Adrian Pettifer / English Castles

Purchase Details US

Purchase Details UK

HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION

The English medieval castle was seldom an impregnable fortress. It served both as fortification and residence, and there was always a degree of incompatibility between the two roles. Military emergencies were unusual, even in the Middle Ages, and to keep up with the latest initiatives in siege warfare would have imposed an unjustifiable burden. One can often observe the dilemma between making a castle strong against assailants without rendering it inconvenient to those who lived there. Even the siting of castles was dictated not by defensive considerations alone, but by the need to dominate the town or control the highway. The dynamic role of the castle - forming the seat of a lord who commanded the surrounding territory - was more important than the strongest defences.

Although castles are similar in overall conception they can be highly individual and no two are alike. Each was purpose-built according to the site, the circumstances, the builder's preferences and the funds available. Contrasting schools of thought helped to create variety in numerous ways, e.g. keep or no keep, round or square towers, regular or irregular layout, etc. There is an element of evolution in these respects but it should not be overstated, Conversely the view that castles cannot be categorised meaningfully into types is unhelpful.

Origins

Although this book deals with English medieval castles, it must be emphasised that most of the defensive features employed in the Middle Ages had already existed for a long time, and very little is native to this island. Towns have always needed defending and from ancient times there was sometimes a citadel providing an inner line of defence. Such was the ancient Greek acropolis, though it should be noted that this was a state fortress opposed to a private residence. In Britain mighty hillforts protected the Iron Age populace; their earth ramparts are still impressive at sites such as Old Oswestry and Maiden Castle. The Roman invaders built forts which were garrison bases designed to house a professional army. The later Roman forts of the 'Saxon Shore' are more geared for defence, with thick walls and flanking bastions a sign that Rome was losing the initiative to Teutonic invaders. As the western half of the Roman Empire fell apart in the fifth century AD, wealthy senators fortified their country villas against barbarian attack. These were arguably the forerunners of the medieval castle, though there are no known examples in Britain.

The castle proper originated in Dark Age Europe. With the break-up of the Carolingian Empire in the ninth century there emerged the pragmatic system of feudalism, with its emphasis on loyalty to one's immediate superior in place of the old ties to a remote central authority. Lords great and small carved out estates for themselves and raised private fortresses to live in. This process can be seen most dearly in northern France, where a number of dukes, counts and lesser warlords wielded power without effective restraint from the weak French monarchy. By the year 1000 castles were becoming a familiar sight in western Europe, though almost all of them were modest affairs of earth and timber.

Different conditions prevailed on the English side of the Channel, however. After the Danes had been rebuffed England emerged in the tenth century as a relatively unified kingdom. This unity contrived to keep feudalism and the castle at bay. Defence remained purely communal, as in the 'burghs' or fortified towns founded by Alfred the Great and his successors. A few castles were in fact raised in England before the Norman Conquest, but they were the product of Norman adventurers invited across by Edward the Confessor to assist in the wars against the Welsh. These Normans were not popular and their stay was brief Whether the English would eventually have adopted castles of their own accord is an open question. It is difficult to see how they could have resisted such a pervasive European trend in the long term, but we shall never know as the Battle of Hastings was about to change their destiny dramatically.

Castles of the Conquest

Castles finally appeared in England as instruments of foreign conquest. The chronicler Orderic Vitalis observed with some justice that England's lack of castles made the Norman Conquest easier, since the defeated Saxon thanes had no private fortresses to retreat to. William the Conqueror is said to have brought a ready-to-assemble wooden fort across the Channel with him, and his march upon London was accompanied by the foundation of several impromptu castles en route. William erected castles at key places (primarily the old Saxon burghs) all over England in the years following 1066. Most of these castles were formidable earthworks, consisting of one or more enclosures (baileys) defended by massive ramparts, ditches and wooden stockades. Such castles were often dominated by a huge artificial mound or 'motte'. William's chief followers, who had been rewarded with vast estates, also began to raise castles. All the early castles acted as administrative centres, barracks, prisons and places of justice, but their primary function was to protect the small Norman households who lived in them from the defeated but resentful English.

