« PreviousContinue »
towns. Of these, less than a third are placed inside the Roman walls or the Saxon or Danish earthworks of the towns, while at least two-thirds are wholly or partly outside these enclosures.' This circumstance is important, because the position outside the town indicates the mistrust of an invader, not the confidence of a native prince. In the only two cases where we know anything of the position of the residence of the Saxon kings we find it in the middle of the city. Even when the castle is inside the town walls it is almost invariably close to the walls, so that an escape into the country might always be possible.3
Of the towns or manors in which these castles were situated, Domesday Book gives us the value in King Edward's and King William's time in sixty-two instances. In forty-five cases the value has risen; in twelve it has fallen; in five it is stationary. Evidently something has caused a great increase of prosperity in these cases, and it can hardly be anything else than the impetus given to trade through the security afforded by a Norman castle.
Our list shows that Mr Clark's confident statement, that the moated mounds were the centres of large and important estates in Saxon times, was a dream. Out of forty-one mottes in country districts, thirty-six are found in places which were quite insignificant in King Edward's day, and only five can be said to occupy the centres of important Saxon manors.*
1 Exact numbers cannot be given, because in some cases the bounds of the ancient borough are doubtful, as at Quatford.
2 At Winchester and Exeter. For Winchester, see Milner, History of Winchester, ii., 194; for Exeter, Shorrt's Sylva Antiqua Iscana, p. 7.
3 Colchester is the only exception to this rule, as the castle there is in the middle of the town; but even this is only an apparent exception, as the second bailey extended to the town wall on the north, and had been royal demesne land even before the Conquest. See Round's Colchester Castle, ch. vii. * These five are Berkeley, Berkhampstead, Bourn, Pontefract, Rayleigh.
In the table in the Appendix, the area occupied by the original baileys of the castles in this list has been measured accurately by a planimeter, from the 25-in. Ordnance maps, in all cases in which that was possible.1 This table proves that the early Norman castles were very small in area, suitable only for the personal defence of a chieftain who had only a small force at his disposal, and absolutely unsuited for a people in the tribal state of development, like the ancient Britons, or for the scheme of national defence inaugurated by Alfred and Edward. We may remark here that in not a single case is any masonry which is certainly early Norman to be found on one of these mottes; where the date can be ascertained, the stonework is invariably later than the 11th century.
ABERGAVENNY (Fig. 8). 8). This castle, being in Monmouthshire, must be included in our list. The earliest notice of it is a document stating that Hamelin de Ballon gave the church and chapel of the castle of Abergavenny, and the land for making a bourg, and an oven of their own, to the Abbey of St Vincent at Le Mans.2
The castle occupies a pointed spur at the S. end of the town, whose walls converge so as to include the castle as part of the defence. The motte has been much altered during recent years, and is crowned by a modern building; but a plan in Coxe's Tour in Monmouthshire, 1800, shows it in its original round form. The bailey is roughly of a pentagonal shape, covering I acre, and is defended by a curtain wall with mural towers and a gatehouse. The ditch on the W.
1 I am indebted for these measurements to Mr D. H. Montgomerie. 2 Notification in Round's Calendar of Documents preserved in France, p. 367. Mr Round dates the Notification 1087-1100.
and N. is much filled in and obscured by the encroachment of the town. On the E. the ground descends in a steep scarp, which merges into those of the headland on which the motte is placed.1
ARUNDEL (Fig. 8). "The castrum of Arundel," says Domesday Book, "paid 40s. in King Edward's time from a certain mill, and 20s. from three boardlands (or feorm-lands), and 2s. from one pasture. Now, between the town feorm and the water-gate and the ships' dues, it pays 12l."2 Castrum in Domesday nearly always means a castle; yet the description here given is certainly that of a town and not of a castle. We must therefore regard it as an instance of the fluctuating meaning which both castrum and castellum had in the 11th century. Arundel is one of the towns mentioned in the "Burghal Hidage." But even accepting that the description in Domesday refers to the town, we can have very little doubt that the original earthen castle was reared by Roger de Montgomeri, to whom William I. gave the Rapes of Arundel and Chichester, and whom he afterwards made Earl of Shrewsbury."
1 Description furnished by Mr D. H. Montgomerie, F.S.A.
2 "Castrum Harundel T. R. E. reddebat de quodam molino 40 solidos, et de 3 conviviis 20 solidos, et de uno paŝticio 20 solidos. Modo inter burgum et portum aquæ et consuetudinem navium reddit 12 libras, et tamen valet 13. De his habet S. Nicolaus 24 solidos. Ibi una piscaria de 5 solidos et unum molinum reddens 10 modia frumenti, et 10 modia grossæ annonæ. Insuper 4 modia. Hoc appreciatum est 12 libras. Robertus filius Tetbaldi habet 2 hagas de 2 solidis, et de hominibus extraniis habet suum theloneum." Several other haga and burgenses are then enumerated. (D. B., i., 23a, 1.)
3 See Mr Round's remarks on the words in his Geoffrey de Mandeville, Appendix O. The above was written before the appearance of Mr Round's "The Castles of the Conquest" (Archæologia, lviii.), in which he paper on rejects the idea that castrum Harundel means the castle.
4 See ante, p. 28.
5 Florence of Worcester mentions the castle of Arundel as belonging to Roger de Montgomeri in 1088.