflicted by stone-throwing machines, see -Villehardouin’s mention of the wounding of Guillaume de Champlitte at -Constantinople, and of Pierre de Bracieux at Adrianople. - -[92] Oman, _op. cit._, 139, quotes Anna Comnena to this effect. - -[93] Stone-throwing engines and _ballistae_ alike were employed by -the Saracens at Mansurah (1250), for hurling Greek fire at the towers -constructed by St Louis to protect his causeway-makers (Joinville). - -[94] Thus, in the first siege of Constantinople by the Crusaders -(1203), Villehardouin emphasises the number of siege-machines used by -the besiegers upon shipboard and on land, but gives no account of their -use by the defenders. They were employed, however, by the defence, as -we have seen at Marseilles; see also Chapter I. above, for possible -traces of their use in the stations of the Roman wall. A special -platform might in some cases be constructed for them and wheeled to the -back of the rampart-walk. - -[95] Such crenellations are indicated even in the timber defences at -Alesia and Trebonius’ second rampart at Marseilles. They are familiar -features of oriental fortification, _e.g._, of the great wall of China -or the walls and gates of Delhi. - -[96] This roof was sometimes gabled, the timbers, as in the donjon at -Coucy, following and resting on the slope of the coping of the parapet. - -[97] Sometimes, as at Constantinople in 1204 (Villehardouin), towers -were heightened by the addition of one or more stages of wood. _Cf._ -the heightening of the unfinished _tête-du-pont_ at Paris in 885-6. - -[98] Clark, i. 68-120, gives an elaborate list of castles in England -and Wales at this date. A large number, however, of those which he -mentions, had been already destroyed; and many were of later foundation. - -[99] Accounts of this rebellion are given by Benedict of Peterborough -and Roger of Hoveden. - -[100] Nottingham was a foundation of the Conqueror: Newark was not -founded until after 1123. - -[101] Ord. Vit., xi. 2, mentions the capture of the castle of Blyth -(Blida castrum) by Henry I. from Robert de Bellême. By this Tickhill is -probably meant. It is four miles from Blyth, where was a Benedictine -priory founded by Roger de Busli, the first Norman lord of Tickhill, -and granted by him to the priory of Ste-Trinité-du-Mont at Rouen. -Ordericus, who, as a monk of a Norman abbey, was familiar with the name -of Blyth priory, may have supposed the castle of Roger de Busli to have -been at Blyth. - -[102] See Rymer, _Fœdera_ (Rec. Com., 1816), vol. i. pt. i. p. 429: -“castrum de Pontefracto, quod est quasi clavis in comitatu Eborum.” - -[103] The remains are chiefly of the second quarter of the fifteenth -century; but it was a residence of the archbishops as early as the -twelfth century. - -[104] A. Harvey, _Bristol_ (Ancient Cities), pp. 35, 116. - -[105] Rob. de Monte, quoted by Stubbs, _Select Charters_, 8th ed., -1905, p. 128: “Rex Henricus coepit revocare in jus proprium urbes, -castella, villas, quae ad coronam regni pertinebant, castella noviter -facta destruendo.” - -[106] The curtain (Lat. _cortina_, Fr. _courtine_) is a general name -for the wall enclosing a courtyard, and is thus applied to the wall -round the castle enclosure. - -[107] Martène, _Thesaurus Anecdotorum_, iv. 47, quoted by Enlart, ii. -418. From _alatorium_ is derived the word _allure_, often employed as a -technical term for a rampart-walk. - -[108] Ord. Vit., v. 19: “Lapideam munitionem, qua prudens Ansoldus -domum suam cinxerat, cum ipsa domo dejecit.” In this case the wall -seems to have been built, not round an open courtyard, but round a -house or tower. The French term for a fortified wall, forming the outer -defence of a single building, is _chemise_. Thus, in a mount-and-bailey -castle, the palisade round the tower on the mount was, strictly -speaking, a _chemise_, while that round the bailey was a curtain. - -[109] Ord. Vit., vii. 10. - -[110] _Ibid._, viii. 23. - -[111] _Ibid._, viii. 5. Robert, son of Giroie, “castellum Sancti -Cerenici ... muris et vallis speculisque munivit.” - -[112] “Herring-bone” masonry consists of courses of rubble bedded -diagonally in mortar, alternating with horizontal courses of thin -stones, the whole arrangement resembling the disposition of the bones -in the back of a fish. The horizontal courses are frequently omitted, -and their place is taken by thick layers of mortar. - -[113] See _Yorks. Archæol. Journal_, xx. 132, where the evidence quoted -points to the conclusion “that the doorway was not erected later than -about 1075.” Harvey, _Castles and Walled Towns_, p. 85, assumes that -the doorway was cut through the south wall of the tower at a later -date: the evidence of the masonry is decisively against this idea. - -[114] The architectural history of Ludlow castle has been thoroughly -examined by Mr W. H. St John Hope in an invaluable paper in -_Archæologia_, lxi. 258-328. - -[115] The original design probably included an upper chamber of -moderate height. There was, however, a considerable interval between -the completion of the gateway and the building of the upper stage. - -[116] The large outer bailey at Ludlow was an addition to the original -castle, late in the twelfth century, and is contemporary with the -blocking of the gatehouse entrance. Originally the castle consisted -merely of the present inner ward. The outer bailey or base-court gave -enlarged accommodation for the garrison, and contained stables, barns, -and other offices for which there was no room in the inner ward. - -[117] The explanation of this passage through the wall was long a -mystery. Clark, ii. 278, recognised that it led from an outer to an -inner “room,” but was puzzled by the bar-holes which showed that the -doors had been carefully defended. - -[118] Mr Hope thinks that it was originally intended to cover the -gateway with a semicircular barrel-vault. The lower stage of the keep -at Richmond has a ribbed vault with central column. This, however, -with the vice, now blocked, in the south-west corner, was inserted -many years after the building of the great tower on the site of the -gatehouse. - -[119] The string-courses of the upper stages of the tower, and the -windows of the southern chamber, which was of the full height of the -two upper stories, and probably formed the chapel of the castle, have -further enrichment; but the detail is nowhere elaborate. See T. M. -Blagg, F.S.A., _A Guide to Newark, &c._, 2nd ed., pp. 19-22. - -[120] Harvey, _op. cit._, p. 98, says that Newark castle “has now no -trace of a keep, and possibly never possessed one.” The gatehouse, -however, may fairly be considered as belonging to the category of -tower-keeps, and has one characteristic of that type of building—viz., -the cross-wall which divides the upper stages, and is borne by an -archway in the centre of the gateway passage. - -[121] The churches of Upton, near Gainsborough, Burghwallis, near -Doncaster, and Lois Weedon in Northamptonshire, are examples of this -type. “Herring-bone” work occurs at Brixworth, in a portion of the -tower to which a pre-Conquest date cannot safely be attributed. At -Marton, near Gainsborough, it occurs in a tower of “Saxon” type, which -was probably not built until after the Conquest. It is found twice at -York, but the date of the so-called Saxon work in the crypt of the -minster is very doubtful; while the tower of St Mary Bishophill Junior, -although Saxon in type, is more likely to be Norman in date. Examples -of “herring-bone” work in the churches of Normandy are found, _e.g._, -at Périers and in the apse at Cérisy-la-Forêt (Calvados). - -[122] The donjon of Falaise belongs to the early part of the twelfth -century, and is therefore a late example of “herring-bone” work. The -“herring-bone” work in the keep at Guildford is probably still later, -and that in the curtain wall at Lincoln, raised on the top of earthen -banks, can hardly be attributed to a very early date. - -[123] It has also been noted in the tower of Marton church, near -Gainsborough. - -[124] The lodge which now occupies its site was built in 1815, while -the present main entrance to the castle, south-west of the mount, was -made in 1810, and is quite outside the original _enceinte_. - -[125] See note 122 on p. 100. - -[126] A curtain is said to be flanked when its line is broken at -intervals by projections, so near one another that the whole face of -the piece of curtain between them can be covered by the fire of the -defenders stationed in them. - -[127] Much of the curtain of Lancaster castle is of fairly early date. -For the supposed Roman origin of the castle and its probable history, -see note 354 on p. 327 below. - -[128] These additions have given rise to the common theory that this -hall is a work of late twelfth century date. - -[129] Other examples of early stone halls will be mentioned in a later -chapter. - -[130] This is very noticeable in Shropshire, where a large number of -parish churches, to which rectors were presented and instituted in the -ordinary way, are described as free chapels in the registers of the -bishops of Lichfield and Hereford during the thirteenth and fourteenth -centuries. - -[131] See Pat. Rolls, 18 Rich. II., pt. 1, m. 28; 3 Hen. IV., pt. 1, m. -6. - -[132] Pat. 2 Edw. III., pt. 2, m. 4. The walls of this chapel, -dedicated to St Peter, remain. In the fifteenth century it was enlarged -as far as the west curtain by a western annexe, and in the sixteenth -century it was divided into two floors, the upper floor being the -court-house, and the lower floor the record-room of the court of the -Marches. - -[133] Pat. 2 Edw. II., pt. 2, m. 24. - -[134] The word _keep_ is a comparatively modern term, unknown to -medieval castle-builders, to whom this part of the castle was the -_donjon_ or _dungeon_, or the _great tower_. - -[135] Other important shell keeps of the normal type are at Arundel, -Cardiff (114), Carisbrooke (111), Farnham, Lewes, Pickering, Totnes, -and Tonbridge—the last one of the most considerable and finest examples. - -[136] Clifford’s tower at York is sometimes quoted as a shell keep. It -was actually a tower with a forebuilding. - -[137] See Enlart, ii. 500, 676: Anthyme Saint-Paul, _Histoire -Monumentale_, p. 168, gives the date 993, with an expression of doubt. -Fulk the Black was count of Anjou 987-1039. - -[138] Enlart, ii. 685, says “début du xiiᵉ siècle.” - -[139] Ord. Vit., xii. 14. - -[140] _Ibid._, viii. 19. - -[141] _Ibid._, x. 18. - -[142] _Ibid._, xi. 20: _adulterina castella_ is the phrase used. - -[143] Enlart, ii. 710. Blanchetière, _op. cit._, 83, mentions Henry’s -operations in 1123, but believes in an earlier date for the donjon. - -[144] Rad. de Diceto, _Abbrev. Chron._, sub anno. - -[145] _Pipe Roll Soc._, vol. i., pp. 13, 14; iv. 23. - -[146] _Ibid._, i. 27. - -[147] _Ibid._, i. 29, 30, 31; ii. 14; iv. 36; v. 50; vi. 57, 58; vii. -11, 12; xii. 79; xiii. 31. - -[148] _Ibid._, ii. 12; v. 49. - -[149] _Ibid._, iv. 35. - -[150] _Ibid._, iv. 39. - -[151] _Ibid._, iv. 40. - -[152] _Ibid._, viii. 89; ix. 59, etc. - -[153] _Ibid._, xiii. 107, 108; xv. 132; xvi. 32. - -[154] _E.g._, _ibid._, xiii. 140. - -[155] _Ibid._, xvi. 32; xviii. 110. - -[156] _Ibid._, xviii. 110. - -[157] _Ibid._, xiii. 161. - -[158] _Ibid._, v. 35. - -[159] _Ibid._, xix. 53. - -[160] Charles Dawson, _Hastings Castle_, ii. 524. - -[161] _Pipe Roll Soc._, ix. 17; xi. 18; xii. 15; xiii. 95; xv. 2; xvi. -2. - -[162] _Ibid._, xviii. 16; xix. 68. - -[163] _Ibid._, xix. 167; xxi. 77; see also xvi. 92. - -[164] _Pipe Roll Soc._, xvi. 118, 119. - -[165] _Ibid._, xvi. 141. - -[166] _Ibid._, xvi. 137. - -[167] _Ibid._, xix. 81. - -[168] _Ibid._, xviii. 7; xix. 173. - -[169] _Ibid._, xviii. 66; xix. 110; xxii. 183. Malcolm, king of Scots, -yielded Bamburgh, Carlisle, and Newcastle to Henry II. in 1157; and the -towers at all three places were begun within a few years of this event. -That at Bamburgh is mentioned in 1164. - -[170] _Ibid._, xix. 2. - -[171] See evidence brought by Mrs Armitage, _Eng. Hist. Rev._, xix. -443-7. - -[172] Ord. Vit., iv. 1. He calls these strongholds _firmamenta quaedam_. - -[173] _A.S. Chron._, sub anno. - -[174] Such cross-walls, found in the larger towers, were not merely -useful as partitions between the rooms. They enabled the builders to -lay their floors more conveniently, as timber of sufficient scantling -for so large an undivided space was obtainable with difficulty. In case -of the great tower being taken by storm, the cross-wall on each floor -formed a barrier to the besiegers, shutting off the tower as it did -into two halves. This is well seen, for example, at Porchester. - -[175] At Norham and Kenilworth the towers are at an angle of the inner -ward where the two wards are adjacent. At Porchester it is at an outer -angle of the inner ward, so that two of its sides are on the outer -curtain of the castle. - -[176] At Hedingham and Rochester there are mural galleries above the -level of the second floor, the height of which therefore corresponds -to that of two external stories. Both towers are exceptionally lofty, -Rochester being 113, Hedingham 100 feet high. - -[177] We know from the Pipe Roll for 1173-4 that work was being done at -Guildford in that year (_Pipe Roll Soc._, xxi. 3). - -[178] This points to two separate dates for the structure. The earlier -masonry has been attributed to Bishop Flambard, who founded the castle -in 1121; the later to Bishop Pudsey, who made additions to the castle -about 1157. If this is so, the history of the tower is parallel to that -of Porchester—a low stone tower, possibly of the reign of Henry I., -heightened in the reign of Henry II. - -[179] Porchester, in spite of its great size, is a tower which was -apparently built for exclusively military purposes. The floors are -feebly lighted, and there is no fireplace in the building. - -[180] Both these castles belong to the class of cliff strongholds which -were walled from their earliest foundation. - -[181] Further alterations were made in the fifteenth century, when a -new stair was inserted in the north-east angle, and the outer stair -against the west wall was removed. - -[182] For the reason, see note 174 on pp. 121, 122. - -[183] Legends about the cruelties practised on prisoners, often -connected with these basement chambers, need not be believed too -readily. Specially constructed prison chambers in castles usually -belong to a period later than the twelfth century. On the origin of the -word “dungeon” see Chapter III. - -[184] See the description of the tower at Ardres in Chapter III. Such -upper floors were probably divided into rooms by wooden partitions. - -[185] It was thus impossible to reach the roof from the first floor -without passing through the second-floor chamber—a precaution which was -adopted also in the cylindrical tower at Conisbrough. - -[186] Here the basement was probably used as a prison. The upper part -of the original stair still remains. - -[187] There are indications, however, of a second chapel in the keep -itself, occupying the south-east angle of the third floor. - -[188] The recently excavated chapel of the great tower of Old Sarum was -a vaulted building occupying the south-eastern part of the basement of -the tower itself. It was entered directly from the bailey, and had no -direct communication with the first floor of the tower. - -[189] Such as the so-called oratories in the fore-buildings of Dover -and Newcastle. - -[190] At Old Sarum, the room in the basement, west of the chapel, was -probably the kitchen. - -[191] _Cf._ the employment of one of the angle towers at the later -castle of Langley in Northumberland as a garde-robe tower. Some of the -late medieval pele-towers of the north of England, _e.g._, Chipchase -and Corbridge, provide excellent examples of mural garde-robes with -corbelled-out seats. - -[192] Roger of Wendover, ann. 1215. - -[193] See the description of the fortifications of Antioch in Oman, -_Art of War_, pp. 527-9; plan facing p. 283. - -[194] _Ibid._, 526-7. - -[195] Enlart, ii. 504. - -[196] _Ibid._, ii. 508: it is attributed to Amaury, count of Evreux -(1105-37): the masonry (_ibid._, 461) is of coursed rubble with -bonding-courses of ashlar. - -[197] See note 161, p. 119. The keep of Orford is