By the end of William's reign the castle had become a well-established - and much hated - symbol of Norman domination. The Domesday Book (1086) mentions about sixty English castles but the real total must already have been considerably larger. As a taxation document Domesday only mentions castles incidentally, for instance if houses had been destroyed to make way for them. At least half were under William's direct control, and the rest were held by trustworthy tenants-in-chief William Rufus was less cautious than his father, so castle building increased. Nevertheless, only on the Welsh Border did castles begin to proliferate, because here William 1 had delegated his powers to three 'palatine' earls who enjoyed a free hand in return for invading Wales. They and their sub-tenants built castles in considerable numbers to defend the newly-won 'Marcher' lordships. There was no comparable militarisation of the Scottish Border. Territorial disputes arose from time to time but, on the whole, England and Scotland coexisted peacefully for the next two centuries.

Transition to Stone

Earthwork castles of the 'motte-and-bailey' type continued to be the norm well into the twelfth century. However, as the Norman conquerors settled down some of them began to reconstruct their castles permanently in stone. Defence was no doubt the primary consideration: earthworks can quite easily be dug away by an attacking force and wooden stockades are extremely vulnerable to fire. Nevertheless status was an important factor even at this early stage. Norman lords sought monumental buildings to rival the great churches which were beginning to dominate the landscape. Stone tower keeps had originated in northern France in the late tenth century Naturally, the King was the first to build such keeps in England. William the Conqueror himself began the White Tower which forms the heart of the Tower of London. Designed as a palace-fortress truly fit for a king, it set the pattern for the next hundred years. In fact, few tower keeps ever rivalled it. A simpler form of keep was the so-called shell keep, consisting simply of an embattled wall around the motte top. Even before 1100 a few enterprising barons had built stone 'curtain' walls a-round their baileys in place of wooden stockades.

Castles feature prominently in the sporadic revolts of the period. Indeed, Norman warfare was characterised by few battles but many sieges. Hence William 11 had difficulty besieging the Northumbrian castles of Robert de Mowbray in 1095, and seven years later Robert de Belle c defied Henry 1 from his Shropshire strongholds. Henry 1 rebuilt the impotant royal castles in stone - one of several measures aimed at keeping the barons in check. A number of keeps are convincingly attributed to him, though documentary proof is lacking. Royal control broke down following the disputed accession of King Stephen. Many barons, particularly in the South-West, preferred the rival claims of the Empress Matilda, and an inconclusive civil war known to history as the Anarchy' lasted for most of Stephen's reign. Ambitious lords took advantage of the situation to build castles without authority. As the Anglo-Saxon chronicle complains: 'They filled the land with castles ... and filled them with devils and wicked men A considerable number of England's more obscure earth-work castles can no doubt be assigned to this period, but some fine stone keeps rose as well. By contrast, Stephen exhausted his resources in fruitless campaigns to defeat his rival. Hence he was not a great builder of castles, although no one besieged more!

The breach was healed when Matilda's son assumed the throne as Henry 11. Henry ordered the demolition of any (though by no means all) of the'adulterine' castles, while taking some of the more important ones into royal hands. Henry proved himself the master of his barons but not of his own family, as shown by the great revolt of his son (Prince Henry) in 1173-74. Some disgruntled English lords took part in this abortive rebellion, and as a result more baronial castles were destroyed. Meanwhile Henry did much to strengthen his own castles, consolidating a vast personal empire which stretched from the Tweed to the Pyrenees. For the first time we have yearly records of royal expenditure in the Pipe Rolls, and Henry built on a prodigious scale. He spent over £7000 on Dover Castle alone - a vast amount of money in those days. By the time of his death the King's authority was reinforced by a series of masonry castles throughout England.

Henry 11 also endeavoured to control private castle building. A system of royal approval emerged, whereby barons were required to apply fora licence to 'crenellate', or fortify, their manor houses. Despite this restriction the greater barons frequently strengthened their castles in stone without interference. Most castles of this era, whether royal or baronial, had a plain curtain around the bailey and a keep for inner defence - either a shell keep on a motte or a big square tower. Even Henry ll's great keep at Dover is a massive cube in the tradition of William I's White Tower. However, there was a gradual shift towards more dynamic defensive forms in the second half of the twelfth century, in response to the rapid improvement in siege techniques.

