« PreviousContinue »
the castle, the value of the manor had greatly gone down in William's time.1 The ten ploughs had been reduced to five.
LEWES, Sussex (Fig. 19).-The castle of Lewes is not mentioned in its proper place in Sussex by Domesday Book, and this is another proof that the Survey contains no inventory of castles; for that the castle was existing at that date is rendered certain by the numerous allusions in the Norfolk portion to "the exchange of the castle of Lewes." 2 It is clear that at some period, possibly during the revolt of Robert Curthose in 1079, William I. gave large estates in Norfolk to his trusty servant, William de Warenne, in exchange for the important castle of Lewes, which he may have preferred to keep in his own hands at that critical period. This bargain cannot have held long, at least as regards the castle, which continued to belong to the Warenne family for many generations. We cannot even guess now how the matter was settled, but the lands in Norfolk certainly remained in the hands of the Warennes.
Lewes is one of the very few castles in England which have two mottes. They were placed at each end of an oval bailey, each surrounded by its own ditch, and each projecting about three-fourths beyond the line of the bailey. On the northern motte only the foundations
1 "Olim 20/.; modo valet 47." D. B., i., 121b.
2 D. B., ii., 157, 163, 172. The first entry relating to this transaction says: "Hoc totum est pro escangio de 2 maneriis Delaquis." The second "Pertinent ad castellum Delaquis." It is clear that Lewes is meant, as one paragraph is headed "De escangio Lewes." I have been unable to find any explanation of this exchange in any of the Norfolk topographers, or in any of the writers on Domesday Book.
3 Lincoln is the only other instance known to the writer. Deganwy has two natural mottes. It is possible that two mottes indicate a double ownership of a castle, a thing of which there are instances, as at Rhuddlan.
of a wall round the top remain; on the other, part of the wall which enclosed a small ward, and two mural towers. These towers have signs of the early Perpendicular period, and are very likely of the reign of Edward III., when the castle passed into the hands of the Fitz Alans. The bailey, which enclosed an area of about 3 acres, is now covered with houses and gardens, but parts of the curtain wall on the S. E. and E. stand on banks, bearing witness to the original wooden fortifications. The great interest of this bailey is its ancient Norman gateway. The entrance was regarded by medieval architects as the weakest part of the fortress, and we frequently find that it was the first part to receive stone defences.1 It is not surprising that at such an important place as Lewes, which was then a port leading to Normandy, and at the castle of so powerful a noble, we should find an early case of stone architecture supplementing the wooden defences. But the two artificial mottes have no masonry that can be called early Norman.
Lewes is one of the boroughs mentioned in the Burghal Hidage, and was a burgus at the time of the Survey.' The value of the town had increased by £1, 18s. from what it had been in King Edward's time.
LINCOLN (Fig. 20).-Domesday Book tells us that 166 houses were destroyed to furnish the site of the castle. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle says that William built a castle here on his return from his first visit to
1 Exeter and Tickhill are instances of early Norman gateways, and at Ongar and Pleshy there are fragments of early gateways, though there are no walls on the banks. We have already seen that Arundel had a gateway which cannot be later than Henry I.'s time. * D. B., i., 26a, 1.
3 "De predictis wastis mansionibus propter castellum destructi fuerunt 166." D. B., i., 336b, 2.