« PreviousContinue »
Roger had contributed sixty ships to William's fleet, and both he and his sons were highly favoured and crusted by William, until the sons forfeited that confidence. We shall see afterwards that their names are connected with several important castles of the
early Norman settlement. We shall see also that the ! Rapes into which Sussex was divided--Chichester,
Arundel, Bramber, Lewes, Pevensey, and Hastingswere all furnished with Norman castles, each with the characteristic motte, except Pevensey, which had a stone keep. Each of these castles, at the time of the Survey, defended a port by which direct access could be had to Normandy. It was to protect his base that William fortified these important estuaries, and committed them to the keeping of some of the most prominent of the Norman leaders.
The castle stands on the end of a high and narrow ridge of the South Downs, above the town of Arundel. It consists of an oblong ward, covering 41 acres, in the middle of which, but on the line of the west wall, is a large motte, about 70 feet high, surrounded by its own ditch. The lower and perhaps original bailey is only 2 acres in extent. Round the top of the motte is a slightly oval wall, of the kind called by Mr Clark a shell keep. We have elsewhere expressed our doubts of the correctness of this term. In all the more important castles we find that the keep on top of the motte has a small ward attached to it, and Arundel is no exception to this rule ; it has the remains of a tower, as well as the wall round the motte. The tower is a small one, but it is large enough for the king's chamber in times which were not extravagant in domestic architecture. It is probable that this tower, and the stone wall round
1 See Appendix R.
the motte are the work of Henry II., as he spent nearly 340l. on this castle between the years 1170 and 1187. His work consisted chiefly of a wall, a king's chamber, a chapel, and a tower. The wall of the motte corresponds in style to the work of the middle of his reign; it is built of flints, but cased with Caen stone brought from Normandy, and has Norman buttresses. The original Norman doorway on the south side (now walled up) has the chevron moulding, which shows that it is not earlier than the 12th century. The tower, which we may assume to be the tower of Henry II.'s records, has a round arched entrance, and contains a chapel and a chamber (now ruined) besides a well chamber.
There is earlier Norman work still remaining in the bailey, namely, the fine gateway, which though of plain and severe Norman, is larger and loftier than the early work of that style, and of superior masonry. The one Pipe Roll of Henry I. which we possess shows that he spent 781. 6s. 2d. on the castle in 1130, and possibly this refers to this gatehouse. We know that Henry was a great builder, but so was the former owner of this castle, Robert Belesme, son of Roger de Montgomeri.
The value of the town of Arundel had greatly increased since the Conquest, at the time of the Domesday Survey." BAMBOROUGH, Northumberland. We first hear of
1 The expenses entered in the Pipe Rolls (1170-1187) are for the works of the castle, the chamber and wall of the castle, the houses of the castle (an expression which generally refers to the keep), and for flooring the tower (turris) and making a garden. Turris is the usual word for a keep, and is never applied to a mere mural tower.
2 This gateway is masked by a work of the 13th century, which serves as a sort of barbican.
3 In operibus castelli de Arundel 221. 7s. 8d. Et debet 551. 185. 6d. Pipe Roll, 31, Henry I., p. 42.
4 D. B., 1., 23a, 1.
this castle in the reign of Rufus, when it was defended against the king by Robert Mowbray, the rebel Earl of Northumberland; but there can be little doubt that the earliest castle on this natural bastion was built in the Conqueror's reign. In the 13th century certain lands were held by the tenure of supplying wood to the castle of Bamborough, and it was declared that this obligation had existed ever since the time of William I. William certainly found no castle there, for Bamborough had fallen into utter ruin and desolation by the middle of the 17th century.” William's hold on Northumberland was too precarious to give opportunity for so long and costly a work as the building of a stone keep. It is more probable that a strong wooden castle was the fortress of the governors of Northumberland under the first Norman kings, and that the present stone keep was built in Henry II.'s reign. There is no motte at Bamborough, nor was one needed on a site which is itself a natural motte, more precipitous and defensible than any artificial hill. As the Domesday Survey does not extend to Northumberland, we have no statement of the value of Bamborough. The area of the castle is 43 acres.
1 Testa de Nevill, i., iii., 236, cited by C. Bates, in a very valuable paper on Bamborough Castle, in Archæologia Æliana, vol. xiv., "Border Holds.” Mr Bates gives other evidence to the same effect. The early existence of the castle is also proved by the fact that Gospatric, whoin William had made Earl of Northumberland, after his raid on Cumberland in 1079, brought his booty to the firmissimam munitionem of Bamborough. Symeon of Durham, 1070.
2 Vita S. Oswaldi, ch. xlviii., in Rolls edition of Symeon.
3 This was the opinion of the late Mr Cadwalader Bates, who thought that the smallness of the sums entered for Bamborough in Henry II.'s reign might be accounted for by the labour and materials having been furnished by the crown tenants. Border Strongholds, p. 236.
4 Bamborough rock has every appearance of having been once an island. As late as 1547 the tide came right up to the rock on the east side ; the sea is now separated from the castle by extensive sandhills.