described at some -length by Harvey, _Castles and Walled Towns_, pp. 106-111. - -[198] Enlart, ii. 505. - -[199] Possibly there was a trap-door in the centre of each floor: see -below. All the floors are gone above the entrance stage. - -[200] An embrasure is the splay or inner opening of a window. The word -is also applied to the openings between the _merlons_ or solid pieces -of a crenellated parapet. - -[201] See pp. 217, 230, 233. - -[202] It may also be noted that the practice of placing windows -immediately above one another would be naturally avoided, as tending to -weaken the masonry of the whole wall at these points. This is well seen -in the irregular position of the numerous loops which light the vice of -the donjon at Coucy. - -[203] Enlart, ii. 735, gives the date of the donjon (Tour Guinette) at -Etampes as about 1140. - -[204] Enlart, ii. 674, gives the date of completion at Issoudun as 1202. - -[205] Or _mâchecoulis_. _Coulis_ = a groove. The first part of the word -is probably derived from _mâcher_ = to break or crush, and implies the -purpose effected by missiles sent through those openings. - -[206] Drawing in Enlart, ii. 504. Here there are two rectangular -towers, with rounded angle-turrets, connected by a lofty intermediate -building. - -[207] The same cause undoubtedly led, at an earlier date, to the -covering of Syrian churches with roofs of stone. - -[208] Château-Gaillard was on the French side of the Seine, in -territory purchased by Richard I. from the archbishop of Rouen. - -[209] E. Lefèvre-Pontalis, _Le Château de Coucy_, pp. 48, 49, shows -that the donjon forms part of the latest work undertaken by Enguerrand -III., lord of Coucy, the founder of the present castle, who died in -1242: it was evidently completed about 1240. - -[210] The town walls appear to be rather earlier than the castle -(_ibid._, 34). - -[211] On the third floor, these niches are divided into two stages -and connected by an upper gallery which pierces the abutments of the -vault, and surrounds the whole apartment. The method of vaulting this -gallery behind the abutments, so as to give additional resistance to -the masonry of the tower, is described by Lefèvre-Pontalis, _op. cit._ -94: see plan _ibid._, p. 93. - -[212] In the angle-towers at Coucy, however, the stairs take the form -of vices, and do not curve with the wall, although ceasing at each -floor. - -[213] The gabled coping of the parapet formed the central support -for the sloping roof of the outer gallery and of the corresponding -_coursière_ on the inner side. - -[214] It stands on a promontory between two creeks at the head of the -inlet known as the Pembroke river. - -[215] The domestic buildings may be in part earlier, but were largely -reconstructed in the thirteenth century. - -[216] The tower is sometimes described as being of five stages: the -dome, however, was merely a vault, and did not form a separate stage. - -[217] An account of Flint castle is given by Harvey, _Castles and -Walled Towns_, p. 123 _seq._ Speed’s map of Flintshire, made _c._ 1604, -shows that the tower was joined to the adjacent curtain by a wall, the -rampart-walk of which probably gave access to the entrance on the first -floor of the tower. - -[218] In 1277 the castle of Flint was a timber structure, so that the -present work cannot be earlier than the end of the thirteenth century. -The masonry is composed of large blocks of yellow sandstone, decayed -where they are exposed to the tide. There was an outer bailey, the -platform of which alone remains, with a ditch between it and the castle -proper. - -[219] These holes do not, however, surround the tower, so that the -passage may have been only partially roofed. - -[220] The keep of Launceston was probably built about the close of the -twelfth century: that at Flint later, as already noted. - -[221] Reproduced in _Memorials of Old Yorkshire_, 1909, opposite p. 256. - -[222] _I.e._, retaining walls used to face (_revêtir_) a sloping -surface. - -[223] A bartizan is a small turret or lookout corbelled out at an -angle of a tower or on the surface of a wall. The word is connected -with “brattice” (_bretèche_); and such turrets, like the machicolated -parapet, are the stone counterpart of the bratticing and hoarding of -timber applied to fortresses at an earlier date. - -[224] Ventress’s model of the castle, made in 1852, shows the great -hall near the north-east corner of the outer ward, its west end being -nearly opposite the main entrance of the castle. The outer ward nearly -surrounded the small inner ward, which contained the keep. - -[225] At Richmond the hall and its adjacent buildings were unusually -complete for their date, and the tower-keep was not planned as a -dwelling-house. None of our tower-keeps, Porchester excepted, are so -purely military in character. - -[226] The origin of this term is doubtful; some think it to be a -corruption of “barbican”—a work covering the entrance to the house -or castle proper. Large outer baileys, as at Ludlow (96) and Coucy, -correspond to the “barmkins” of the north of England. - -[227] At Arundel, Cardiff, and Warwick, mount-and-bailey castles which -are still inhabited, the present great halls stand on sites which -were doubtless occupied by the original halls built by the founders. -All three were largely rebuilt at a later date, and have been further -restored in modern times. Warwick was one of the Conqueror’s earliest -castles; Arundel was founded before 1086, Cardiff about 1093. A large -portion of the _enceinte_ at Cardiff follows the line of the curtain of -the Roman station (see _Archæologia_, lvii. pp. 335-52). - -[228] At Boothby Pagnell there is a cylindrical chimney-shaft very -similar to that of the hall at Christchurch. - -[229] The usual arrangement even in small cottages: _cf._ Chaucer, -_Cant. Tales_, B. 4022 (the house of the dairy-woman in the Nonne -Preestes Tale), “Ful sooty was hir bour, and eek hir halle.” - -[230] The word “solar” or “soller” (_solarium_ = a terrace exposed to -the sun) was used indiscriminately of any room, gallery, or loft above -the ground-level of a building: _e.g._, the loft or gallery above a -chancel-screen was commonly known as a “solar,” and the same word -should be applied to the chamber, inaccurately called a “parvise,” on -the first floor of a church porch. The word, however, is sometimes -applied to a well-lighted parlour facing south, without respect to -the floor on which it stands, _e.g._, the abbot’s solar at Haughmond -(_Archæol. Journal_, lxvi. 307) and at Jervaulx (_Yorks. Archæol. -Journal_, xxi. 337). - -[231] Ord. Vit., iv. 19: “Super solarium ... tesseris ludere ceperunt.” -The word “solarium” may be used, of course, in this passage with -reference merely to the site of the house—_i.e._, it may mean “the -first floor above the ground.” In this case William and Henry may have -been playing dice in the hall itself, which, as at Christchurch, may -have occupied the whole “solarium.” Robert was evidently outside the -house. - -[232] Bates, _Border Holds of Northumberland_ attributes the walling, -etc., of Warkworth castle “on its present general lines” to Robert, -son of Roger (1169-1214), who obtained in 1199, for 300 marks, a -confirmation of the grant of the castle and manor from John. - -[233] So called in Clarkson’s survey, made in 1567. One explanation of -the name is that the tower was similar to one in Carrickfergus castle, -on Belfast Lough. Clarkson describes its polygonal form as “round of -divers squares.” - -[234] This entrance has been blocked, and the modern entrance has been -cut through a window-opening, in the adjoining bay to the west. - -[235] The aisle-walls are low and the whole building is covered by a -single high-pitched roof, so that there is no clerestory. - -[236] The same feature occurs at the west end of the great hall at -Auckland, where the daïs was placed: there are regular responds at the -east end, but the eastern bay was made somewhat wider than the rest, to -give room for the screens. - -[237] Bishop Bek (1284-1311) probably heightened the aisle-walls and -inserted traceried windows. Cosin (1660-72) rebuilt the greater part -of the outer walls, renewed Bek’s windows, and added the present -clerestory and roof: the splendid screen, which divides the chapel from -the ante-chapel, was also part of his work. - -[238] The work of this late period is attributed to Bishop Tunstall -(1530-59). Cosin at a later date made additions to the chapel. - -[239] At the fortified manor-house of Drayton, some fourteen miles -south-east of Rockingham, the great hall is a fabric of the later half -of the thirteenth century, although the date has been obscured by later -alterations. The vaulted cellar at the east end of the hall (_c._ 1270) -is almost intact; but the great chamber above was rebuilt about the end -of the seventeenth century. - -[240] As at Penshurst. The hearth-stone remains at Stokesay. At Haddon -the great fireplace in the west wall was inserted several years after -the hall was built. - -[241] At Harlech the kitchen was at right angles to the hall, against -the south curtain. - -[242] The words “horn-work,” “demilune,” or “ravelin,” were applied in -later fortification to flanked outworks which presented a salient angle -to the field, _i.e._, on the side of attack. To such defences in the -middle ages the general name of “barbican” seems to have been given. - -[243] The mining operations, so successful at Château-Gaillard, were -not without their own danger to the miners. In the siege of Coucy by -the count of Saint-Pol in 1411, the traditional method was used to -undermine one of the towers of the base-court. A party of the besiegers -descended to admire the preparations. The wooden stays, however, were -not strong enough to support the weight of the tower, which fell -unexpectedly, and buried the men in the mine. Their remains have never -come to light. - -[244] These are additions to the wall, probably made soon after the -building of the great cylindrical tower. The wall seems to be of the -earlier part of the twelfth century, and may have enclosed the bailey -from the first. No traces of a mount remain. - -[245] The position of Appleby town and castle, within a great sweep of -the Eden, is somewhat similar. - -[246] Apartments, known as the Constable’s lodging, were on the first -floor of the gatehouse: the portcullis probably descended through the -thickness of the south wall of this floor, which was not pierced for a -window. - -[247] The common idea that molten lead was poured through these holes -on the besiegers is a mere legend. This valuable material would hardly -have been employed for this purpose. Powdered quick-lime, however, may -have been used, with even more deadly effect. - -[248] This applies, of course, to almost all vaulted towers which -are cylindrical in plan, and not to gatehouse towers alone: _e.g._, -the towers of the inner ward of Coucy. But, even where there is -no vaulting, the interior plan of cylindrical towers is sometimes -polygonal—_e.g._, in the western angle-towers at Harlech, on all floors -as well as in the basement. In the eastern angle-towers of the same -castle, the interior of the basements is cylindrical. Clark, ii. 73, -describes these angle-towers inaccurately. - -[249] The entrances to such guard-rooms, where great thickness was -given to the outer wall, took the form of narrow elbow-shaped lobbies, -which would be a source of difficulty and deception to an attacking -force. - -[250] The Black gate was built in 1247: the entrance was protected by -an outer barbican in 1358. - -[251] Holes in the masonry for the beam to which the pulley was fixed -may be seen, _e.g._, in the gateways at Conway and Rhuddlan. - -[252] At Sandal (86) there was a barbican guarding the entrance to a -shell-keep. - -[253] Conisbrough is virtually a castle of one ward set on an isolated -hill, not unlike Restormel in Cornwall. - -[254] The entrance may be compared to the more perfect plan of the -barbican and platform at Conway (254). - -[255] The wall of _enceinte_ at Scarborough is probably in great part -the wall which defended the castle from its foundation. - -[256] They appear to have been a feature of the keep at Pontefract; -_cf._ also Micklegate, Monk, and Bootham bars at York, which have -bartizans at the outer angles. At Lincoln the wall of the upper floor -of the gatehouse, between the bartizans, presents an obtuse angle to -the field. - -[257] The main gatehouse (Belle-Chaise) was built under abbot Tustin -(1236-64); the _châtelet_ was added under Pierre Le Roy in 1393. - -[258] The fortifications of Coucy were built in the thirteenth century: -the round tower in front of the Porte de Laon was superseded in 1551 -by a bastion of pentagonal form. The southern gate of Coucy (Porte -de Soissons) was made in a re-entering angle of the town wall: the -southern gate at Conway (Porth-y-Felin) shows the same disposition. The -walls of Tenby were originally built early in the reign of Edward III.: -letters patent, granting murage for seven years to the men of Tenby for -the construction of their walls, were issued 6th March 1327-28 (Pat. 2 -Edw. III., pt. 1, m. 22). - -[259] Plan in Oman, _Art of War_, opposite p. 530. - -[260] The northern rampart-walk at Coucy was widened by the building -of an arcade of thirteen pointed arches against the inner face of the -wall, connecting a series of internal buttresses. Part of the western -wall of the town of Southampton was widened, some time later than the -actual building of the wall, by the addition of eighteen arches upon -the outer face (293). The soffits of the arches were pierced by long -machicolations—a necessary precaution in so exceptional an arrangement. - -[261] In the battlement of the donjon of Coucy, each piece of solid -wall between the arched embrasures is pierced by an arrow-loop (177). - -[262] Viollet-le-Duc, _La Cité de Carcassonne_, p. 27, has a drawing -of a similar device with an upper and lower shutter (245): the upper -shutter is propped open by iron guards: while the lower is hung in iron -hooks fixed in the face of the wall. - -[263] _Cf._ sections of church parapets in Bond, _Gothic Architecture -in England_, pp. 385-8. - -[264] At Kenilworth the Water tower, on the south curtain of the -base-court, has a fireplace in the basement. - -[265] Garde-robes built upon arches across re-entering angles of a wall -occur on each side of a large buttress in the west wall of Southampton. -A similar feature occurs at the junction of the north curtain of -Porchester castle with one of the Roman towers. In both cases the -addition was probably made in the fourteenth century. - -[266] These towers appear to be of the fourteenth century, and are -therefore much later in date than the towers of the inner curtain. - -[267] At Flint, Rhuddlan, and several other castles, the angle-towers -were three-quarter circles, the face towards the bailey being a flat -wall, on which, at Rhuddlan as at Harlech, the rampart-walk was -corbelled out. - -[268] These walls, pierced by seven gates and flanked by thirty-nine -rectangular towers, were begun under Pope Clement VI. in 1345, and -finished _c._ 1380. The rampart is reached by stairs set against the -inner face of the walls. The walls of Aigues-Mortes, built 1272-5, and -of Carcassonne, begun earlier and completed later than Aigues-Mortes, -belong to an earlier period of fortification, corresponding to that of -our Edwardian castles. Of other well-known French examples, the walls -of Mont-Saint-Michel are of various dates from the thirteenth to the -fifteenth century: those of Domfront are partly of the thirteenth, -those of Fougères (250) of the fifteenth century, and those of -Saint-Malo chiefly of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The -thirteenth-century _enceinte_ of Coucy has already been referred to. A -list of the numerous remains of town walls in France will be found in -Enlart, ii. 623 _seq._, under the name of each department. - -[269] Clark, i. 460, 312, 314. - -[270] The cross-wall at Carnarvon is gone. - -[271] The polygonal towers which flank the great gatehouse at Denbigh -had the same characteristic of obtuse angles, as can be still seen -where the masonry has not been