Castles of Enclosure

The revolution in castle building was triggered to a large extent by the experiences of crusaders, in the Holy Land and (no less importantly) in Spain. Siege warfare became more sophisticated, enabling besiegers to penetrate castle defences in a variety of ways. Scaling ladders and siege towers allowed attackers to go over the wall, catapults and battering rams could breach the ' wall and, worst of all, undermining could bring a section of wall crashing down. Norman castles, with their lumbering square keeps and relatively low curtains, were vulnerable to such forms of assault, but England was comparatively slow in embracing the remedies. Curtains gradually increased in height and thickness and were strengthened by the provision of flanking towers, which enabled archers to fire laterally upon attackers approaching the wall. Mural towers feature in some early Norman castles, but the concept did not reach maturity until Henry 11 built curtains at Windsor and Dover which are comprehensively flanked by towers.

These towers are square in the Norman tradition, but the angles of square towers were particularly vulnerable to undermining- This was demonstrated at Rochester in 1215, when King John's sappers brought own a corner of the keep. Castle builders responded by eliminating angles altogether. Mural towers became circular,' or at least semi-circular with their curved fronts towards the field. Keeps were also built in rounded form, but there are few English examples because the very concept of the keep was Wing out of fashion. Circular rooms must have seemed particularly inconvenient at a time when lords were beginning to move out of their inhospitable keeps in favour of more spacious bailey accommodation. Furthermore, a welldefended enclosure with a number of projecting towers - each of which could serve as a self-contained strongpoint in the event of the bailey being overrun - eliminated the need for a keep as a last resort. Hence there emerged the 'castle of enclosure', consisting of a high curtain with several flanking towers of equal status. The dominant feature of such a castle is likely to be the gatehouse, which developed from a simple tower into a long gate passage flanked by twin towers.

After the glut of castle building in Norman times not many new castles were built in thirteenth-century England. More often there was a piecemeal strengthening of older castles with keeps. Some castles had to be reconstructed after suffering damage during the Magna Carta war (1215-16), when King John attempted to reverse his humiliation at Runnymede and the rebel barons invited the French Dauphin Louis to claim the English throne. Undermining caused devastation at Rochester and Dover, while a number of curtains crumbled before Louis' powerful trebuchets. The siege of Bedford Castle in 1224 demonstrated how even a single castle could be a real nuisance in the hands of a rebel baron. Simon de Montfort's revolt (1264-65) saw long sieges at Pevensey and Kenilworth, but this time the decisive battles were fought in the open. It should be stressed that these wars were short-lived interruptions of a mainly peaceful era. Only in the Welsh Marches was there anything resembling a hostile frontier. Here, Llywelyn the Great and Llywelyn the Last reversed the tide of conquest and put the Marcher lords on the defensive. That is why the new idiom is most apparent in Wales and the Welsh Border districts. One important group of thirteenth-century fortifications should not be overlooked. This was the era in which many English towns received their stone defences.

The kings of England led the way in adapting their castles to the new style. It is estimated that castle building and maintenance accounted for a tenth of royal revenue in this period. Even Henry 11 had experimented with a round keep at Orford. Richard Is great monument is Chateau Gaillard in Normandy. King John, thwarted by the loss of his continental possessions, lavished attention on his English strongholds instead. Henry 111 continued the comprehensive programme of strengthening royal castles, leaving an impressive legacy at Dover, Windsor and the Tower of London. Castle building in Britain reached its climax in the reign of Edward 1, with the conquest of Wales and the erection of a mighty group of strongholds there. Some of the Welsh castles follow a concentric plan, in which the main enclosure is closely surrounded by a parallel outer curtain. Edward 1 converted the Tower of London into a concentric fortress but this is the only fully-developed example in England. Combined keep-gatehouses - another characteristic of the 'Edwardian' castle - are nearly as rare.