stripped from the rubble core. - -[272] The threshold of the gateway was from 35 to 40 feet above the -bottom of the ditch. - -[273] The eastern gateway was defended in the same way. - -[274] Le Krak (Kala’at-el-Hosn) was rebuilt in 1202, and held by the -Franks till 1271 (Enlart, ii. 536). It was a frontier fortress of the -county of Tripoli in Syria, commanding the mountain country to the -east, and must be distinguished from the great castle of Kerak in Moab, -near the Dead sea, built about 1140, and surrendered in 1188, “the -eastern bulwark of the kingdom of Jerusalem” (Oman, _Art of War_, 541). -The entrance to the castle of Kerak has been described above, pp. 240, -241. - -[275] One feature of the defences of Berkhampstead is the series of -earthen bastions, applied to the outer bank on the north side of the -castle, probably at a date long after the foundation of the stronghold. - -[276] The breadth of the “lists” or intermediate defence of -the town-walls at Carcassonne varies. On the steep western and -south-western sides they are very narrow, and in one place are covered -by the rectangular Bishop’s tower. The ground-floor of this was a -gateway, which could be used to shut off one part of the lists from -each other. Of the castle and its defences more will be said later. - -[277] At Newcastle the plan was nearly concentric; but the curtains -of the outer and inner ward met at one point, and the outer ward was -a large space, containing the domestic buildings, while the inner was -nearly filled by the keep. The concentric scheme was therefore almost -accidental, and no simultaneous use of both lines of defence was -possible. - -[278] _Cf._ the outer ditch constructed to cover the barbican at -Alnwick, where there was possibly a further outwork next the town. - -[279] All these gatehouses, like the gatehouse at Rockingham and others -of the same period, have a central passage, flanked by round towers -towards the field. Traitors’ gate, however, has an entrance of great -breadth, wide enough to admit a boat from the river; and the interior -is an oblong pool, without flanking guard-rooms. The round towers cap -the outer angles, but are of relatively small importance in the plan. -The interior pool is actually part of the ditch between the outer ward -and the Thames, and the gateway is “a barbican ... placed astride upon -the ditch” (Clark, ii. 242). - -[280] These angle-towers appear to belong in great part to the end of -the twelfth century: the Beauchamp tower is generally attributed to the -reign of Edward III. - -[281] These and the adjacent curtain are largely of the twelfth -century: the Bloody tower was added in the fourteenth century. - -[282] Thus protecting the quay outside Traitors’ gate. _Cf._ the -spur-wall at Beaumaris. - -[283] The thirteenth-century work in the great hall (103) of Chepstow -castle is unusually elaborate for military work of the period: nowhere -in English castles have we such splendour and beauty of detail as that -of which there remain many indications at Coucy. - -[284] It was begun about 1267 by Gilbert de Clare, eighth earl of -Gloucester and seventh earl of Hertford (d. 1295). - -[285] The inner ward at Kenilworth lay at all points within an outer -line of defence. The outer ward, narrow on the south and west, was -very broad on the east and north, and its western half was cut up into -sections by cross-walls: it was also crossed by a ditch in front of the -inner ward. The lake did not surround the castle, and on the north its -outer defence was a very deep dry ditch. - -[286] The partisans of the Despensers held Caerphilly against Queen -Isabel in 1326: its defenders were granted a general pardon, from which -Hugh, son of Hugh le Despenser the younger, was excepted, 15th February -1326-7 (Pat. 1 Edw. III., pt. 1, m. 29). One of the defenders, John -Cole, received a special pardon on 20th February (_ibid._, m. 32). -There is no record of a definite siege. - -[287] The earthwork or redoubt on the north-west side of the castle is -probably of this period: no definite details of the destruction of the -castle are preserved. - -[288] The inner buildings at Rhuddlan have entirely disappeared: traces -of one or two fireplaces are left in the curtain. - -[289] At Rhuddlan a passage, protected by an outer wall ending in a -square tower, descended the river-bank to the water-gate. - -[290] Clark (i. 217) places the date of foundation about 1295. - -[291] The outer drum towers are large and imposing, though low: the -inner angles are capped by smaller towers, which bear much the same -relation to the gatehouses as the outer round towers to Traitors’ gate -in the Tower of London. - -[292] Of these towers, that on the west has an outer salient or spur, -on the sides of which two bartizans are corbelled out: these are united -into one, so that the outer face of the upper stage of the tower is -rounded into a semicircle. The eastern tower is smaller, with a solid -base: the western part of the upper portion is corbelled off in the -angle between the tower and a rectangular southern projection. The -upper stages of the towers completely command the approach, while the -projection just mentioned would conceal a small body of defenders -posted between the gateway and the spur-wall (236). - -[293] This was not founded by the Crown, like the great castles -of North Wales, but, like Caerphilly, was a private foundation. -It passed by marriage, early in the fourteenth century, into the -possession of the house of Lancaster. Some of the most important -English castles—_e.g._, Kenilworth, Knaresborough, Lancaster, Lincoln, -Pontefract, and Pickering—came at various times into the possession of -this royal house, and, at the accession of Henry IV., became castles of -the Crown as seized of the duchy of Lancaster. - -[294] The stair to the rampart-walk, built against the curtain, was, -however, normal in the defences of towns (241). - -[295] It may be compared with the division of the outer face of the -polygonal tower at Stokesay into two smaller half-octagons (306). - -[296] Viollet-le-Duc’s drawing (_La Cité de Carcassonne_, p.75) shows -a rampart-walk on each of the enclosing walls of this passage. He also -shows the passage crossed by a series of looped barriers, so placed -that each formed a separate line of defence, guarded by a few soldiers, -and compelled an enemy to pursue a zigzag course through the passage. -Much allusion has been already made to oblique and elbow-shaped -contrivances for impeding an enemy’s progress: the antiquity of these -is evident from the entrances to earthworks like Maiden Castle (see -Chapter I.). - -[297] Description and plan in Blanchetière, _Le Donjon ... de -Domfront_, pp. 59-63. The date there given is actually earlier than the -probable epoch of construction. - -[298] The progress of fire-arms in English warfare was slow. See the -various articles by R. Coltman Clephan, F.S.A., in _Archæol. Journal_, -lxvi., lxvii., and lxviii. The earliest picture of a cannon is in a -MS. at Christ Church, Oxford, written in 1326 (lxviii. 49), while -the earliest mention of a hand-gun in England appears to be in 1338 -(lxvi. 153-4). The long-bow continued to be the popular weapon of the -individual English soldier until long after this date. - -[299] The ramparts of Saint-Paul-du-Var (Alpes Maritimes) are said -to belong to the epoch of the wars between Francis I. and Charles -V. To the same period belong the fortifications of Lucca, Verona, -and Antwerp. The present walls of Berwick were begun somewhat later, -in 1558, enclosing a space considerably smaller than the original -_enceinte_ of the town, as fortified by Edward I. - -[300] Holes with embrasures for cannon were in many cases pierced -in the walls of fortresses during the fifteenth century, or were -formed, as in the eastern tower at Warkworth, by blocking the ordinary -cross-loops through most of their height. - -[301] This is very clearly seen in the fortified towns of Italy, or -in the towns founded by Edward I. and by the kings of France in the -southern districts of France. - -[302] _Pomerium_ = the space _pone muros_, _i.e._, at the back of the -walls. The word was at first applied to the sacred boundary of Rome and -other towns, which limited the _auspicia_ of the city. - -[303] The re-erection of the rectangular wall-turrets at Newcastle, -which are of very slight projection from the wall, appears to date -from 1386: a writ of aid was granted to the mayor and bailiffs on 29th -November in that year for the repair of the walls and bridge of the -town (Pat. 10 Rich. II., pt. 1, m. 8). - -[304] _I.e._, the lower gate. The north-western gateway is the upper -gate, Porth Uchaf. - -[305] Every monastery was, of course, surrounded by a wall; but it was -only in certain cases and after a certain period that such walls were -crenellated. - -[306] Pat. 4 Edw. I., m. 12. - -[307] _Ibid._, 13 Edw. I., m. 22. - -[308] _Ibid._ - -[309] _Ibid._, m. 15. - -[310] _Ibid._, 14 Edw. I., m. 24. - -[311] _Ibid._, m. 19 (sched.). - -[312] _Ibid._, 24 Edw. I., m. 8. - -[313] _Ibid._, 27 Edw. I., m. 29. - -[314] _Ibid._, 2 Edw. II., pt. 2, m. 25. The abbot and convent of St -Mary’s, York, had licence to crenellate their wall, except on the side -towards the city, 12th July 1318 (_Ibid._, 12 Edw. II., pt. I, m. 31). - -[315] September 1315 (Pat. 9 Edw. II., pt. 1, m. 18), and 24th February -1315-6 (_Ibid._, pt. 2, m. 31). - -[316] _Ibid._, 12 Edw. II., pt. 1, m. 7. No licence for crenellation -had previously been given. The licences, here and elsewhere, explain -that homicide and other crimes in the close by night made walling -desirable. The gates were to be closed from twilight to sunrise. - -[317] Burghersh also had licence to crenellate his manor-houses of -Stow Park and Nettleham in Lincolnshire and Liddington in Rutland, -16th November 1336 (Pat. 10 Edw. III., pt. 2, m. 18). A comprehensive -licence was granted, 20th July 1377 (_Ibid._, 1 Rich. II., pt. 1, m. -26) to Ralph Erghum, bishop of Salisbury, to wall and crenellate the -city of Salisbury and his manor-houses at Salisbury, Bishop’s Woodford, -Potterne, Bishops Cannings, and Ramsbury in Wilts, Sherborne in Dorset, -Chardstock in Devon, Sonning in Berks, and his house in Fleet Street. - -[318] There were four of these double gatehouses in the _enceinte_. The -fifth gatehouse, Pottergate, was single. - -[319] Bishop Wyvill had a grant, 1st March 1331-2, of the stones of the -cathedral of Old Sarum and the old residential houses, for the repair -of the cathedral and enclosure of the precinct (Pat. 5 Edw. III., pt. -1, m. 27). - -[320] Licence to crenellate Whalley, “the church and close,” was -granted 10th July 1348 (Pat. 22 Edw. III., pt. 2, m. 20). - -[321] Pat. 6 Rich. II., pt. 1, m. 22: a further licence to crenellate -the abbey precinct bears date 1389, 6th May (Pat. 12 Rich. II., pt. 2, -m. 13). - -[322] Pat. 3 Rich. II., pt. 2, m. 10. - -[323] The beautiful rectangular gatehouse of Battle abbey is earlier -than Thornton. Licence to crenellate was granted 9th June 1339 (Pat. 12 -Edw. III., pt. 2, m. 28). - -[324] One of these towers remains: the other, with the adjacent -curtain, is gone. - -[325] Pat. 19 Edw. I., m. 2. - -[326] _Ibid._, 2 Edw. II., pt. 2, m. 19. - -[327] Pat. 3 Edw. II., m. 18. - -[328] 28th August 1315 (Pat. 9 Edw. II., pt. 1, m. 25). - -[329] See a commission to Humphrey, duke of Gloucester, to survey and -repair defects in Dover castle, 22nd May 1425 (Pat. 3 Hen. VI., pt. 2, -m. 17). - -[330] It will be remembered that the gatehouse of the quasi-concentric -castle of Kidwelly, only a few miles distant from Llanstephan, is also -situated upon the outer line of defence. - -[331] Bishop Bek enfeoffed Henry Percy of the manor and town, 19th -November 1309 (Pat. 3 Edw. II., m. 23). - -[332] It has been already pointed out that this older house may have -simply taken the form of a series of buildings against the encircling -wall of a large shell-keep. - -[333] John, Lord Neville, obtained licence from Bishop Hatfield of -Durham to crenellate Raby in 1378 (O. S. Scott, _Raby, its Castle and -its Lords_, 1906, P-47). - -[334] At Middleham, where the plan of the fore-building is rather -exceptional, there was a passage through the eastern part of the -ground-floor of the forebuilding: this, however, was not the only way -from the northern to the southern half of the castle. The first floor -of the tower at Knaresborough, which formed a great guard-room, is -in a very ruinous state; but there are clear indications of the main -entrance near the north-east angle, and the inner entrance in the south -wall, at right angles to the outer, still remains. There is also a vice -in the south wall, by which the inner ward could be reached when the -gates were closed. This tower, of course, never contained the domestic -buildings of the castle; but the kitchen was in the basement, to which -there were three doors of entry from the inner ward. The approach to -each gateway from outside seems to have been a rising causeway built on -arches. - -[335] The tower of Belsay measures 51½ by 47½ feet. The tower of -Knaresborough, which is of the same period, measures 62 by 54 feet; -while that of Gilling measures 79½ by 72½ feet. - -[336] This is said to have been the medieval vicarage of the church, -which was appropriated to the cathedral priory of Carlisle. A -pele-tower forms part of the rectories of Elsdon and Rothbury and of -the vicarage of Embleton, Northumberland. - -[337] The term “pele-yard” is applied to the base-court of the castle -of Prudhoe in Pat. 1 Rich. II., pt. 1, m. 1; where there is a licence -to Gilbert de Umfraville, earl of Angus, to apply a rent to the -augmentation of a chaplain’s stipend in the “chantry of St Mary in le -Peleyerde of Prodhowe.” - -[338] Enlart (ii. 623-753) quotes 242 examples of French churches -which show remains of fortification. Most of the midland and southern -departments of France contain a few; but the thickest clusters occur -near the northern frontier (15 in the Aisne, 10 in the Ardennes -department), and on the coast of Languedoc and Roussillon, where -inroads of pirates were common (Pyrénées-Orientales 22; Hérault, 12). -Among the larger fortified churches were the cathedrals of Agde, -Béziers, Lodève, and Saint-Pons (Hérault), Elne (Pyrénées-Orientales), -Pamiers (Ariège), Viviers (Ardèche), and Saint-Claude (Jura), -and the abbey churches of Saint-Denis (Seine), Saint-Victor at -Marseilles (Bouches-du-Rhône), La Chaise-Dieu (Haute-Loire), Moissac -(Tarn-et-Garonne), and Tournus (Saône-et-Loire). The example of Ewenny -was followed in one or two churches of the same district, such as -Newton Nottage, and in the peninsula of Gower. - -[339] At Llanfihangel-cwm-Du, near Crickhowell, there was a fireplace -upon the first floor of the tower until recently: the vent for the -smoke remains in one of the corner turrets of the tower. - -[340] The constant pressure of Scottish invasion upon the northern -border is illustrated by the persistence of military architecture in -the counties of Northumberland and Cumberland. Thus, as late as 1399, -William Strickland undertook the building of Penrith castle “for -fortifying that town and the whole adjacent country” (Pat. 22 Rich. -II., pt. 2, m. 16; _cf._ pt. 3, m. 37). - -[341] Bishop Burnell was building this house in 1284. He left the king -at Conway on 25th July, to look after the progress of the works (Pat. -12 Edw. I., m. 7). - -[342] 4th July (Pat. 3 Rich. II., pt. 1, m. 43). A contract is still -preserved, of 14th September 1378. - -[343] 26th April (Pat. 5 Rich. II., pt. 2, m. 21). - -[344] The builder of Raby, John, Lord Neville (d. 1388), was also -responsible for the fortification of Sheriff Hutton. - -[345] This date is given in the 43rd Report of the Deputy-Keeper of -the Public Records, p. 71. The licence, as the castle was within the -palatinate, was granted by Bishop Skirlaw. - -[346] The licence to Thomas de Heton to “make a castle or fortalice” of -Chillingham bears date 27th January 1343-4 (Pat. 18 Edw. III., pt. 1, -m. 46). Some of the masonry in the angle-towers is, however, of a much -earlier date than this. - -[347] The mount remains at the west end of the enclosure, but the -shell-keep on its summit has been removed. - -[348] The gatehouse and barbican in the east curtain, as well as the -older portion of the dwelling-house, were the work of Thomas Beauchamp, -earl of Warwick (d. 1369): Cæsar’s tower and Guy’s tower were the work -of his son Thomas, who died in 1401. - -[349] This-is the usual date given for the tower, which is entered from -the first floor of the great donjon, and from the lower floor of the -“lesser donjon” attached to one side of the keep. E. Lefèvre-Pontalis, -_Le Château de Coucy_, p. 82, departs from the usual date to assign the -tower to Philip Augustus, two centuries earlier. The details certainly -appear to be of a period much earlier than the fifteenth century. - -[350] The turrets attached to some of the towers at Conway and Harlech -are at the side, not in the centre. Such raised turrets were useful -as look-out posts, and a watcher posted upon them could inform the -defenders on the rampart-walk below of movements which they might not -be able to follow for themselves. - -[351] Pat. 9 Rich. II., pt. 1, m. 22. - -[352] Pat. 9 Rich. II., pt. 2, m. 24. - -[353] An interesting gatehouse, belonging to the later years of Edward -I., is that of Denbigh, which was probably built by Henry de Lacy, -the last earl of Lincoln (d. 1310). Here a noble archway, flanked by -two octagonal towers, gives access through a passage to an octagonal -central hall, beyond which is a smaller octagonal guard-room. The inner -gateway to the enclosure is set in a side of the octagon, obliquely to -the outer entrance. The plan is apparently unique. The upper portion of -the gatehouse is badly ruined, and the walls have been much stripped; -but there is a statue, probably of the founder, left above the entrance -archway, which is set in a niche and panel treated with a considerable -amount of ornamental detail. - -[354] The barrel-vault of a basement chamber in one of the -curtain-towers retains the marks of the wattled centering on which it -was built. This is persistently asserted to be a mark of Roman origin. -As a matter of fact, no part of the present castle can be proved to be -earlier than the beginning of the twelfth century, when Roger of Poitou -may have moved the head of his honour here from Penwortham, south of -the Ribble. The castle, however, lies partly within, and partly outside -the limits of a Roman military station. - -[355] This is the date proposed by Bates, _Border Holds_: C. H. -Hartshorne (_Archæol. Inst._, Newcastle, vol. ii.) proposed a later -date, _c._ 1435-40. Mr Bates’ date is more likely than the other: for -neither is there any direct evidence. - -[356] New works were begun at Porchester in 1386, when Robert Bardolf, -the constable, was appointed to impress masons, carpenters, etc., -and to take materials at the king’s expense (Pat. 8 Rich. II., pt. -2, m. 23). This probably applies to the building of the barbican, -but the hall may also have been remodelled at this period. There are -considerable remains of twelfth-century work in the substructure of the -hall, as already noted. - -[357] The stone gatehouse of the Norman castle appears to be -incorporated in the fourteenth-century work, the outer archway, which -was covered by a barbican, being merely a facing added to earlier work. -The inner walls of the gatehouse were also lengthened, as part of the -fourteenth-century enlargement. - -[358] John of Gaunt was duke of Lancaster 1362-99. The gatehouse of -Lancaster castle, known as John of Gaunt’s gateway, was not built until -after his death. See p. 327. - -[359] This hall was probably built late in the thirteenth or early in -the fourteenth century. - -[360] Charles also seems to have rebuilt the chapel on the south side -of the enclosure. - -[361] See the drawing by Androuet du Cerceau and plans in W. H. Ward, -_French Châteaux and Gardens in the XVIth Century_, Plates III., IV., -and p. 11. - -[362] See p. 285 above. - -[363] The three principal features of the strong tower at Stokesay -are (1) its isolation from the range of buildings adjoining it, its -only entrances being from the outside, in the basement and on the -first floor; (2) the division of its face towards the field into two -small half-octagons; (3) the stairs carried from floor to floor in -the thickness of the wall. The stair from the basement to the first -and second floors crosses the entrance-lobby on the first floor; but, -in order to reach the roof, the second-floor chamber has to be passed -through, and a new stair entered in the embrasure of a window. This was -planned partly, as at Richmond and Conisbrough, to give the defenders -complete control of the stair, and partly to keep the stair within the -wall of the tower which was least open to attack, and could therefore -be lightened most safely. - -[364] This was done towards the end of the twelfth century. The licence -stated that the wall was to be without crenellations (_sine kernello_). - -[365] The hall may be a little earlier than the fourteenth century: the -windows seem to indicate the period 1290-1310. The great chimney and -the heavy battlement were added when the porch to the hall was built. - -[366] Such a position for a medieval stronghold was not unusual. Thus -Richmond castle is commanded by much higher hills on the north and -south-west. In medieval warfare, however, before fire-arms had received -any full development, an enemy would have gained little advantage -by occupying a commanding position at some distance from the place -attacked. In 1644, the Parliamentary force which besieged Wingfield -attempted to breach the walls from Pentrich common, on slightly higher -ground to the south-east. This was found impossible, and the cannon had -to be moved to a wood on the west side of the manor before any damage -was done. - -[367] The additions at this end were possibly the work of John Talbot, -second earl of Shrewsbury (d. 1460), to whom Cromwell sold the manor -shortly before his death. The earl certainly did some building at -Wingfield: see the short, but carefully compiled _Guide to Wingfield -Manor_, by W. H. Edmunds, p. 11. - -[368] This can clearly be seen from the small open courtyard on the -north-west side of the great chamber block. The kitchen block is there -seen to have been built up against the west wall of the great chamber -and its lower stage, without any bonding. - -[369] At Conway, Porchester, etc., however, the large hall was probably -intended for the use of the garrison. The great hall at Wingfield was -essentially the hall of a dwelling-house, in which the inner court is -kept quite separate from the base-court, where possibly a common hall -was provided for the men-at-arms who might be lodged there. - -[370] This tower, like that at Stokesay, can be entered only by an -outer door. This is at the foot of a turret containing a broad vice. -The doorway had no portcullis, but was commanded by a slit in the wall -from the stair, which ascends on the left of the entrance lobby. - -[371] The gateways of the outer and inner courtyards each had double -doors. There was no provision for portcullises. Each gateway has a -small postern entrance on one side of the main archway. This would be -used after the great doors had been closed for the night. - -[372] These have recently been removed, to the great detriment of this -noble tower. - -[373] The high tower at Wingfield is not machicolated, and affords a -curious contrast in this respect to Tattershall. - -[374] The late thirteenth-century hall at Little Wenham, near Hadleigh, -is an early example of a brick house in this district. - -[375] Other Lincolnshire examples of brick-work are the gatehouse -of Thornton abbey (1382), already described, and the early -sixteenth-century manor-house on the Trent above Gainsborough, known as -Torksey castle. - -[376] The ditch at Hurstmonceaux is now dry. That at Compton Wyniates -has been partly filled up. The moat of Kentwell, an Elizabethan house, -is still perfect. - -[377] The upper stories of these towers only are semicircular. The two -lower stages are half octagons. The towers have circular upper turrets -like those at Warwick. - -[378] The castle of Amberley was built about 1379 by Bishop Rede of -Chichester, and is therefore nearly contemporary with Bodiam. It is -rectangular in shape, with lofty curtains, and has a gatehouse flanked -by round towers. - -[379] _Lett. and Pap. Hen. VIII._, vol. IV., nos. 2,655, 2,656. - -[380] _Lett. and Pap. Hen. VIII._, vol. IV., no. 1,089. - -[381] Calendared _ibid._, vol. III., no. 1,186. - -[382] Pat. 19 Edw. III., pt. 1, m. 25. - - - - -INDEX OF PERSONS AND PLACES - -_N.B.—Illustrations are denoted by numbers followed by the name of the -photographer, draughtsman, or source from which the picture is derived._ - - - A - - Acton Burnell (Salop), castle, 298, 317, 338 - - Adrianople, siege of, 73 - - Æthelflaed, lady of the Mercians, 26, 28, 29, 30, 32, 41, 101 - - Æthelwulf, king of Wessex, 28 - - Agde (Hérault), cathedral, 315 - - Aigues-Mortes (Gard), 77, A. Thompson; 242, 246, 250, 289 - - Aire river, 85 - - Aisne department, fortified churches in, 315 - - Alan of Brittany, earl of Richmond, 47, 94, 101, 104, 107 - - Albi (Tarn), fortified cathedral, 315 - - Alençon (Orne), castle, 289, A. Thompson - - Alençonnais, the, 52 - - Alesia [Alise (Côte-d’Or)], siege of, 46, 59, 60, 61, 79 - - Alexander, bishop of Lincoln, 97, 99, 189 - - Alfred the Great, king, 26, 28, 64 - - Alne river, 86 - - Alnwick (Northumberland), castle, 115, G. T. Clark; 243, J. P. Gibson; - 310, A. Thompson; 7, 42, 43, 86, 115, 116, 210, 235, 245, 247, - 265, 309, 310, 327, 328 - - Amaury, count of Evreux, 165 - - Amberley (Sussex), castle, 360 - - Amboglanna (Cumberland), 15 - - Amboise (Indre-et-Loire), castle, 338 - - Amiens (Somme), 22 - - Ancaster (Lincoln), 355 - - Anderida (Sussex), 12, 22; - _see_ Pevensey - - Andover (Hants), 22 - - Angers (Maine-et-Loire), 27, 88, 118 - - Angevins, war of William I. with, 52 - - Anglesey, isle of, 278 - - Angus, earl of, _see_ Umfraville - - Anjou, count of, _see_ Fulk - - Anker river, 101 - - Antioch (Syria), siege of, 71, 164, 241 - - Antwerp, 290 - - Ardennes department, fortified churches in, 315 - - Ardres (Pas-de-Calais), castle, 54, 55 - - Arles (Bouches-du-Rhône), 315 - - Arnold, son of Robert, 52 - - Arras (Pas-de-Calais), 290 - - Arundel (Sussex), castle, 37, 115, 190, 360 - - Ashbourne (Derby), 318 - - Astures, Roman auxiliaries, 19 - - Auckland (Durham), castle, 197, 198, 200, 338 - - Autun (Sâone-et-Loire), 15 - - Avignon (Vaucluse), palace of the popes, 304; - walls, 246, 250, 295 - - Avon river (Bristol), 2, 88; - (Warwick), 29 - - Axholme, isle of, 56 - - Aydon (Northumberland), castle or fortified house, 189, 190, 312, 338 - - - B - - Badbury (Dorset), 25 - - Bakewell (Derby), 29 - - Bamburgh (Northumberland), castle, 91, J. P. Gibson, W. Maitland; - 25, 62, 66, 86, 90, 120, 132, 133, 134, 137, 150, 155, 202, 230, - 233 - - Bardolf, Robert, 335 - - Barking (Middlesex), 38 - - Barlborough (Derby), hall, 318 - - Barnard Castle (Durham), castle, 87, G. T. Clark; 85, 86, 163, 185 - - Baroche, la (Orne), 52 - - Barwick-in-Elmet (Yorks, W.R.), castle, 56 - - Basing house (Hants), 360 - - Bath (Somerset), 24, 25 - - Bath and Wells, bishop of, _see_ Burnell - - Battle (Sussex), gatehouse of abbey, 304 - - Battlesbury (Wilts), 25 - - Bayeux (Calvados), castle, 45 - - —— bishop of, _see_ Odo - - Beauchamp, house of, 109 - - —— Thomas, earl of Warwick (d. 1369), 321 - - —— Thomas, earl of Warwick (d. 1401), 321 - - Beaugency (Loiret), castle, 116, A. Thompson; 117, 118, 120 - - Beaumaris (Anglesey), castle, 277, G. T. Clark; 236, 278, A. Thompson; - 7, 211, 225, 236, 251, 261, 265, 266, 268, 275, 276-9, 280, 282, - 284 - - Beauvais (Oise), 22, 27 - - Bebbanburh, 25; - _see_ Bamburgh - - Bedale (Yorks, N. R.), church tower, 316 - - Bedburn river, 8 - - Bedford, 29, 30, 32; - castle, 30, 32; - John, duke of, 330 - - Bek, Antony, bishop of Durham, 188, 189, 198, 200, 202, 309 - - Bellême, house of, 51; - Robert of, 55, 67, 85 - - Belsay (Northumberland), castle, 313, J. P. Gibson; 236, 312 - - Belvoir (Leicester), castle, 85, 360 - - Berkeley (Gloucester), castle, 142, 186, A. Thompson; 42, 43, 142, - 186, 193, 194, 209, 210 - - Berkhampstead (Herts), castle, 42, A. Thompson; 42, 119, 263 - - Berry, John, duke of, 338 - - Berry Pomeroy (Devon), castle, 229, 358 - - Berwick-on-Tweed, town walls, 290, 291 - - Beverley (Yorks, E. R.), 295 - - Béziers (Hérault), cathedral, 315 - - Bignor (Sussex), Roman villa, 12 - - Birdoswald (Cumberland), 15 - - Bishop Auckland (Durham), 8; - and _see_ Auckland - - Bishops Cannings (Wilts), manor-house, 301 - - Bishop’s Castle (Salop), 2 - - Bishop’s Woodford (Wilts), manor-house, 301 - - Black mountains, 184 - - Blackbury castle (Devon), 7, A. H. Allcroft; 6 - - Blackfriars, _see_ London - - Blackwater river, 22, 29 - - Blois (Loir-et-Cher), castle, 337 - - Blyth (Notts) castle, 85; - and _see_ Tickhill; - priory, 85 - - Bodiam (Sussex), castle, 323, E. A. and G. R. Reeve; 326, A. Thompson; - 210, 322, 325, 326, 327, 330, 335, 360 - - Bokerley dyke, 24, 25 - - Bolton-in-Wensleydale (Yorks, N. R.), castle, 316, 317, 318, 330, - 362, 367 - - Bolton-on-Swale (Yorks, N. R.), church tower, 316 - - Boothby Pagnell (Lincoln), manor-house, 190, 192 - - Borcovicus (Northumberland), 14, A. Thompson; 15, 18, A. Thompson - (after Bruce); 15, 17, 18, 19 - - Bosham (Sussex), 36, A. Thompson (after Bayeux tapestry); 190 - - Boston (Lincoln), Hussey tower at, 355 - - Bothal (Northumberland), castle, 245, 327 - - Bourbourg, Louis de, 54 - - Bourges (Cher), 22 - - Boves (Somme), siege of, 70, 76 - - Bowes (Yorks, N. R.), tower, 131, 132, 133, 142, 145, 312 - - Bowness (Cumberland), 10 - - Bracieux, Pierre de, 73 - - Bradwell-juxta-Mare (Essex), 22 - - Brancaster (Norfolk), 12 - - Brancepeth (Durham), castle, 86 - - Brandenburg (Prussia), 26 - - Branodunum (Norfolk), 12 - - Brecon beacons, 274 - - —— castle, 44, 56, 87, 362, 365, 367 - - Breteuil, William of, 55 - - Bréval (Seine-et-Oise), 55, 67 - - Bridgnorth (Salop), 29; - castle, 108, 109, 119, 133 - - Bridlington (Yorks, E. R.), gatehouse of priory, 301 - - Brionne (Eure), castle, 56 - - Bristol, castle, 88; - walls and gateways, 292, 295, 296 - - —— channel, 24, 308 - - Brittany, mount-and-bailey castles in, 45; - Alan of, _see_ Alan - - Brixworth (Northants), church, 100 - - Bronllys (Brecknock), castle, 183, 184 - - Bruce, house of, 85 - - Brunanburh, battle of, 63 - - Brutus, Marcus, 62 - - Buckingham, 29, 30, 32 - - —— castle, 30, 32 - - —— duke of, _see_ Stafford - - Builth (Brecknock), castle, 50, G. T. Clark; 50, 51 - - Burgh Castle (Suffolk), 12, 16, 22 - - Burghersh, Henry, bishop of Lincoln, 301 - - Burghwallis (Yorks, W. R.), 100 - - Burgundy, 59, 64, 198 - - Burnell, Robert, bishop of Bath and Wells, 298, 317 - - Bury ditches (Salop), 6, A. Thompson; 2, 6 - - Bury St Edmunds (Suffolk), 25; - Moyses hall, 190 - - Busli, Roger de, 85 - - - C - - Cadbury (Somerset), 25 - - Caen (Calvados), 118; - abbey churches, 93 - - Caer Caradoc (near Clun, Salop), 6 - - Caerlaverock (Dumfries), castle, 364, J. P. Gibson; 304, 307 - - Caerphilly (Glamorgan), castle, 270, 271, 272, A. Thompson; 7, 160, - 189, 205, 236, 264, 265, 270-2, 274-5, 276, 277, 278, 279, 280, - 282, 284, 287, 309, 334, 352 - - Cahors (Lot), walled town, 65; - Pont Valentré, 297, 355 - - Calder river, 85 - - Caldicot (Monmouth), castle, 182, 184 - - Calleva Atrebatum (Hants), 14; - and _see_ Silchester - - Cambridge, castle, 39, 40, 41 - - —— colleges, 193 - - Camulodunum (Essex), 12; - and _see_ Colchester - - Canterbury (Kent), 28, 198; - archbishops of, _see_ Robert of Jumièges, Sudbury - - —— castle, 46, 120, 128 - - —— west gate, 296, 304 - - Carcassonne (Aude), town and castle, 78, 239, 242, A. Thompson; 264, - 283, Viollet-le-Duc; 79, 82, 236, 242, 246, 250, 264, 284, 286, 289 - - Cardiff (Glamorgan), 274; - castle, 114, A. Thompson; 191, G. T. Clark; 115, 190, 193, 194, 209 - - Carew (Pembroke), castle, 248, 336, A. Thompson; 202, 239, 240, 247, - 252, 269, 304, 330, 333, 337, 362 - - Carisbrooke (Isle of Wight), castle, 111, R. Keene; 115 - - Carlisle (Cumberland), castle, 87, 88, 120, 361, 362, 367 - - —— cathedral priory, 312 - - Carnarvon, castle, 245, 