Fortified Manor Houses

Scotland replaced Wales as the goal of English imperialism in the later years of Edward 1, but then the tables were turned. Robert Bruce seized the initiative after his victory at Bannockburn (1314), and for the rest of the fourteenth century there was intermittent warfare between the two kingdoms. The Border counties would languish in an atmosphere of raiding and feuding for the next three hundred years. In this war-torn environment the need for defence was paramount, even among the lesser nobility who were compelled to build pele towers in large numbers. Elsewhere in England the tower house, as opposed to the unfortified manor house, was a rarity and castle building remained in the hands of the greater barons. Owing to the Hundred Years' War (1336-1453) there is one other area where English castles retained a serious defensive role. Although the war was mainly fought on the Continent, the French did manage a number of retaliatory raids across the Channel, especially in the later fourteenth century when they went onto the offensive. New castles on the South Coast, such as Bodiam and vanished Queenborough, were intended to play a part in coastal defence.

Even on the frontiers, however, the nature of the castle was changing. Edward I's Welsh strongholds were exceptional because they had been designed to hold down a conquered people. Contemporary English castles are seldom as formidable. They were no longer instruments of conquest, even if they remained symbols of feudal inequality, and the Scots and French came in raiding parties which were seldom equipped for a long siege. Hence there is a gradual shift in emphasis, castle builders making more concessions to the demands of comfort. The term 'fortified manor house' is often used to describe such castles. Many older castles were brought up to date but some were already being abandoned as residences. In their place we find a resurgence in the building of new castles, many exhibiting great uniformity in design.

Previously most castles had been laid out around a conveniently defensible perimeter dictated by the contours of the ground, without much regard to overall symmetry. Now the four-square plan around a quadrangle became fashionable, with towers at the corners and a gatehouse usually located in the middle of one side. This quadrangular layout was efficient from a defensive point of view. It also allowed the domestic buildings to be ranged conveniently against the four surrounding walls.

Some castle builders of this era were professional soldiers who earned their reputation during the long-running wars with France and Scotland. They made a fortune out of ransom money and plunder, erecting impressive castles which emphasised their soldierly status. Fourteenth-century castles also reflect the chivalrous aspirations of the aristocracy at a time when knightly virtues were highly valued, if not always practised. Some developments appear to put the clock back to the Norman era. One is the reappearance of the square flanking tower. Most later medieval towers contained suites of apartments instead of being purely defensive platforms, and from a domestic point of view circular rooms were never popular. Another seemingly archaic development was the revival of the keep. Scholars prefer the Scottish term 'tower house' to distinguish these structures from the keeps of Norman times. They were not so much a defensive last resort against outsiders, it is argued, as a secure place for the lord against his own retainers, at a time when the French wars had caused the old system of feudal levies to be replaced by one of recruiting untrustworthy mercenaries. Tower houses, including the many small pele towers, are most common in the Northern counties but they can be found all over England. It should be noted that there was much less royal castle building in the fourteenth century and beyond. Edward 111 strengthened some South Coast castles against the French but his biggest castle expenditure, at Windsor, was mainly of a domestic nature.

Impact of Artillery

Under Henry V there was a renewed tide of conquest in France. The fruits of victory - admittedly short-lived - created another generation of veterans eager to advertise their soldierly status by building castles. The main themes of the fourteenth century - quadrangular castles and tower houses - carried on into the fifteenth. A new development was the frequent use of brick as the main building material. Castles maintained that cautious divide between the ford and his hired retainers, the latter sometimes being confined to an outer or 'base' court. However, except perhaps in the North there was less castle building in the fifteenth century, and the concessions made for comfort at the expense of security reached a point where the castle turned into a castellated mansion. Great piles like Herstmonceux and Tattershall, although they look impressive enough, have serious defensive flaws. The quadrangular castle, with its ranges backing onto the curtain, was on its way to becoming an unfortified courtyard house. Such tendencies increased after the middle of the century, which is surprising in view of the dynastic struggle which erupted between the Houses of Lancaster and York. In fact the Wars of the Roses (1455-87) were an intermittent series of field campaigns in which castles played little part. A few Northumbrian strongholds were besieged by the Yorkists but the castle had ceased to have a significant role in warfare. Few castles of the late fifteenth century show any genuine defensive capability, and small gun ports are the only admission that artillery was introducing a new dimension to warfare.