253, G. T. Clark; 258, A. Thompson; 259, - F. Bond; 88, 189, 209, 224, 242, 245, 246, 248, 252, 255, 257, - 261, 262, 265, 266, 269, 270, 279, 282, 284, 291 - - —— town walls, 251, A. Thompson; 88, 251, 291, 292, 295, 296 - - Carrickfergus (Antrim), castle, 194 - - Castles camp (Durham), 8 - - Castleton (Yorks, N. R.), castle, 85 - - Castrum Harundel (Sussex), 37; - and _see_ Arundel - - Caus castle (Salop), 362 - - Cawood (Yorks, W. R.), castle, 85, 338 - - Ceawlin, king of West Saxons, 25 - - Cedd, St, 22 - - Cérisy-la-Forêt (Calvados), abbey church, 100 - - Chaise-Dieu, la (Haute-Loire), abbey church, 315 - - Champlitte, Guillaume de, 73 - - Chardstock (Devon), manor-house, 301 - - Charles the Bald, king of Neustria, 27, 29, 32 - - —— the Fat, king of Neustria, 27, 64 - - —— the Simple, king of Neustria, 28 - - —— V., emperor, 290 - - —— Martel, 65 - - Chartres (Eure-et-Loir), 22 - - —— count of, _see_ Theobald - - Château-Gaillard (Eure), 163, A. Thompson, after Enlart; 175, A. - Thompson; 66, 68, 70, 71, 73, 76, 77, 163, 172, 175, 176, 215, - 216, 229, 257, 264 - - Château-sur-Epte (Eure), 165 - - Chauny (Aisne), 295 - - Chedworth (Gloucester), Roman villa, 12 - - Chepstow (Monmouth), 182; castle, 103, 249, 268, A. Thompson; 104, - A. Thompson (after _Official Guide_); 56, 88, 104, 107, 175, 185, - 189, 223, 249, 250, 268, 269, 280, 282, 359 - - —— town and walls, 88, 251, 295 - - Chester, castle, 39 - - —— city and walls, 14, 22, 23, 24, 119 - - Chesters (Northumberland), 15; - and _see_ Cilurnum - - Chichester (Sussex), 14, 22, 23, 198; - bishop of, _see_ Rede - - Chilham (Kent), castle, 120 - - Chillingham (Northumberland), castle, 318 - - China, great wall of, 79 - - Chipchase (Northumberland), castle, 156, 236, 312 - - Christchurch (Hants), castle, 123, P. M. Johnston; 128, 189, 192, 193 - - —— priory church, 93, 94 - - Cilurnum (Northumberland), 13, A. Thompson (after Bruce); 15, 17, - 18, 19 - - Cirencester (Gloucester), 25 - - Cissbury (Sussex), 2, 25 - - Clare (Suffolk), castle, 188 - - —— Gilbert de, earl of Gloucester and Hertford, 270 - - Clark, G. T., 30 - - Clavering (Essex), castle, 37 - - Clement VI., pope, 250 - - Cleveland (Yorks, N. R.), 85 - - Clifford’s hill (Northampton), 84 - - Clifton (Bristol), promontory forts, 2, 8 - - Clinton, family of, 365 - - Clipsham (Rutland), 197 - - Clun (Salop), 2, 6 - - —— castle, 43, 127, A. Thompson; 43, 50, 119, 128, 129, 131, 145 - - Clwyd river, 275 - - Cnut, king, 33, 34 - - Colchester (Essex), 12, 19, 26, 29, 65; - castle, 47, 101, A. Thompson; 47, 83, 100, 124, 125, 127, 128, 133, - 134, 137, 146, 150, 154, 188, 317 - - Cole, John, 274, 275 - - Colne river (Essex), 29 - - Compton castle (Devon), 358 - - Compton Wyniates (Warwick), manor-house, 193, 210, 308, 359 - - Conisbrough (Yorks, W. R.), castle, 166, 167, 168, A. Thompson; 217, - G. Hepworth; 42, 85, 86, 149, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 178, - 179, 180, 182, 183, 184, 188, 212, 216, 342 - - Constantinople, siege of, 73, 77, 78, 81, 164, 262, 263 - - Conway (Carnarvon), 317; - castle, 234, 256, G. T. Clark; 261, 262, 263, A. Thompson; 7, 88, - 177, 205, 209, 210, 229, 233, 236, 242, 252, 255, 257, 258, 261, - 262, 265, 268, 270, 275, 276, 279, 280, 282, 291, 322, 334, 352 - - —— town walls, 88, 177, 240, 250, 251, 291, 295, 296 - - Coquet river, 86, 219, 298 - - Corbridge-on-Tyne (Northumberland), 18; - _see_ Corstopitum - - —— pele-tower, 156, 312 - - Corfe (Dorset), castle, 102, 131, 132, 155 - - Corstopitum (Northumberland), 18, 22 - - Cosin, John, bishop of Durham, 198, 200 - - Coucy (Aisne), castle, 81, 177, A. Thompson; 80, 81, 82, 171, 176, - 177, 178, 179, 181, 182, 189, 216, 225, 241, 242, 248, 264, 269, - 284, 285, 322, 338 - - —— town walls, 240, 250, 295, 297 - - —— Enguerrand III., seigneur de, 176 - - —— VII., 338 - - Courcy-sur-Dives (Calvados), 67 - - Coutances (Manche), 23 - - Coventry and Lichfield, bishop of, _see_ Langton - - Cowdray castle (Sussex), 360 - - Cradyfargus tower at Warkworth, 194, 219, 247 - - Cranborne (Dorset), 25 - - Cromwell, Ralph, Lord, 345, 347, 352 - - Cynewulf, king, 36 - - - D - - Dacre, Lord, of Gillesland, 361 - - Dalyngrugge, Sir Edward, 322, 325 - - Danby Wiske (Yorks, N. R.), church-tower, 316 - - Danelaw, the, 28, 34 - - Dead sea (Palestine), 263 - - Dee river, 24 - - Delhi, 79 - - Denbigh, castle, 185, 224, 229, 255, 327, 360 - - Denmark, king of, _see_ Swegen - - Derby, 29, 30 - - Derwent river (Derby), 345 - - —— (Durham and Northumberland), 316 - - —— (Yorks), 85 - - Despenser, Hugh, 274 - - Devizes (Wilts), 24 - - Devon river, 99 - - Didier, St, bishop of Cahors, 65 - - Dinan (Ille-et-Vilaine), castle, 46, A. Thompson, after Bayeux - tapestry; 45 - - D’Oily, Robert, 104 - - Dol (Ille-et-Vilaine), castle, 45 - - Dolbadarn (Carnarvon), tower, 183, 184, A. Thompson; 87, 185 - - Dolebury (Somerset), 8, 25 - - Dolwyddelan (Carnarvon), castle, 185 - - Domfront (Orne), castle, 284, A. Thompson; 51, 52, 117, 118, 120, - 142, 145, 284, 285 - - —— town walls, 250 - - Don river, 85 - - Doncaster (Yorks, W.R.), 85, 100 - - Dorchester (Dorset), 2, 19 - - Dove river, 42 - - Dover (Kent), 37; - castle, 126, G. T. Clark; 37, 119, 120, 131, 132, 133, 134, 137, - 138, 141, 146, 149, 150, 154, 155, 159, 241, 265, 308 - - Drayton house (Northampton), 205 - - Dudley, Robert, earl of Leicester, 337 - - Duffield (Derby), castle, 132 - - Dumfries, 304 - - Dunheved (Cornwall), 89 - - Dunstanburgh (Northumberland), castle, 219, 308, 309, 327 - - Durham, bishops of, _see_ Bek, Cosin, Flambard, Hatfield, Pudsey, - Skirlaw, Tunstall - - Durham, 24; - castle, 199, _Archaeol. Journal_; 201, Billings; 203, J. P. Gibson; - 44, 86, 107, 108, 189, 200, 202, 275 - - —— cathedral, 153 - - —— University college, 200 - - Dyrham (Gloucester), battle of, 25 - - - E - - Earls Barton (Northampton), castle and church, 45, 52, 109 - - Easingwold (Yorks, N.R.), 296 - - East Anglia, king of, _see_ Edmund - - Échauffour (Orne), castle, 52 - - Eddisbury (Chester), 29 - - Eden river, 312 - - Edgar the Ætheling, 39 - - Edmund, king of East Anglia, 28 - - —— Ironside, king, 33, 34 - - Edward the Confessor, king, 37 - - —— the Elder, king, 26, 28, 29, 30, 32, 41 - - —— I., king, 241, 252, 275, 276, 290, 291, 292, 298, 304, 307, - 317, 327 - - —— II., king, 185, 301, 307 - - —— III., king, 109, 266, 291, 301, 307 - - Egbert, king, 27 - - Elizabeth, queen, 337, 345, 361 - - Ellesmere (Salop), castle, 119 - - Elmham (Suffolk), 24 - - Elmley (Worcester), castle, 109 - - Elne (Pyrénèes-Orientales), cathedral, 315 - - Elsdon (Northumberland), fortified rectory, 312 - - Embleton (Northumberland), fortified vicarage, 312 - - Emperors, _see_ Charles V., Henry the Fowler, Vespasian - - England, kings of, _see_ Cnut, Edward I., Edward II., Edward III., - Henry I., Henry II., Henry III., Henry IV., Henry V., Henry VIII., - John, Richard I., Richard II., Stephen, William I., William II. - - England, queens of, _see_ Elizabeth, Isabel - - Erghum, Ralph, bishop of Salisbury, 301 - - Ermine street, 21 - - Erve river, 90 - - Etampes (Seine-et-Oise), castle, 172, A. Thompson; 172, 186 - - Ethelred the Redeless, king, 28, 33 - - Eudes, count of Paris (Hugh Capet), 63, 64 - - Eustace, son of John, 116 - - Evreux (Eure), abbey of Saint-Taurin, 22; - count of, _see_ Amaury - - Ewenny (Glamorgan), priory church, 315 - - Ewias Harold (Hereford), castle, 37 - - Exeter (Devon), 21, 23, 39; - castle, 39, 40, 83, 95, 96, 98, 113 - - —— cathedral close, 298 - - - F - - Falaise (Calvados), castle, 117, A. Thompson; 54, 100, 117, 118, 120, - 322 - - Farnham (Hants), castle, 115 - - Ferrers (Walkelin de), 197 - - Fiennes, Sir Roger, 358, 359 - - Fitzwilliam, Sir William, 300 - - Flambard, Ranulf, bishop of Durham, 133 - - Flamborough head (Yorks, E.R.), 86 - - Flint, castle, 181, 182, 249 - - Foss river, 41 - - Fosseway, the, 21 - - Fougères (Ille-et-Vilaine), 250, A. Thompson; 250, 304 - - France, Capetian kings of, 34; - and _see_ Hugh Capet, Louis VI., Louis IX., Philip I., Philip II., - Philip III. - - —— Carolingian kings of, 36; - _see_ Neustria - - —— Valois kings of, _see_ Francis I., Henry II., Louis XII. - - Francis I., king of France, 290, 337, 338 - - Freeman, Professor E. A., 30 - - Frome river (Bristol), 88, 296; - (Dorset), 2, 19 - - Fulk the Black, count of Anjou, 116 - - - G - - Gainsborough (Lincoln), 100, 101, 358 - - —— old hall, 355, 356, 358 - - Galmanho (York), 33 - - Galtres forest (Yorks, N.R.), 55, 85 - - Gannock’s castle, _see_ Tempsford - - Gariannonum (Suffolk), 12; - and _see_ Burgh castle - - Garonne river, 27 - - Gaunt, John of, _see_ Lancaster, John, duke of, - - Gête-aux-Lièvres, 66 - - Gilbert, family of, 358 - - Gilling, East (Yorks), castle, 312 - - Gisors (Eure), castle, 166, 176 - - Gloucester, 14, 22, 25, 37 - - —— castle, 119 - - —— duke of, Humphrey, 308 - - —— earl of, _see_ Clare - - Godwin, earl, 37 - - Goël, Ascelin, 55 - - Goodmanham (Yorks, E.R.), 23 - - Goodrich (Hereford), castle, 174, C. Gethen, G. W. Saunders; 175, 185 - - Gower (Glamorgan), fortified churches in, 315 - - Gower, Henry, bishop of St David’s, 338, 341 - - Goxhill (Lincoln), “priory,” 190 - - Gravesend (Kent), 119 - - Guildford (Surrey), castle, 128, A. Thompson; 100, 128, 129, 131, - 132, 133, 134, 138, 145, 149, 153, 154, 156, 189 - - Gundulf, bishop of Rochester, 120 - - Gwendraeth Fach river, 279 - - - H - - Haddon, Nether (Derby), 342; - hall, 340, H. Baker; 343, G. J. Gillham; 193, 206, 315, 342, 345 - - Hadleigh (Suffolk), rectory, 355 - - Hallaton (Leicester), castle, 51, A. Thompson - - Halton (Northumberland), pele-tower, 312 - - Hambleton hills (Yorks, N.R.), 85 - - Hamelin Plantagenet, 167 - - Hardwick hall (Derby), 318 - - Harewood (Yorks, W.R.), castle, 85 - - Harlech (Merioneth), castle, 273, G. T. Clark; 274, A. Thompson; 160, - 189, 209, 210, 211, 225, 236, 249, 261, 275, 276, 277, 278, 279, - 280, 282, 284, 289, 309, 322, 325 - - Harold, king, 36, 38, 190, 192 - - Hastings (Sussex), 37; - castle, 38, A. Thompson (after Bayeux tapestry); 38, 39, 40, 43, - 45, 46, 102, 108, 109, 119, 128, 209, 360 - - Hatfield, Thomas, bishop of Durham, 202, 310 - - Haughmond abbey (Salop), 192 - - Haughton (Northumberland), castle, 317, 338 - - Haverfordwest (Pembroke), castle, 341 - - Hawarden (Flint), castle, 184 - - Hedingham (Essex), castle, 135, 147, F. R. Taylor; 44, 128, 131, 132, - 133, 134, 137, 145, 146, 155, 156, 159 - - Helmsley (Yorks, N.R.), castle, 85, 131 - - Henry I., king, 66, 71, 85, 117, 118, 133, 189, 193 - - —— II., king, 56, 57, 83, 89, 118, 120, 133, 159, 160, 165, 166, 167, - 176, 188, 202, 212 - - —— III., king, 55, 162, 185, 188, 202, 205, 265, 270 - - —— IV., king, 279, 330, 336 - - —— V., king, 327 - - —— VIII., king, 337, 361 - - —— II., king of France, 337 - - —— the Fowler, emperor, 26 - - Hérault department, fortified churches in, 315 - - Hereford, 37; - castle, 119; - earl of, _see_ William, son of Osbern - - Herefordshire, Norman castle in, 37 - - Hertford, 29, 30, 32; - castle, 30, 32, 119; - earl of, _see_ Clare - - Hestengaceaster (Sussex), 45 - - Heton, Thomas de, 318 - - Hexham (Northumberland), 317; - fortified manor-house, 312 - - Higham Ferrers (Northampton), castle and church, 109 - - Hingston down (Cornwall), battle of, 27 - - Holderness (Yorks, E.R.), 86 - - Holy Island (Northumberland), castle, 86 - - Horkstow (Lincoln), Roman villa, 12 - - Horncastle (Lincoln), 355 - - Houdan (Seine-et-Oise), donjon, 165 - - Housesteads (Northumberland), 15; - and _see_ Borcovicus - - Hubert, count of Maine, 66, 90 - - Hugh Capet, king of France; _see_ Eudes - - Hull (Yorks, E.R.), 296 - - Humber estuary, 28, 85 - - Huntingdon, 29, 30 - - —— castle, 39, 40, 362 - - Hurstmonceaux (Sussex), castle, 323, E. A. and G. R. Reeve; 359, - A. Thompson; 330, 358, 359, 360 - - - I - - Ida, king of Northumbria, 25 - - Ireland, passage from England to, 179 - - Isabel, queen of England, 274 - - Issoudun (Indre), donjon, 175 - - Ivry (Eure), castle, 55 - - - J - - Jerusalem, kingdom of, 263 - - —— siege of, 67, 70 - - Jervaulx abbey (Yorks, N.R.), 192 - - Jeufosse (Seine-et-Oise), 27 - - John, king, 162, 194 - - Jublains (Mayenne), 23 - - - K - - Kala’at-el-Hosn; _see_ Krak des Chevaliers - - Kenilworth (Warwick), castle, 132, 337, A. Thompson; 129, 131, 132, - 133, 134, 138, 146, 149, 154, 156, 209, 210, 233, 234, 247, 270, - 271, 279, 297, 317, 322, 336, 337 - - Kentwell hall (Suffolk), 359 - - Kerak in Moab, castle, 240, 241, 263 - - Kidwelly (Carmarthen), castle, 225, 281, A. Thompson; 267, G. T. - Clark; 211, 224, 269, 275, 279-82, 304, 309 - - Kimbolton (Hunts), castle, 365, 366 - - Kinnard’s Ferry (Lincoln), castle, 56, 57, 83 - - Kirkby Malzeard (Yorks, N.R.), castle, 56, 57, 83 - - Knaresborough (Yorks, W.R.) castle, 85, 86, 216, 279, 310, 312, 327 - - Knighton (Radnor), 6 - - Krak, le, des Chevaliers, 176, A. Thompson (after G. Rey); 176, 263 - - Kyme (Lincoln), tower, 355 - - - L - - Labienus, Titus, 61 - - Lacy, Henry de, earl of Lincoln, 327 - - —— Ilbert de, 56 - - —— Roger de, 102 - - Laigle (Orne), castle, 193 - - Lamotte, significance of place-name, 46 - - Lamphey (Pembroke), manor-house, 341, A. Thompson; 338, 341, 342 - - Lancaster castle, 104, 145, 246, 279, 327, 328, 336, 337 - - —— duchy of, castles of, 279, 327, 336 - - —— —— records of, 186, 336, 361 - - —— John, duke of, 336, 337 - - —— Thomas, earl of, 308 - - Langeais (Indre-et-Loire), castle, 116 - - Langley (Northumberland), castle, 156, 317 - - Langton, Walter, bishop of Coventry and Lichfield, 298 - - Languedoc, fortified churches in, 315 - - Laon (Aisne), 295 - - Launceston (Cornwall), castle, 89, 182, 188, 264, 362 - - Laval (Mayenne), castle, 80, A. Thompson; 81, 88 - - —— town walls, 88 - - Lea river, 29, 120 - - Leconfield (Yorks, E.R.), manor-house, 307 - - Leeds (Kent), castle, 326 - - —— (Yorks, W.R.), 56 - - Leicester, 22, 29, 30 - - —— castle, 88, 109, 197 - - —— earl of, _see_ Dudley - - Le Roy, Pierre, abbot of Mont-Saint-Michel, 236 - - Lewes (Sussex), castle, 50, 98, A. Thompson; 49, 96, 97, 98, 99, 115, - 220, 235, 236, 360 - - Lichfield (Stafford), 24; - bishop of, _see_ Coventry - - —— cathedral close, 298 - - Liddington (Rutland), manor-house, 190, 301 - - Lilbourne (Northampton), castle, 43, 51 - - Lille (Nord), 290 - - Lillebonne (Seine-Inférieure), edict of, 89, 90, 102 - - Lincoln, 12, 18, 19, 20, 23, 30, 301, 355 - - —— bishops of, 85; - and _see_ Alexander, Burghersh - - —— bishop’s palace, 198, 301, 338, 348, 351 - - —— castle, 40, W. G. Watkins; 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 47, 48, 49, 50, - 85, 86, 87, 100, 102, 114, 115, 188, 236, 279, 301 - - —— cathedral, 23, 94 - - —— cathedral close, 298, 301; - gatehouses, 301, 303 - - —— city walls, 20, 296 - - —— earl of, _see_ Lacy - - Lindsey, parts of (Lincoln), 28 - - Llanberis (Carnarvon), 87, 185 - - Llandovery (Carmarthen), castle, 87, 229 - - Llanfihangel-cwm-Du (Brecon), church tower, 316 - - Llanstephan (Carmarthen), castle, 249, 308, 309 - - Llawhaden (Pembroke), castle, 342 - - Loches (Indre-et-Loire), castle, 82 - - Lodève (Hérault), cathedral, 315 - - Loire river, 27 - - Lois Weedon (Northampton), church, 100 - - London, 21, 26, 27, 28, 37, 38, 64, 65, 295 - - —— Baynard’s castle, 38, 39 - - —— Blackfriars, 39 - - —— Fleet Street, house of bishops of Salisbury, 301 - - —— St Paul’s cathedral close, 298 - - —— Tower of, 121, 122, A. Thompson; 123, P. M. Johnston; - 38, 39, 40, 47, 88, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 127, 128, 134, - 137, 146, 150, 154, 188, 202, 210, 223, 225, 226, 234, 265, 266, - 268, 277 - - Longchamp, William, bishop of Ely, 265 - - Louis VI., king of France, 66, 67, 68, 93, 165 - - —— IX., king of France, 68, 74, 264 - - —— XII, king of France, 337, 338 - - Lucca (Tuscany), 290 - - Lucé (Orne), castle, 52 - - Ludlow (Salop), castle, 94, 95, 96, 108, A. Thompson; 106, R. Keene; - 195, C. Gethen; 87, 95, 96, 97, 98, 102, 103, 104, 107, 109, 110, - 113, 137, 149, 153, 156, 159, 161, 189, 194, 206, 207, 209, 210, - 212, 215, 219, 229, 252, 304, 330, 334, 335 - - —— town walls, 87 - - Ludlow, Lawrence of, 307 - - Lumley (Durham), castle, 318 - - Lundenburh, 26 - - - M - - Magdeburg (Prussian Saxony), 26 - - Maiden Castle (Dorset), 2, 3, A. Thompson; 2, 3, 5, 19, 26, 230, 282 - - Maine, count of, _see_ Hubert - - Malassis, 66 - - Malcolm IV., king of Scots, 120 - - Maldon (Essex), 29; - battle of, 63 - - Malet, William, 39 - - Mailing, West (Kent), St Leonard’s church, 120 - - Malton (Yorks, N. R.), castle, 85 - - Manorbier (Pembroke), castle, 208, A. Thompson; 217, C. Gethen; 189, - 192, 207, 208, 209, 211, 215, 229, 304, 316, 334, 335 - - Mans, le (Sarthe), 22, 23 - - Mansurah (Lower Egypt), 68, 74 - - Mantes (Seine-et-Oise), 27 - - Markenfield (Yorks, W.R.), manor-house, 307, 308, 338 - - Marlborough (Wilts.), 24 - - Marmion, Robert, 101 - - Marne river, 27 - - Marrah (Syria), siege of, 71 - - Marseilles (Bouches-du-Rhône), abbey church of Saint-Victor, 315 - - —— siege of, 61, 62, 70, 73, 78 - - Marshal, William, earl of Pembroke and Striguil, 179 - - Marton (Lincoln), church, 100, 101 - - Massilia, _see_ Marseilles - - Mâte-Putain, 66 - - Maule, siege of, 90 - - Maxstoke (Warwick), castle, 364, H. Baker; 365, 366, 367 - - Medway river, 365 - - Méhun-sur-Yèvre (Cher), castle, 338 - - Melbourne (Derby), castle, 336 - - Melsonby (Yorks, N.R.), church-tower, 315 - - Melun (Seine-et-Marne), 27 - - Merchem, castle of, 53, 54 - - Mercia, kingdom of, 28; - kings of, _see_ Offa, Penda - - Mercians, lady of the, _see_ Æthelflaed - - Merseburg (Prussian Saxony), 26 - - Mersey river, 28, 29 - - Merton (Surrey), 36 - - Mexborough (Yorks, W. R.), castle, 42, 51 - - Middleham (Yorks, N.R.), castle, 85, 87, 132, 133, 134, 142, 150, - 310, 312 - - Midhurst (Sussex), 360 - - Milford haven, 179 - - Mitford (Northumberland), castle, 86, 166, 167 - - Moel Siabod (Carnarvon), 185 - - Moissac (Tarn-et-Garonne), abbey, 315 - - Monkchester, _see_ Muncanceaster - - Monkton (Pembroke), priory church, 316 - - Monmouth, fortified bridge, 297, A. Thompson; 298 - - Montauban (Tarn-et-Garonne), Pont des Consuls, 297 - - Montgomery castle, 43 - - Montmajour (Bouches-du-Rhône), fortified abbey, 315 - - Montmartre (Seine), 64 - - Mont-Saint-Michel (Manche), abbey, 235, A. Thompson; 236; - abbots of, _see_ Le Roy, Tustin - - —— town walls, 291, A. Thompson; 250, 289 - - Morpeth (Northumberland), 166 - - Mortham (Yorks, N. R.), manor-house, 338 - - Mount Bures (Essex), 44, 46 - - Mowbray, Robert, 66, 90 - - —— vale of (Yorks, N.R.), 83 - - Mowbrays, revolt of the, 56, 83 - - Muncanceaster (Northumberland), 21 - - - N - - Naeodunum Diablintum (Mayenne), 23 - - Nantes (Loire-Inférieure), 27 - - Narbonne (Aude), 65 - - Naworth (Cumberland), castle, 189 - - Nettleham (Lincoln), manor-house, 301 - - Neufmarché, Bernard de, _see_ Newmarch - - Neustria, kingdom of, 34; - kings of, _see_ Charles - - Neville, John, Lord, 310, 317 - - Newark-on-Trent (Nottingham), castle, 99, A. Thompson; 157, F. Bond; - 85, 86, 97, 98, 99, 189, 202, 360 - - Newcastle-on-Tyne (Northumberland), 21, 22 - - —— castle, 139, 152, J. P. Gibson; 227, A. Thompson; 22, 47, 48, 51, - 86, 88, 120, 131, 132, 133, 134, 137, 138, 141, 146, 149, 153, - 154, 155, 156, 166, 169, 188, 202, 210, 227, 265 - - —— town walls, 293, W. Maitland; 88, 292 - - Newmarch, Bernard of, 56 - - Newport (Monmouth), castle, 362 - - Newton Nottage (Glamorgan), fortified church, 315 - - Nidd river, 85 - - Nile river, 68 - - Niort (Deux-Sèvres), castle, 175 - - Noirmoutier (Vendée), 27, 28 - - Norham (Northumberland), castle, 157, J. P. Gibson; 86, 129, 131, - 132, 133, 149, 160, 163 - - Normandy, duchy of, 28, 34; - dukes of, _see_ Robert, Rollo; - mount-and-bailey castles in, 45, 51, 52 - - Northallerton (Yorks, N.R.), castle, 56, 57, 83 - - Northampton, 44 - - —— town wall, 295 - - Northumberland, earls of, 211; - _see_ Percy - - Northumbria, kingdom of, 28; - king of, _see_ Ida - - Norwich (Norfolk), castle, 88, 128, 134, 137, 141, 155 - - —— cathedral close, 298 - - —— town wall, 88, 89, 301 - - Nottingham, 28, 29, 30, 32 - - —— castle, 30, 32, 39, 41, 85, 88, 120 - - Nunney (Somerset), castle, 325 - - Nuremberg (Middle Franconia), town walls, 82 - - - O - - Oakham (Rutland), castle, 107, 197, 198, 362 - - Ockley (Surrey), battle of, 28 - - Odiham (Hants), castle, 185 - - Odo, bishop of Bayeux, 66 - - Offa, king of Mercia, 24, 32 - - Offa’s dyke, 24 - - Oise river, 27 - - Oissel (Seine-Inférieure), 27 - - Old Sarum (Wilts), camp and castle, 4, A. H. Allcroft; 3, 5, 6, 19, - 24, 25, 153, 154, 210, 301 - - Orford (Suffolk), castle, 119, 165, 166, 168, 170 - - Orléans, Charles, duke of, 337 - - —— Louis, duke of, 338 - - Orontes river, 164 - - Osbern, _see_ William - - Oswestry (Salop), 24; - castle, 119 - - Othona (Essex), 22 - - Otley (Yorks, W.R.), 85 - - Ouse river, Great, 29, 30, 33, 63; - (Yorkshire), 41, 85 - - Oxburgh (Norfolk), hall, 355 - - Oxford castle, 88, 104, 108, 119, 188 - - —— Christ Church, 190 - - —— New college, 190 - - - P - - Pamiers (Ariège), cathedral, 315 - - Paris (Seine), 22, 27; - count of, _see_ Eudes; - Louvre, donjon of, 178; - siege of, by Danes, 27, 63, 64, 65, 67, 70, 81 - - Peak castle (Derby), 35, 156, 315 - - Pembroke, castle, 180, 224, A. Thompson; 181, _Archaeol. Journal_; - 213, C. Gethen; 179, 180, 182, 202, 212, 215, 223, 224, 225, 236, - 239, 240, 248, 251, 316 - - —— St Mary’s church, 316 - - Pembroke, earl of, _see_ Marshal, William - - Pembrokeshire, churches of, 316 - - Penda, king of Mercia, 25 - - Penmaenmawr (Carnarvon), 8 - - Penrith (Cumberland), castle, 316 - - Penshurst (Kent), manor-house, 206 - - Pentecost’s castle (Hereford), 37 - - Pentrich (Derby), 345 - - Penwortham (Lancaster), castle, 327 - - Percy, Sir Henry, 307, 309 - - —— Henry, earl of Northumberland, 328, 330 - - —— house of, 348 - - Périers (Calvados), church, 100 - - Perrott, Sir John, 333 - - Peterborough (Northants), 25 - - —— abbey precinct, 298 - - Petworth (Sussex), manor-house, 307 - - Pevensey (Sussex), Roman station and castle, 16, 246, A. Thompson; - 12, 16, 22, 247, 360 - - Philip I., king of France, 55 - - —— II. (Augustus), king of France, 62, 70, 71, 73, 76, 175, 176, 178, - 215, 216, 322 - - —— III., king of France, 264 - - Pickering (Yorks, N.R.), castle, 43, 85, 86, 115, 279 - - Pierrefonds (Oise), castle, 338 - - Pistes, edict of, 32, 35, 55 - - Pitt-Rivers, General A. H. L. F., 25 - - Poitiers (Vienne), 27 - - Poitou, Roger of, 327 - - Pons Aelii (Northumberland), 21 - - Pontaudemer (Eure), 71 - - Pontefract (Yorks, W.R.), castle, 49, 56, 85, 86, 185, 186, 187, 236, - 279, 336, 360 - - Porchester (Hants), Roman station and castle, 97, 131, A. Thompson; - 12, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 122, 131, 132, 133, 134, 137, 141, 142, - 145, 146, 150, 153, 154, 155, 156, 189, 235, 247, 335, 352 - - Portishead (Somerset), 24 - - Portsmouth harbour, 99, 335 - - Portus Adurni, 12 - - —— Magnus (Hants), 12 - - Potterne (Wilts), manor-house, 301 - - Poundbury (Dorset), 2, 19, 25 - - Prague (Bohemia), bridge, 297, 298 - - Provins (Seine-et-Marne), castle, 172, 182 - - Prudentius, bishop of Troves, 27 - - Prudhoe (Northumberland), castle, 86, 315 - - Pudsey, Hugh, bishop of Durham, 56, 107, 133, 198, 200, 202 - - Puiset, le (Eure-et-Loir), siege of, 67, 68 - - Pyrénées-Orientales department, fortified churches in, 315 - - - R - - Raby (Durham), castle, 311, _Archaeol. Journal_; 310, 317, 318, 322 - - Raglan (Monmouth), castle, 331, G. W. Saunders; 269, 330 - - Ramsbury (Wilts), manor-house, 301 - - Raymond, count of Toulouse, 70, 71 - - Reading (Berks), 28 - - Rede, William, bishop of Chichester, 360 - - Reims (Marne), 22 - - Rennes (Ille-et-Vilaine), castle, 45, A. Thompson (after Bayeux - tapestry) - - Restormel (Cornwall), castle, 52, 230, 335 - - Rhiangol river, 183 - - Rhône river, 304 - - Rhuddlan (Flint), castle, 229, 249, 275, 276, 280 - - Rhymney river, 274 - - Rhys ap Thomas, 330 - - Ribble river, 327 - - Richard I., king, 172, 176, 265 - - —— II., king, 307 - - Richborough (Kent), 12, 22 - - Richmond (Yorks, N.R.), castle, 93, A. Thompson; 47, 51, 56, 85, 87, - 90, 93, 94, 97, 98, 101, 104, 107, 131, 133, 134, 137, 146, 149, - 153, 159, 163, 178, 189, 202, 212, 215, 252, 304, 308, 342, 345; - earl of, _see_ Alan - - Ripon (Yorks, W.R.), 24 - - Rising (Norfolk), castle, 143, G. H. Widdows; 131, 132, 133, 134, - 141, 142, 143, 146, 150, 154, 156, 188, 194 - - Robert, duke of Normandy, 55, 67, 117, 193 - - —— of Jumièges, archbishop of Canterbury, 37 - - —— son of Giroie, 52, 90 - - —— son of Roger, 194 - - Robert’s castle, 37 - - Roche-Guyon, la (Seine-et-Oise), castle, 172, 175 - - Roche-sur-Igé, la (Orne), castle, 52 - - Rochester (Kent), Boley hill, 128; - bishop of, _see_ Gundulf; - castle, frontispiece, J. Bailey; 145, A. Thompson; 66, 120, 125, - 127, 128, 131, 132, 133, 134, 137, 138, 141, 142, 145, 149, 150, - 154, 155, 156, 159, 162, 163, 177 - - —— cathedral, 120 - - Rockingham (Northants), castle, 205, 226, A. Thompson; 202, 205, 226, - 227, 266, 360 - - Roger, bishop of Salisbury, 98 - - —— of Newburgh, earl of Warwick, 109 - - Rollo, duke of Normandy, 28 - - Rome, 292 - - Rothbury (Northumberland), fortified rectory, 312 - - Rother river, 325 - - Rouen (Seine-Inférieure), 22, 27, 66, 176; - abbey of Saint-Ouen, 22; - castle, 23, 82, 117, 176, 178; - priory of Ste-Trinité-du-Mont, 85 - - Roussillon, fortified churches in, 315 - - Royat (Puy-de-Dôme), fortified church, 315 - - Runcorn (Chester), 29 - - Ruthin (Denbigh), castle, 119 - - Rutupiae (Kent), 12; - _see_ Richborough - - Rye (Sussex), 325 - - Ryedale (Yorks, N.R.), 85 - - - S - - Saint-Cénéri-le-Gérei (Orne), castle, 52, 90 - - Saint-Clair-sur-Epte (Eure), treaty of, 28 - - Saint-Claude (Jura), cathedral, 315 - - St David’s (Pembroke), bishop’s palace, 338 341, 342 - - —— bishops of, _see_ Gower, Vaughan - - Saint-Denis (Seine), abbey, 32, 315 - - Saint-Malo (Ille-et-Vilaine), town walls, 290, A. Thompson; 250, 289 - - Saint-Paul-du-Var (Alpes-Maritimes), 290 - - Saint-Pol, count of, 216 - - Saint-Pons (Hérault), cathedral, 315 - - Sainte-Suzanne (Mayenne), castle, 66, 90 - - Saintes-Maries-sur-la-Mer, les (Bouches-du-Rhône), fortified church, - 315 - - Salisbury (Wilts), 25; - and _see_ Old Sarum - - —— bishop’s palace, 301 - - —— bishops of, _see_ Erghum, Roger, Wyvill - - —— cathedral close, 301 - - —— city walls, 301 - - Sandal (Yorks, W.R.), castle, 86, _Yorks. Archæol. Journal_; 85, 86, - 230 - - Sandwich (Kent), 22 - - Sarthe river, 23 - - Savernake park (Wilts), 24 - - Saracens in southern France, 65 - - Scarborough (Yorks, N. R.), 296; - castle, 129, A. Thompson; 85, 119, 129, 131, 132, 133, 134, 137, - 138, 142, 145, 149, 160, 175, 202, 216, 230, 233, 236, 360 - - Scots, kings of, _see_ Malcolm IV., William the Lion - - Scratchbury (Wilts), 25 - - Searobyrig (Wilts), 25; - _see_ Old Sarum - - Segedunum (Northumberland), 10 - - Seine river, 27, 63, 64, 172, 175 - - Sens (Yonne), 22 - - Sept-Forges (Orne), castle, 52 - - Severn river, 29, 119 - - Sheffield (Yorks, W.R.), 318 - - Sherborne (Dorset), 24 - - —— castle, 98, 301 - - Sheriff Hutton (Yorks, N.R.), castle, 317, 362, 367 - - Shirburn (Oxford), castle, 325 - - Shrawardine (Salop), castle, 119 - - Shrewsbury, 29 - - —— castle, 39, 40, 88, 109, 119 - - —— church of St Julian, 109 - - —— earl of, _see_ Talbot - - Shropshire, free chapels in, 109 - - Silchester (Hants), 14, 22 - - Skelton (Yorks, N.R.), castle, 85 - - Skenfrith (Monmouth), castle, 184 - - Skipsea (Yorks, E.R.), castle, 85, 86 - - Skirlaw, Walter, bishop of Durham, 318 - - Sleaford (Lincoln), 355 - - Soar river, 28 - - Soissons (Aisne), 295 - - Solway firth, 10, 304 - - Sonning (Berks), manor-house, 301 - - Southampton (Hants), castle, 88, 119 - - —— town walls, 293, C. Gethen; 88, 223, 241, 247, 292, 296 - - Spennithorne (Yorks, N.R.), church-tower, 316 - - Spofforth (Yorks, W.R.), manor-house, 307, 358 - - Spurn head (Yorks, E.R.), 86 - - Stafford, 29 - - —— castle, 365, 367 - - Stafford, Edward, duke of Buckingham, 362, 365, 366 - - —— Anne, duchess, 365, 366 - - Stainmoor, 312 - - Stamford (Lincoln and Northampton), 29, 30, 32; - castle, 30, 32 - - Stephen, king, 56, 57 - - Stokesay (Salop), castle, 207, A. Thompson; 306, R. Keene, C. Gethen; - 193, 206, 281, 307, 342, 352 - - Stour river (Kent), 28 - - Stow Park (Lincoln), manor-house, 301 - - Strickland, William, 316 - - Sudbury, Simon, archbishop of Canterbury, 304 - - Surrey, earl of, _see_ Warenne - - Swale river, 90 - - Swaledale, 85 - - Swansea (Glamorgan), castle, 338, 341 - - Swegen, king of Denmark, 64 - - Sweyn Godwinsson, 37 - - Syria, castles and churches in, 176 - - - T - - Tadcaster (Yorks, W.R.), 295; - castle, 85 - - Talbot, John, earl of Shrewsbury, 347 - - Talvas, Guillaume, 51 - - Tamar river, 27 - - Tame river, 101 - - Tamworth (Stafford), 28, 29, 30 - - —— castle, 48, A. Thompson; 32, 47, 101, 242 - - Tattershall (Lincoln), castle, 356, A. Thompson; 297, _Archaeol. - Journal_; 318, 352, 355, 356, 357 - - Tavistock (Devon), 27 - - Tees river, 85, 86, 312 - - Tempsford (Beds), _burh_ and earthwork, 32, A. Thompson; 29, 30, 33 - - Tenby (Pembroke), town walls, 240, A. Thompson; 239, 240, 297 - - Tewkesbury (Gloucestershire), gatehouse of abbey, 301 - - Thames river, 28, 63, 64, 119 - - Thanet, isle of (Kent), 28 - - Thelwall (Chester), 26, 29 - - Theobald, count of Chartres, 67, 68 - - Thérouanne, bishop of, _see_ Warneton - - Thetford (Norfolk), 24; - castle, 44 - - Thirsk (Yorks, N.R.), castle, 56, 57, 83 - - Thornbury (Gloucester), castle, 366, 367 - - Thornton (Lincoln), gatehouse of abbey, 302, A. Thompson; 303, - _Archaeol. Journal_; 331, F. Bond; 303, 304, 358 - - Thurkill, 64 - - Tickhill (Yorks, W.R.), castle, 67, 85, 96, 98, 99, 220, 235 - - Tinchebray (Orne), battle of, 117 - - Toledo (New Castile), bridge of Alcantarà, 297 - - Tolleshunt Major (Essex), manor-house, 308 - - Tonbridge (Kent), castle, 115, 365, 367 - - Tor Bay, 358 - - Torksey (Lincoln), castle, 358 - - Torquay (Devon), 358 - - Totnes (Devon), castle, 115 - - Toulouse (Haute-Garonne), 27 - - —— count of, _see_ Raymond - - Tournai (Hainault), fortified bridge, 297 - - Tournus (Saône-et-Loire), abbey church, 315 - - Tours (Indre-et-Loire), 22 - - Towcester (Northampton), 26, 29, 65 - - Tower on the Moor (Lincoln), 355 - - Towy river, 308 - - Trebonius, Gaius, 61, 62 - - Trecastle (Brecknock), castle, 44, A. Thompson; 44, 56, 87 - - Trent river, 28, 29, 50, 83, 85, 99, 120, 355, 358, 360 - - Tre’r Ceiri (Carnarvon), 8 - - Tretower (Brecknock), castle, 183, 184 - - Tripoli (Syria), county of, 263 - - Troyes (Aube), 22; - bishop of, _see_ Prudentius - - Tungri, first cohort of, 18 - - Tunstall, Cuthbert, bishop of Durham, 200 - - Tustin, abbot of Mont-Saint-Michel, 236 - - Tutbury (Stafford), castle, 237, R. Keene; 41, 42, 44, 327, 335, - 336, 359 - - Tweed river, 86 - - Tyne river, 10, 86, 88, 316 - - Tynemouth priory (Northumberland), 298 - - - U - - Umfraville, Gilbert de, earl of Angus, 315 - - Upton (Lincoln), church, 100 - - Ure river, 83, 85 - - Usk river, 183 - - - V - - Vaughan, Edward, bishop of St David’s, 342 - - Vercingetorix, 59, 60, 61 - - Vernon (Eure), 27 - - Verona (Venetia), 290 - - Vespasian, emperor, 14 - - Villandraut (Gironde), castle, 325 - - Villeneuve-d’Avignon (Gard), Château-Saint-André, 307, A. Thompson; - 304 - - Vitré (Ille-et-Vilaine), 49 - - Viviers (Ardèche), cathedral, 315 - - - W - - Wakefield (Yorks, W.R.), 85 - - Wallsend (Northumberland), 10 - - Wansbeck river, 86, 166 - - Wansdyke, the, 24, 25 - - Warburton, 29 - - Warenne, Isabel de, 167 - - —— William de, earl of Surrey, 167 - - Wark (Northumberland), castle, 86, 119 - - Warkworth (Northumberland), castle, 49, A. Thompson; 221, J. P. - Gibson; 44, 48, 86, 107, 190, 194, 197, 206, 209, 210, 211, 219, - 220, 223, 247, 248, 251, 290, 328, 329, 330, 356, 357 - - —— fortified bridge, 298 - - Warneton, John of, bishop of Thérouanne, 53 - - Warrington (Lancaster), 26 - - Warwick, _burh_, 29, 32 - - —— castle, 231, 319, H. Baker; 234, 321, A. Thompson; 32, 39, 40, - 109, 189, 190, 194, 206, 223, 235, 246, 318, 321, 322, 327, 328, - 330, 359 - - —— church of St Mary, 109 - - —— earls of, _see_ Beauchamp, Roger - - —— town walls, 296 - - Wat’s dyke, 24 - - Wear river, 86, 202 - - Wedmore (Somerset), peace of, 28 - - Welland river, 28, 29 - - Wells (Somerset), 24 - - —— bishop’s palace, 300, Mrs Jessie Lloyd; 301, 338 - - —— cathedral close, 298, 301 - - Welshmen, 37 - - Wenham, Little (Suffolk), hall, 355 - - Wensleydale (Yorks, N.R.), 85 - - Wessex, kingdom