Cannon first appeared in England in Edward Ill's reign but their impact on siegecraft was minor owing to their unreliability. In the fifteenth century guns became more powerful, and the French made devastating use of the new weapon in the last stages of the Hundred Years War. On the Continent and even in Scotland attempts were made to adapt castles to artillery, but the English resisted these developments. Hence, although the rise of artillery coincided with the decline of the English castle, it seems that the one did not actually cause the other. If castles had become status symbols, it was because their high towers and embattled parapets conveyed an image of baronial pride. The response to artillery demanded a squatter profile which failed to appeal to the nobility.

The End of the Castle

It is not strictly true that castle building was forbidden under the Tudors. Licences to crenellate were still issued occasionally but they had become a symbolic gesture, permitting a favoured subject to put battlements on top of his house. Tudor legislation abolishing private armies did more to bring the aristocracy to heel. This and other incentives encouraged their transition from war lords to courtiers. The North took longer to adjust and pele towers continued to rise near the Scottish Border well into the sixteenth century This was due to general lawlessness as much as the periodic dashes between England and Scotland. Conditions did not really improve until the union of the two realms in 1603.

Frontier defences were needed more than ever in the sixteenth century. Henry VIII's breach with Rome and the alliance of the chief Catholic powers against him led to a short-lived threat of invasion in the 1540s, and this prompted Henry to embark upon the first comprehensive scheme of coastal defence since Roman times. With their thick walls and geometrical layouts Henry's forts were designed to withstand the artillery of the day. They also differ from castles proper in being garrison posts rather than residential fortresses, so we have strictly reached the end of our story However, by Elizabeth I's reign low ramparts and arrow-headed bastions (as at Berwick) had become the staple defence for artillery, and Henrician forts have more in common with the medieval castle than with that kind of fortification. How effective these coastal fortifications would have been in stopping an invasion is doubtful. The scare of the 1540s did not materialise, while the Spanish Armada was defeated by weather and aggressive seamanship.

Many older castles were abandoned for up-to-date residences in the Tudor period. Others were modernised to the detriment of their old defensive strength. Ironically,temporarily broke the medieval castle had long ceased to be a fortress when the stability of England down in the conflict between Charles 1 and Parliament (1642-46). As in previous wars the outcome of the Civil War was

primarily on the battlefield, but many castles were astily refortified to act as garrison posts. As a result the Civil War is remarkable for its many sieges. Some castles held out surprisingly well against the artillery of the day, but the victorious Parliament ordered the 'slighting' of many to prevent their future use by the Royalists. It is a pity that so much damage was done during a crisis which only lasted a few years.

Recent Times

In the Post-medieval centuries English castles have suffered a variety of fates. A number of Royal Castlesdeclined to utilitarian functions, such as garrison posts on the frontiers or gaols and court houses in the county towns. Other castles lost their defensive role but remained inhabited. This often entailed sweeping changes to the fabric, particularly if their owners could afford to keep up with changing tastes. Only where there was impoverished occupancy, as at Stokesay, has a castle survived more or less in its original form. The majority of castles, abandoned both as fortifications and residences, were regarded as white elephants and often became convenient sources of building stone for the local populace. Many castles have vanished in this way. Ironically, as genuine castles were being destroyed there emerged a new interest in castellated architecture. Sham castles became fashionable in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, both to five in and to have as romantic ruins in landscaped parks.

It is only in the last century that society has begun preserving historic monuments for their own sake. Interest has been growing since the Victorian era and a great deal of progress has been made in the sympathetic restoration of old buildings. For many castles the process of decay has been halted, temporarily at least. Today they are enjoying a new lease of life as tourist attractions. While the public continues to be fascinated with the past they may stand for a long time yet, if we can master the environmental problems which threaten to engulf us.