of, 28, 34 - - —— kings of, _see_ Æthelwulf, Alfred, Ceawlin, Cynewulf, Edmund, - Edward the Confessor, Edward the Elder, Egbert, Ethelred, Harold - - Westminster palace, 124 - - Weston-super-Mare (Somerset), 8 - - Whickham (Durham), church-tower, 316 - - Whalley (Lancashire), gatehouse of abbey, 303 - - Wharfe river, 85 - - William I., king, 22, 34, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 52, 56, 66, 67, 85, - 88, 90, 118, 120, 265 - - —— II., king, 25, 62, 66, 90, 120, 124, 193 - - William the Lion, king of Scots, 83 - - William, son of Osbern, earl of Hereford, 104 - - Winchelsea (Sussex), 296, 325 - - Winchester (Hants), castle, 39, 40, 197, 202 - - Windsor (Berks), castle, 109, 119, 282; - - St George’s chapel, 109 - - Wingfield (Derby), manor, 346, W. H. Edmunds’ _Guide_; 348, A. - Thompson; 349, 353, G. J. Gillham; 229, 269, 336, 345, 347, - 348, 351, 352, 355, 356, 357, 358, 359 - - Witham (Essex), 29 - - Witham river, 12, 20 - - Wiverton (Notts), manor-house, 360 - - Wollaton hall (Notts), 318 - - Wootton lodge (Derby), 318 - - Worcester, 119 - - Worlebury (Somerset), 9, A. H. Allcroft; 8, 25 - - Worthing (Sussex), 2 - - Wressell (Yorks, E.R.), castle, 358 - - Wrexham (Denbigh), 24 - - Writtle (Essex), manor-house, 366 - - Würzburg (Lower Franconia), 26 - - Wye river, 24, 268 - - Wyvill, Robert, bishop of Salisbury, 301 - - - Y - - Yanwath (Westmorland), manor-house, 338 - - York, 17, A. Thompson; 14, 16, 18, 23, 28, 33, 41; - archbishops of, 85; - bars, 229, A. Thompson; 237, W. Maitland; 7, 229, 230, 233, 236, - 241, 245, 295, 296, 297; - castles, 185, A. Thompson; 32, 39, 40, 41, 42, 52, 55, 85, 86, 88, - 89, 115, 120, 185, 186 - - —— cathedral, 100; - cathedral close, 298 - - —— St Mary’s abbey, 33, 107, 298 - - —— St Mary Bishophill Junior, 100 - - Yorkshire, sheriff of, 55 - - Ythanceaster (Essex), 22 - - - Z - - Zara (Dalmatia), siege of, 70 - - - - -INDEX RERUM - - - A - - Adulterine castles, 56, 57, 89 - - _Adulterinus_, 56 - - _Agger_, 11, 60 - - _Alatorium_, 89 - - Allure, 89 - - Angle, dead, in fortification, 162 - - Angles, reduction of, in fortification, 165 - - Arbalast, 73; - _see_ Cross-bow - - _Arx_, 22, 32, 53, 65; - _arcem condere_, etc., 38 - - Attack, science and methods of, 66-79 - - _Aula_, hall or manor-house, 197, 198 - - _Aula principalis_, 56; - _see_ Hall - - - B - - Bailey, 40, 43, 44, 45, 46, 50, 51, 55, 56; - _see_ Castles, plan of - - _Ballista_, 16, 63, 67, 73, 74 - - _Ballium_, 40 - - Barbican, 215, 229, 230, 233-6, 239-41 - - Barmkin, 189, 229, 312, 347 - - Bartizan, 187, 235, 236 - - Base-court, 40, 96 - - _Basse-cour_, 40 - - _Bastille_, 236 - - Bastion, 289, 290 - - Battering ram, _see_ Ram - - Bayeux tapestry, 36, 38, 45, 46, A. Thompson; 36, 38, 44, 45, 46, 52, - 66, 190, 192 - - Belfry, 72, Viollet-le-Duc; 67, 70, 71, 78 - - _Berfredum_, 67 - - Berm, 5, 11, 60 - - Bishop’s palaces, fortified, 301, 338, 341, 342 - - Bore, 70, Viollet-le-Duc; 61, 64, 68 - - Borough, 30 - - _Bourg_, 26 - - Bower, 192, 193 - - Brattice, 79, 187 - - _Bretèche_, 79, 187 - - Brick-work in eastern counties, 355, 358 - - —— tower of, at siege of Marseilles, 62 - - Bridges, fortified, 297, 298; - London bridge, 64; - bridges at Paris, 63 - - _Burg_, 25, 26 - - _Burgus_ or _burgum_, 30, 41 - - _Burh_, 25; - _burhs_ in Saxon England, map of, 31, A. Thompson; 25-27, 28-33, - 35, 38, 41, 42 - - Byzantine military science, 59, 61, 67, 73 - - - C - - _Cabulus_, 76 - - Carfax, 22 - - _Castel_, 35, 37, 42 - - _Castellum_, 35, 55, 60, 66; - _castellum construere_, etc., 38; - _castellis, vastata in_, 42 - - Castles, dwelling-houses in, 188-211 - - —— in England, Norman, earthworks, 26, 30, 32, 33, 35-57; - mount-and-bailey plan, 42-47, 48-52, 55-56, 110, 113, 160, 161; - relative date of, 56, 57; - importance in warfare, 65, 66, 83-7; - stone fortifications, 47, 89-107 - - —— in relation to plan of walled towns, 87-89 - - —— plan of, with successive baileys, 162, 163, 164; - concentric, 7, 164, 264, 264-82, 304; - mount-and-bailey, _see_ Castles in England, Norman - - —— strategic position in North of England, map illustrating, 84, A. - Thompson; 83-87 - - —— Syrian, _see_ Crusaders - - _Castrum_, 35, 53 - - Cat, 68 - - Catapult, 73, Viollet-le-Duc; 16, 17, 51, 67, 70, 71, 73-6; - _see_ _Ballista_, _Mangana_, etc. - - Centering of vault at Lancaster castle, 327 - - _Cervi_, 60 - - Chamber, great, 54, 205, 206, 207 - - Chapels in castles, 107-9, 209-11; - _see_ also Keep - - _Châtelet_, 236 - - _Chats-châteaux_, 68 - - _Chemise_, 90, 177 - - Churches, fortified, 315, 316 - - _Cippi_, 60, 61 - - Closes of cathedrals, fortified, 298, 301 - - “Contour” forts, 1, 2 - - _Cortina_, 89 - - Countervallation, wall of, 62 - - _Coursière_, 80, 82, 178 - - _Courtine_, 89 - - Crenellate, licences to, 298, 301, 303, 304, 307, 308, 309 - - Crenellations, 79 - - Cross-bow, 67, 73, 74, 78 - - Crusade, first, 66, 74; - fourth, 70 - - Crusaders, castles of, in Syria, 175, 176, 240, 241, 262, 263 - - Crusades, influence of, on military science, 59, 66, 67, 160, 163, - 164, 175, 176, 262, 263 - - - D - - Danegeld, 33 - - Danes, invasions of England and France by, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 33, - 34, 39, 63, 64, 65 - - Defence, science and progress of, 79-82, 161-5 - - Demi-lune, 215 - - Domesday Book, evidence with regard to early castles, 30, 37, 41, - 42, 83 - - _Domgio_, 46 - - Donjon or dungeon, 43, 46, 47, 361, 365 - - Drainage of roofs, 156, 179 - - Drawbridge, 55 - - Dungeon, _see_ Donjon - - _Dunio_, 46 - - - E - - Earthworks in Britain, early, 1-10, 19; - defence of entrances, 3, 5-7; - dry-built walls, 8; - in Saxon England, 24, 25 - - Embrasure, 169 - - - F - - Fire-arms, introduction of, 58, 59, 287-90 - - _Firmamentum_, 38 - - _Firmitas_, 55 - - Flanking, 102, 161, 162, 164, 216-20 - - Fore-building, _see_ Keep - - _Forum_, 14, 18, 19, 22, 23 - - France, Gallo-Roman cities in, 22, 23 - - —— early castles in, 36 - - —— mount-and-bailey castles in, 46, 52, 53, 55 - - —— progress of military art in, 65 - - —— walled towns in, 64, 65, 250, 290, 292 - - Free chapels, 109 - - - G - - Galleries in walls of castles, 284, 285 - - Garde-robes, 247; - _see_ also Keep, Mural chambers - - Gatehouses of castle, early, 95-9; - later, 220-9 - - Gateways of Roman stations, 14, 15, 19 - - _Geweorc_, 30, 33, 63 - - Great chamber, _see_ Chamber - - - H - - _Haia_, 55 - - Hall of castle, 54, 55, 56, 104, 107, 190-3, 195, 197, 198, 200, - 202, 205, 206 - - “Herring-bone” masonry, 93, 99-102 - - Herse, 70 - - Hides, raw, used to protect palisades, 62, 64, 68 - - Hoarding, 79, Viollet-le-Duc; 79, 80, 81, 82, 187 - - Hooks, grappling, 61, 71 - - Horn-work, 215 - - _Hourd_; _see_ Hoarding - - Hurdles, use of, in attack, 61 - - - I - - Italy, fortified towns in, 290, 292 - - - K - - Keep, gradual disappearance of, 164, 212, 215 - - —— cylindrical tower, 165-85; - internal arrangements, 168-72, 178, 179, 182, 183, 184 - - —— octagonal tower, 185 - - —— quatrefoil tower, 172, 185-7 - - —— rectangular tower, map of towers, 130, A. Thompson; - in France and Normandy, 116-8; - in England, 118-59; - evidence for date, 118-20; - early Norman towers, 120-5; - comparative measurements of towers, 125, 127-8, 131-3; - position in plan, 128-31; - external treatment, 133, 134, 137; - entrance and forebuilding, 137-8, 141-2; - internal arrangement and cross-wall, 142, 145-6; - basement, 146, 149-50; - stairs, 146, 149; - chapels, 150, 153-4; - kitchens, 154; - wells, 154; - mural chambers and galleries, 155-6; - roof and rampart, 157, 159; - drawbacks of shape, 161-2 - - —— , residential use of, 53-5, 179, 188 - - —— shell, 113-6; - combination with rectangular tower, 129 - - —— wooden tower on mount, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 51, 52-5, 56, 113, 160 - - Kitchen in castles, 54, 193, 194, 209; - _see also_ Keep - - - L - - _Lilium_, 60, 61 - - Lists, 264 - - Limestone, Yorkshire, 355 - - _Logium_, 54 - - - M - - Machicolations, 82, 175, 223, 246 - - _Malvoisin_, 66 - - _Mangana_, mangon, mangonel, 64, 73 - - Mantlets, 61, 64, 68, 70, 79; - of rope, 62 - - _Merlon_, 169, 242, 245, 246 - - Mile-castles on Roman wall, 11, 17, 60 - - Mines, use of, in siege, 58, 62, 63, 68, 70, 71 - - Monasteries, fortified, 298, 301, 303, 304, 315 - - _Motte_, 41, 46, 54 - - Mount, 41, 43, 44-47, 48-53, 54 - - Mouse, 62, 68 - - _Municipium_, 35, 53 - - _Munitio_, 35, 53; - _munitionem firmare_, etc., 38 - - _Musculus_, 62 - - - N - - Norman conquest, castle-building after, 38, 39 - - Normans at court of Edward the Confessor, 37 - - - O - - _Oppidum_, 21 - - - P - - _Palicium_, 55 - - Palisade and stockade, use of, 5, 25, 26, 29, 32, 36, 40, 45, 46, - 52, 53, 55, 58, 59, 61, 65, 66, 67, 68, 73, 89 - - Pantry, 54 - - Parapets, 79, 80, 82, 102, 242, 245, 246 - - Parvise, 192 - - Pele, 229, 312 - - Pele-towers, 185, 219, 220, 312, 315, 316 - - Pele-yard, 315 - - Pent-houses, 62, 64, 79 - - _Petraria_, 73 - - _Pierrière_, 73 - - _Pomerium_, 292, 295 - - _Porta decumana_, 19; - _praetoria_, 19; - _principalis_, 19 - - Portcullis, 70, 96, 227, 229 - - _Porte-coulis_, 70 - - Postern, 247, 251 - - _Praetorium_, 14, 18 - - Promontories, early camps on, 1, 2 - - _Propugnaculum_, 89 - - - Q - - _Quincunx_, 60 - - - R - - Ram, 69, Viollet-le-Duc; 63, 64, 68, 78, 79; - devices against, 79 - - Rampart-walk, 241, Viollet-le-Duc; 79, 80, 89, 102; - _see_ also Keep - - Ravelin, 215 - - Revetment, walls of, 186 - - Roman military science, 59-62, 73 - - —— occupation of Britain, 10-20 - - —— roads in Britain, 11, 12, 25 - - —— stations, 10, 12-20 - - —— wall in Northumberland and Cumberland, 11, A. Thompson - (after Bruce); - 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, 25 - - - S - - Saxon invasions of Britain, 21, 22 - - —— shore, fortresses of, 12, 22 - - —— towns and villages, 23, 24 - - Scaling, 58; - scaling-ladders, 61, 70, 71 - - _Scorpio_, 73 - - Shutter in embrasure, 245, Viollet-le-Duc; 242 - - Siegecraft, engines used in, 68-77; - _see_ Catapult - - - Sieges— - of Alesia, 59-61 - of Antioch, 164, 241 - of Château-Gaillard, 70, 71, 73, 76, 77, 163, 215, 216 - of Constantinople, 164 - of London by Danes, 64, 65 - of Marseilles, 61, 62 - of Paris, 63, 64 - of Le Puiset, 67, 68 - - Slingers, 58 - - Solar, _solarium_, 192, 193 - - Sow, 68 - - Spur at base of towers, 175, 185 - - Stakes used as missiles, 61 - - _Stimuli_, 61 - - Stockade, _see_ Palisade - - - T - - _Terebra_, 68 - - _Testudo_, 62, 68 - - _Tête-du-pont_, 63, 234, 326 - - Teutonic origin of mount-and-bailey castle, conjectural, 51 - - _Timbrian_, 29 - - Tortoise, 68; - _see_ _Testudo_ - - Tower at siege of Marseilles, 62 - - Tower, great, _see_ Keep - - Towers on ramparts, 60, 61, 161, 162, 164; - in early Norman castles, 102-4; - _see_ Flanking - - —— on walls of Roman stations, 15-17 - - —— strong, survivals of keep, 269, 281, 282 - - Towns; Saxon settlements, 23, 24 - - —— walled, 228, 288, Viollet-le-Duc; - early, 64, 65; - in relation to castles, 87-89 - - _Trebuchet_, 75, 76, Viollet-le-Duc; 76 - - Turrets on Roman wall, 11 - - - U - - _Urbs_, 21 - - - V - - _Vallum_, 2, 5, 11, 53, 60, 61 - - _Via praetoria_, 18; - _principalis_, 18, 19, 23 - - _Villa_, 53 - - Villas in Roman Britain, 12, 21 - - _Vinea_, 62 - - - W - - Ward, 40 - - Wells in castles, 119, 124, 125, 141, 145, 146, 154, 155, 179 - - - _Printed at_ THE DARIEN PRESS, _Edinburgh_ - - - - -GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND - - -An Analysis of the Origin and Development of English Church -Architecture from the Norman Conquest to the Dissolution of the -Monasteries - -BY FRANCIS BOND, M.A., F.G.S. - -With 1254 Illustrations, comprising 785 Photographs, Sketches, and -Measured Drawings, and 469 Plans, Sections, Diagrams, and Moldings. -Imperial 8vo, 800 pp., handsomely bound in art canvas, gilt. Price 31s. -6d. net - -Published by B. T. BATSFORD, 94 High Holborn, London - - -SOME PRESS NOTICES - -_The Times._—“Mr Bond has given us a truly monumental work on English -Gothic Architecture in his profusely illustrated and very fully indexed -volume of some 800 pages.... As a mine of erudition, of detailed -analysis and information, and of criticism on English Mediæval Church -Architecture the book is worthy of all praise. For students it must -be of lasting value; for authentic reference it will be long before -it is likely to be in any way seriously superseded; while the lavish -illustrations, many of them unpublished photographs, must be of -permanent interest to all.” - -_The Athenæum._—“This is, in every sense of the word, a great book. It -at once steps to the front as authoritative.” - -_The Building News._—“A remarkable book.... Perfectly orderly, and most -complete and thorough, this great book leaves nothing to be desired.” - -_The Reliquary._—“The more expert a man is as a Church Architect or as -an intelligent ecclesiologist, the more grateful will he be to Mr Bond -for the production of a noble volume like that now under notice.” - -_The Spectator._—“The whole book is extraordinarily full, -extraordinarily minute, and enriched by a wealth of illustrations, and -must stand for many years to come as _the_ book of reference on the -subject of Ecclesiastical Gothic in England for all architects and -archaeologists.” - -_The Westminster Gazette._—“Mr Bond gives us an immense quantity of -material—the result of the most painstaking and laborious research; -he has illustrated every chapter, not only with photographs, but with -the most admirable diagrams of mouldings and details; he has scarcely -missed a church of any importance in his search for examples. In all -these respects he places the architect and the architectural student -under an immense obligation.” - -_The Pall Mall Gazette._—“Archæologist, scholar, and geologist, he -is something more than a mere enthusiast, for to the ardour of his -argument he brings deep technical mastery, much wide research, and -scientific knowledge.... The book is one of the most absorbing that we -have read for a long time in any field.” - -_Bulletin Monumental._—“Le grand travail sur l’architecture gothique -anglaise.” - - - - -SCREENS AND GALLERIES IN ENGLISH CHURCHES - - -BY FRANCIS BOND, M.A., F.G.S. - -A handsome volume, containing 204 pp., with 152 Illustrations, -reproduced from Photographs and Measured Drawings. Octavo, strongly -bound in cloth. Price 6s. net - -LONDON: HENRY FROWDE, Oxford University Press - - -SOME PRESS NOTICES - -_Builder._—“When we look at the detailed photographs we realise the -richness of the field which Mr Bond has traversed, and congratulate -him on the choice of his subject. His method is one of singular -thoroughness from the ecclesiological standpoint.” - -_Journal of the Architectural Association._—“As a record of the screens -remaining in our churches it cannot be valued too highly. No book till -now has brought such a number together, or traced their development in -so full and interesting a manner.... A most delightful book.” - -_Builders’ Journal._—“The author may be congratulated on the production -of a book which, in text as well as in illustrations, is of striking -and inexhaustible interest; it is the kind of book to which one returns -again and again, in the assurance of renewed and increased pleasure at -each reperusal.” - -_Tablet._—“The numerous excellent illustrations are of the greatest -interest, and form a veritable surprise as to the beauty and variety of -the treatment which our forefathers lavished upon the rood screen.” - -_British Weekly._—“The book abounds with admirable illustrations of -these beautiful works of art, so perfect even in the minute details -that any one interested in the art of woodcarving could reproduce the -designs with ease from the excellent photographs which occur on almost -every page. There is also a series of ‘measured drawings’ of great -beauty and interest.” - -_New York Nation._—“It is not easy to praise too highly the simple and -effective presentation of the subject and the interest of the book to -all persons who care for ecclesiology or for decorative art.” - -_Bibliophile._—“This excellent book is a sign of the times; of the -reawakened interest in the beautiful and historic.... A model of -scholarly compression. Of the finely produced illustrations it is -difficult to speak in too high terms of praise.” - -_Daily Graphic._—“Mr Bond has produced a work on our ecclesiastical -screens and galleries which, like his larger work on the ‘Gothic -Architecture of England,’ is in the first degree masterly. His -knowledge of his subject, exact and comprehensive, is compressed into a -minimum amount of space, and illustrated by a series of photographs and -measured drawings which render the work of permanent value.” - -_Bulletin Monumental._—“Après avoir analysé, aussi exactement que -possible, l’intéressant étude de M. Bond, nous devons le féliciter de -nous avoir donné ce complément si utile à son grand ouvrage.” - - - - -FONTS & FONT COVERS - - -BY FRANCIS BOND. M.A., F.G.S. - -A handsome volume containing 364 pages, with 426 Illustrations -reproduced from Photographs and Measured Drawings. Octavo, strongly -bound in cloth. Price 12s. net - -LONDON: HENRY FROWDE, Oxford University Press - - -SOME PRESS NOTICES - -_Guardian._—“Mr Bond is so well known by his monumental work on ‘Gothic -Architecture in England,’ and by his beautiful book on ‘Screens and -Galleries,’ that his name alone is a sufficient guarantee for this new -volume on ‘Fonts and Font Covers,’ the most complete and thorough that -has yet appeared.” - -_Church Times._—“The finest collection of illustrations of fonts and -font covers yet attempted.... A real delight to the ecclesiologist.” - -_Commonwealth._—“A sumptuous monograph on a very interesting subject; -complete and thorough.” - -_Church Quarterly Review._—“It is most delightful, not only to indulge -in a serious perusal of this volume, but to turn over its pages again -and again, always sure to find within half a minute some beautiful -illustration or some illuminating remark.” - -_Irish Builder._—“This book on ‘Fonts and Font Covers’ is a most -valuable contribution to mediæval study, put together in masterly -fashion, with deep knowledge and love of the subject.” - -_Westminster Gazette._—“Every one interested in church architecture -and sculpture will feel almost as much surprise as delight in Mr -Bond’s attractive volume on ‘Fonts and Font Covers.’ The wealth of -illustrations and variety of interest are truly astonishing.” - -_Journal of the Society of Architects._—“The book is a monument of -painstaking labour and monumental research; its classification is -most admirable. The whole subject is treated in a masterly way with -perfect sequence and a thorough appreciation of the many sources of -development; the illustrations, too, are thoroughly representative. -To many the book will come as a revelation. We all recognise that -the fonts are essential, and in many cases beautiful and interesting -features in our ancient churches, but few can have anticipated the -extraordinary wealth of detail which they exhibit when the photographs -of all the best of them are collected together in a single volume.” - -_Outlook._—“Mr Francis Bond’s book carefully included in one’s luggage -enables one, with no specialist’s knowledge postulated, to pursue to a -most profitable end one of the most interesting, almost, we could say, -romantic, branches of ecclesiastical architecture.... This book, owing -to its scholarship and thoroughness in letterpress and illustrations, -will doubtless be classic; in all its methods it strikes us as -admirable. The bibliography and the indexes are beyond praise.” - - - - -VISITORS’ GUIDE TO WESTMINSTER ABBEY - - -BY FRANCIS BOND, M.A., F.G.S. - -93 pages of text, abridged from the eighteenth and nineteenth chapters -of the author’s larger work on “Westminster Abbey,” consisting chiefly -of description of the Tombs, Monuments, and Cloisters, with 15 Plans -and Drawings and 32 Photographic Illustrations. Price 1s. net - -LONDON: HENRY FROWDE, Oxford University Press - - -SOME PRESS NOTICES - -_Guardian._—“There is probably no better brief handbook. Mr Bond’s -qualifications for the task are beyond question. By the use of varied -type, ingenious arrangement, and excellent tone-blocks and plans, the -book attains a high standard of lucidity as well as of accuracy.” - -_Building News._—“This little work is characterised by its terseness, -directness, and practical treatment. A carefully compiled and scholarly -guide-book.” - -_Architect._—“This book will excellently and admirably fulfil its -purpose.... A splendid itinerary, in which almost every inch of the way -is made to speak of its historical connections.” - -_Birmingham Daily Post._—“Concise, informative, reliable, and admirably -illustrated.” - -_Western Morning News._—“By his key plan and very clear directions as -to where to find the numerous side chapels, historic monuments, and -other objects of interest, Mr Bond makes it possible for a visitor to -find his way round the building at his leisure. It refreshes one’s -knowledge of English history, and is supplemented by thirty-two -excellent plates, which by themselves are worth the shilling charged -for it.” - -_Scotsman._—“A more complete and dependable guide to the National -Pantheon could not be desired.” - -_Architectural Review._—“This is an excellent little text-book. Mr Bond -is to be congratulated in having introduced into it an interesting -element of history. The notes in small print should make the visit -to the Abbey both more profitable and more interesting. The key plan -and the numerous small plans are extremely clear and easily read. The -information given is concise and to the point, and a word of special -praise must be given to the plates at the end; the subjects of these -are well chosen and are illustrated by very good photographs.” - -_Antiquary._—“This little book, strongly bound in linen boards, gives -concisely and clearly all the information the ordinary visitor is -likely to require. Cheap, well arranged, well printed, abundantly -illustrated and well indexed, this handy book, which is light and -‘pocketable,’ is the best possible companion for which a visitor to our -noble Abbey can wish; it is an ideal guide.” - - - - -WESTMINSTER ABBEY - - -BY FRANCIS BOND, M.A., F.G.S. - -A handsome volume, containing 348 pages, with 270 Photographs, Plans, -Sections, Sketches, and Measured Drawings. Octavo, strongly bound in -cloth. Price 10s. net - -LONDON: HENRY FROWDE, Oxford University Press - - -SOME PRESS NOTICES - -_Oxford Magazine._—“All who love the Abbey will be grateful for the -skill and affection bestowed on this admirable work.” - -_Birmingham Post._—“With the history of the Abbey the author -interweaves the life of the Benedictines, peopling the building with -its occupants in the centuries when England was a Catholic country, -and does it with such skill than one can almost imagine oneself at the -services.” - -_Englishman._—“The writer handles his subject with consummate skill, -and his reward will lie in the unmeasured praise of his many readers.” - -_Guardian._—“A book which brings fresh enthusiasm, and will impart a -new impetus to the study of the Abbey and its history.” - -_Scotsman._—“At once instructive and delightful, it more than justifies -its existence by its historical and architectural learning.” - -_Liverpool Daily Courier._—“We found the earlier parts of the book most -fascinating, and have read them over and over again.” - -_Architectural Association Journal._—“Bright and interesting; evincing -the author’s invariable enthusiasm and characteristic industry.” - -_Western Morning News._—“To say that the book is interesting is to say -little; it is a monument of patient and loving industry and extreme -thoroughness, an inexhaustible mine of delight to the reader, general -or technical.” - -_Outlook._—“The author discusses the architecture with a minuteness -that might terrify the inexpert if it were not for the sustained ease -and interest of his style; great is the fascination of the expert hand -when its touch is light.” - -_Saturday Review._—“Mr Bond leaves us more than ever proud of what is -left to us of the stately Benedictine house of God, which is to the -entire English-speaking world a common bond and home.” - -_Antiquary._—“It has a wealth of capital illustrations, is preceded by -a bibliography, and is supplied with good indexes to both illustrations -and text.” - -_Journal des Savants._—“Certains clichés, comme ceux des voûtes, des -tombeaux et de quelques détails de sculpture sont de véritables tours -de force. Le choix des illustrations est très heureux, comme d’ailleurs -dans les autres ouvrages de M. Bond.” - - - - -Wood Carvings in English Churches - - -I. MISERICORDS - -BY FRANCIS BOND. M.A., F.G.S. - -A Handsome Volume, containing 257 pages, with 241 Illustrations Octavo, -strongly bound in cloth. Price 7s. 6d. net - -LONDON: HENRY FROWDE, Oxford University Press - - -SOME PRESS NOTICES - -_Morning Post._—“The subject is one of the first importance to mediæval -popular history, and we welcome this very admirable and thorough -monograph with special gratitude.” - -_Athenæum._—“Mr Bond has put his rare industry in all that pertains to -ecclesiology to excellent service in his latest book on Misericords.” - -_Antiquary._—“An authoritative and, at the same time, delightful and -instructive volume. Really the first attempt to deal comprehensively -with the great variety of carvings on misericords.” - -_New York Herald._—“One of the quaintest, most fascinating, and at the -same time most learned volumes that a reader would happen upon in a -lifetime.” - -_Church Times._—“An indispensable guide to the subject. The -illustrations are worthy of all praise.” - -_Architectural Association Journal._—“The blocks, taken from -photographs, are of an excellence really amazing, when the difficulties -such subjects present to the camera are considered. A most delightful -book.” - -_Yorkshire Post._—“Another of the valuable series of monographs on -Church Art in England, and the most entertaining of all.” - -_Architects’ and Builders’ Journal._—“An exceedingly interesting -volume both in illustrations and subject-matter, and full of curious -information.” - -_Glasgow Herald._—“Mr Bond’s scholarly and most interesting book brings -us very near to popular life in the Middle Ages.” - -_Liverpool Courier._—“Another of the admirably written and illustrated -art handbooks for which the author is famous.” - -_Birmingham Post._—“This well illustrated volume is not only a valuable -technical monograph, but also an important contribution to the history -of social life and thought in the Middle Ages. Mr Bond’s treatment -of the subject is exceptionally charming and successful. The general -excellence of the book is great.” - -_Outlook._—“Many there must be to whom Mr Bond’s new book will be -welcome. Into all the details of this varied and most puzzling subject -he goes with thoroughness and a pleasant humour. The bibliography and -indexes, as usual in Mr Bond’s work, are admirable.” - - - - -STALLS AND TABERNACLE WORK IN ENGLISH CHURCHES - - -BY FRANCIS BOND, M.A., F.G.S. - -Illustrated by 123 Photographs and Drawings. Price 6s. net - -LONDON; HENRY FROWDE, Oxford University Press - - -SOME PRESS NOTICES - -_Birmingham Post._—“Valuable for lucid description and enlightened -criticism of architectural and technical details combined with -suggestive treatment of historical facts. A certain charm of manner -contributes to the interest.” - -_La Chronique des Arts et de la Curiosité._—“Une illustration copieuse -établie avec des soins tout documentaires; des index; une table par -ordre chronologique, une autre par noms de lieux, viennent faciliter -les recherches et permettre au lecteur de tirer bénéfice des vastes -resources d’une érudition informée et sure.” - -_Revue de l’Art Chrétien._—“M. Bond est le premier qui ait traité ce -sujet; il l’a fait avec une grande compétence, et son intéressant -ouvrage nous fait regretter que chez nous pareil travail ne tente un de -nos érudits.” - -_The Builder._—“The illustrations are admirable, and we cordially -recommend our readers to undertake their examination with the help of -so accomplished and genial a cicerone as Mr Bond.” - -_The Antiquary._—“The volume abounds with fine illustrations, which -even more than the text make us realise the extraordinary beauty and -variety of the craftsmanship.” - -_The Architect._—“A most delightful and valuable account of the -marvellous fertility of design, the exquisite craftsmanship, and the -pious generosity of mediæval England.” - -_Cambridge Review._—“The fourth of a series of handbooks of which it is -difficult to speak too highly.” - -_Building News._—“A monument of industry and erudition.” - -_The Cabinet Maker._—“Every lover of woodwork should possess this -series, which contains beautiful illustrations and most interesting -descriptions of the noble heritage of magnificent work handed down to -us by the mediæval Church.” - - - - -_IN THE PRESS._ - - -ENGLISH MILITARY ARCHITECTURE IN THE MIDDLE AGES - -By A. HAMILTON THOMPSON, M.A., F.S.A. - -Author of “THE GROUND PLAN OF THE ENGLISH PARISH CHURCH”; “THE -HISTORICAL GROWTH OF THE ENGLISH PARISH CHURCH”; &c. - -Copiously illustrated with Plans, Drawings, and Photographs. Octavo, -strongly bound in cloth. Price 7s. 6d. net - -LONDON: HENRY FROWDE - - -CHURCH BELLS IN ENGLAND - -By H. B. WALTERS, Esq., M.A., F.S.A. - -Joint-Author of “BELLS OF ESSEX” and “BELLS OF WARWICKSHIRE.” - -Copiously illustrated with Photographs of Bells, Bell Stamps, Founders’ -Marks, &c. - -Octavo, strongly bound in cloth. Price 7s. 6d. net - -LONDON: HENRY FROWDE - - -CATHEDRALS OF ENGLAND AND WALES - -By FRANCIS BOND, M.A., F.G.S. - -A Short History of their Architecture; being a remodelled, -re-illustrated, and enlarged edition of “English Cathedrals -Illustrated.” Containing over 270 Illustrations from photographs and a -complete set of plans specially drawn to a uniform scale. Octavo, cloth -gilt. Price 7s. 6d. net - -LONDON: B. T. BATSFORD - - -INTRODUCTION TO ENGLISH CHURCH ARCHITECTURE FOR GENERAL READERS - -By FRANCIS BOND, M.A., F.G.S. - -This book has been specially prepared for those who have not had an -architectural training and desire an account of English Ecclesiastical -Architecture not overlaid with archæological and technical detail. It -will be a quarto volume of large size and handsome type, illustrated -with many hundred Plans, Drawings, and large size Photographs, and will -probably be published at a Guinea. - -LONDON: HENRY FROWDE - - - - -Transcriber’s Notes:— - - - Numbers in parentheses eg., (106) refer to the illustration page - numbers. - - In the Bibliography:— - Viollet-de-Duc corrected to read Viollet-le-Duc - - In the Index:— - - Aigues-Mortes (Gard), 7, A. Thompson; - Corrected thus:— - Aigues-Mortes (Gard), 77, A. Thompson; - - - Tattershall (Lincoln), castle, 296, A. Thompson; - Corrected thus:— - Tattershall (Lincoln), castle, 356, A. Thompson; - - mount-and-bailey plan, 42-47, 48-52, 55-56, 112, 113, 160, 161; - Corrected thus:— - mount-and-bailey plan, 42-47, 48-52, 55-56, 110, 113, 160, 161; - - Hall of castle, 54, 55, 56, 104, 107, 190-3, 196, 197, 198, 200, - Corrected thus:— - Hall of castle, 54, 55, 56, 104, 107, 190-3, 195, 197, 198, 200, - - Keep, gradual disappearance of, 164, 214, 215 - Corrected thus:— - Keep, gradual disappearance of, 164, 212, 215 - - Footnotes:— - - [135] Other important shell keeps of the normal type are at Arundel, - Cardiff (114), Carisbrooke (171), Farnham, Lewes, Pickering, Totnes, - Corrected thus:— - [135] Other important shell keeps of the normal type are at Arundel, - Cardiff (114), Carisbrooke (111), Farnham, Lewes, Pickering, Totnes, - - - - - -End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Military Architecture in England -During the Middle Ages, by Alexander Hamilton Thompson - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK MILITARY ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND *** - -***** This file should be named 60518-0.txt or 60518-0.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/6/0/5/1/60518/ - -Produced by MWS, Brian Wilcox and the Online Distributed -Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was -produced from images generously made available by The -Internet Archive/American Libraries.) - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you - are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - |