grooves 7 inches broad and about 6 inches deep, and 11 feet apart.
They commence at the stringcourse, which corresponds with the cill of
the doorway, and are 6 feet high. Above this, 10 feet 6 inches from
the stringcourse, and 12 feet apart, are two similar grooves, 7 feet
6 inches long, and which, therefore, reach a little above the level
of the top of the doorway arch. It is evident that these two pair of
grooves were connected with the drawbridge, the lower pair probably
receiving the ends of the parapet rail, and the upper the struts
supporting the beams of the bridge.
Next to this door recess, in the inside of the chamber, is a small
plain fireplace, placed in a tall pointed recess, like a doorway, and
beyond this again is a lower recess, but broader, and also pointed, in
which is a plain, square-headed window, 4 feet high by 1 foot broad,
looking towards the inner ward. In the jamb of the recess is a side
door, leading by a short passage into the well staircase from the
kitchen, which also, at this level, has a loop towards the inner ward.
The floor of this chamber at present rises about 2 feet, or 1 in 26,
from the outer to the inner gate. This, however, may be a modern
arrangement, intended to carry off the water from the asphalt with
which the floor has been paved.
Outside the outer gate of this chamber, towards the south, is a small
mural chamber, lighted by a very handsome window, 2 feet 6 inches
broad, with tracery in the arched head and a handsome drip-stone
above, looking towards the inner ward. This chamber opens upon a sort
of lobby, now mostly destroyed, outside the great gate, and provided
with a small doorway of its own, fitted with a portcullis, and from
this descends a small staircase with a ribbed and vaulted roof,
which communicated with the lodge connected with the entrance from
the outer to the inner ward. This was evidently a postern for such
foot-passengers as came after the great gates were closed, and who did
not wish to enter the main or guard-chamber of the keep. From this
lobby ascended a well-stair to the upper story, rather larger than the
other one, which was close beside it in the wall. The position of the
larger staircase is marked by a sort of bartizan or projecting round
turret, which commenced at the first floor level, and was lighted from
the inner ward. Most of this is broken away, and only traces of it
remain.
Of the upper floor but little remains save the wall towards the inner
ward. In this wall is an excellent trefoil-topped window of one light
beneath a square head. This is placed in a recess of the wall, vaulted
and ribbed.
Near it a small door opens upon the head of the staircase from the
lower floor and the kitchen. The other staircase from the postern is
destroyed.
It appears from what has been described that the main floor of the keep
was in fact a passage by which the principal entrance led from the
outer to the inner ward. As the level of the first floor is 17 feet
above that of the inner ward, and something more above that of the
outer, the approaches were upon arches leading up to the gateways. The
outer bridge no doubt was built against and protected by the curtain
of the outer ward. That the road rested upon arches is evident from
a trace of a skewback or springing stone below the gateway, and from
the position of the window of the inner cell of the porter’s lodge.
There is similar evidence of another bridge from the inner gateway down
to the level of the inner ward, and excavation there would probably
show the pier bases. How there came to be two fireplaces in what must
have been the guard-chamber, and what was the use of the trough, are
questions as yet unanswered. So far as I know, this is the only example
of a main entrance so raised and carried through the keep. This keep
is, in fact, a gatehouse.
There remains to be noticed the fragment of a building attached to
the southern angle of the keep, and from which evidently sprang the
wall which ran between the outer and the inner ward. [B. Fig. _a._]
This seems to have been an oblong, divided into two compartments.
One, of which much of two sides remains, was 11 feet square, vaulted
and ribbed, the fans spreading from the four angles. This was entered
on one side from a small Decorated door of 2 feet 3 inches opening,
which led into a bent passage. The face towards the inner ward seems
to have contained a second small door, by the side either of a window
or a larger door. From this chamber a door probably led, through the
second chamber, now removed, to the base of the winding steps already
mentioned as ascending to the eastern entrance to the keep. The designs
of the mouldings of this appended building are peculiarly delicate and
graceful, and well executed.
This keep is probably the latest example of a rectangular keep as
well as a singular one of a keep with its main floor employed as
a gatehouse. Its ornaments and details generally are in the late
Decorated style, and of the reign probably of Edward II., though it is
by no means likely that the work was due to Gaveston. Ashlar masonry
is freely employed outside and inside the building, and the details
throughout are admirable. It is probable that the addition of the solid
buttresses to the curtain was the work of the builder of the keep. The
masonry and material correspond. The portcullis grooves are alike, and
the solitary stringcourse on one of the bastions is nearly, if not
quite, of the pattern of that employed on the keep. It is much to be
desired that the inhabitants of Knaresborough would obtain the castle
as a promenade, reopen the ditch, or part of it, restore the bridge
leading to the outer gate, excavate the foundation of the north-east
angle of the keep and of the bridge covering the way into the prison,
and check the progress of weather and exposure in the upper portions of
the keep. A moderate sum would execute all that is required, and the
result would add to the comfort and augment the attractions of the town.
LEEDS, OR LEDES, CASTLE, KENT.
Leeds Castle is a very peculiar structure. It stands upon three rocky
knolls, of which two are islands in a lake of 15 acres, and the
third occupies the central part of the artificial bank by which, as
at Kenilworth and Caerphilly, and in some degree at Framlingham and
Ragland, the waters are or were retained.
The central and larger island is girt by a revetment wall, having
half-round bastions, and rising about 15 feet out of the water. This
was the wall of the outer ward. About 40 feet within, and concentric
with this, are indications of the wall of the inner ward, which was
about 8 feet thick and 20 feet high. At each end, connecting the two
walls, and occupying the space between them, were the gatehouses, of
which that to the south remains, and is a very curious structure. It
represents, probably, a late Norman work; but its oldest recognisable
part is a doorway of the time of Henry III., surrounded, however, by
masonry apparently of that of Edward, his son. A bretache is mentioned
in a Survey of 1314, but the present corbels overhanging the gateway,
and upon which the timber work rested, appear to be of the age of
Richard II., and probably date from 1386. The Constable’s room, placed
in the rear, and at the level of the portcullis chamber, is entered
through a doorway, the valve of which is original and peculiar, being
composed of planks of a taper section, the narrow edge of one fitting
into a groove in the back or broad edge of the next.
The domestic buildings occupied the north end of the two wards, and are
replaced by a modern house, excepting only a vaulted cellar, which may
be late Norman, and is certainly the oldest known masonry in the place,
and a bracket which supported the ancient oven, and is placed near what
(17 Henry VI.) is described as “Una coquina juxta pedem pontis de la
Gloriet,” which kitchen was not long since removed.
In this ward also, or rather partly in this and partly in the outer
ward, near a building of the age of Henry VIII., is a very remarkable
bath,—“balnea domini regis apud Ledes,” as it is designated, which was
constructed for the use of Edward I. in 1291–2. This is now used as
a boathouse. It communicates with the lake by a passage in which are
still seen the grooves for the portcullis, and the recesses for the
oblique gates by means of which the water was retained or excluded. Mr.
Wykeham Martin’s investigations of the accounts relating to this bath
are very curious. The hundred Reigate stones, 2 feet square, which are
there specified, just tally with the area of the chamber.
Thus far the castle is, or has been, a concentric structure, after
the plan much in use in the latter part of the reign of Henry III.
and throughout that of Edward I. Its peculiarities are caused by the
circumstances of its position, and remain to be described. Of these the
chief is the keep, or Gloriette, a shell of wall rising from the deep
water around it to a considerable height, and containing apartments
round a central court, an arrangement usual in Norman shell keeps.
This shell contains the chapel, no doubt the “major capella” of the
records, the kitchen, and amidst much work of the date at least of
Edward I., more that is of that of Henry VIII., and even of recent
date. This island is thought to have been the original stronghold of
those who first appropriated the spot, but the oldest work now seen
dates from Edward I., and the style of the chapel points to about
1280. It contains, however, an excellent low side window, open 17 feet
above the water, probably an insertion by Richard II. There is also
a postern at the level of the water, part of which appears old, as
does an adjacent garderobe. The basement, by which the ground-floor is
raised about 12 feet above the water, is solid, and probably very old,
for no occupant of these islands for the purpose of security could have
neglected this site. Edward, no doubt, remodelled this work with the
rest of the castle, and possibly rebuilt the whole of the outer wall.
Sir Henry Guildford, custos here for Henry VIII., seems to have removed
part of the earlier building, and to have built a spacious hall, a
large fragment of which is the present kitchen. During the reign of
Charles II. these additions were much injured by fire, so that most of
the buildings next the court are modern. Still the general type and
arrangement was evidently preserved; and there is little doubt but that
this structure represents a late Norman shell, if not an earlier Saxon
house of timber. A handsome clock-tower, to which the term Gloriette is
sometimes confined, contains a very early clock, and is of the date of
Henry VIII., guarding the covered bridge which connects the keep with
the larger island. This bridge is of two openings, and has two stories,
and was originally a drawbridge, the pit being contained between the
side walls, and dropping into the water. It is called in the accounts
“pons gloriettæ.”
The term “Gloriette” is not of frequent occurrence, and its meaning has
not been precisely defined.[1] It was first brought under notice in the
ancient miscellanea of the Exchequer relating to Corfe Castle, amongst
which Mr. Bond cites a document dated 8 Edward I., that mentions
“Camera que vocatur Gloriette.”[2] It was probably like “Butavant” and
“Cocaygne,” one of the towers of the _enceinte_ of the castle, and may
have been of somewhat greater elevation. Scarcely any vestiges remain.
The name seems sometimes to denote the whole of the buildings near
the Queen’s Tower and Hall; in that part of the castle there existed
a chapel called the chapel of the Gloriette. It appears that the
Gloriette tower at Corfe was newly built by Richard II., about 1379.[3]
Amongst the conventual buildings also of Christ Church, Canterbury,
there was a “New Lodgyng, juxta antiquam Priorum mansionem vocatam Le
Gloriet.” Professor Willis informs us that it was the upper chamber at
the north end of the range of buildings, known as the “Privata Camera,”
or “Prior’s Mansion.”[4] A building on an elevated spot in the palace
grounds at Schönbrunn, commanding an extensive view of Vienna, is
called “La Gloriette.”
The third great division of the castle, also very peculiar, is the
barbican, or tête-de-pont, which is placed on the counterscarp of the
lake, here reduced to 50 feet in width, and at the outer end of the
bridge which carries the road of approach into the great island. It is
composed of three parts, which were isolated by three wet ditches, of
which one is the river Len, and having three entrances, one from each
wing of the dam, and one, the main one, central, from the south. Each
approach had its drawbridge, gateway, and portcullis, and the three met
upon a small central plot, open towards the fortress, and whence sprung
the bridge leading up to the great gateway. This is the bridge that was
broken down by the great horses and heavy wagons of Aymer de Valence.
It is of two arches, the inner of which was open between the parapets
for the pit of the drawbridge. One division of the barbican contains
the mill, a strongly-fortified building, in advance of which were the
barriers which are known to have covered the southern approach, and to
have been standing in 1385. They were no doubt mainly of timber, though
there are traces of foundations in masonry. This triple composition of
a barbican has not been elsewhere observed. The object of its lateral
gates was the defence of the dam, which might otherwise have been
mined and cut through. Also those who came either from the east or
the west could only have reached the south gate by a wide detour, for
the causeway along the dam was defended on the outside as well as the
inside by water, the lake to the south-east being of large area, and
known as the “stagnum exterius,” while, to the south-west, was a deep
watercourse and marsh formed by the Len.
The late Mr. Wykeham Martin, whose investigations of his hereditary
fortress were a labour of love, seems to have established firmly,
on sound critical grounds, the date of its several parts. He shows
the high probability of its occupation by at least a Saxon lord, and
the changes it has undergone from the Crevecœurs, Leyburns, and the
Plantagenet and Tudor monarchs, who, from Edward I. to Edward VI., held
it in possession.
Like many Saxon strongholds, Leeds is thought to date from the ninth
century. It was held, probably by a Norman arrangement, by castle-guard
tenure under Dover. To Bishop Odo, who obtained it at the Conquest, is
attributed some Norman work in the church, but the earliest masonry
in the castle, probably represented by the curious vaulted cellar,
is thought to be the work of Robert de Crevecœur, who founded Leeds
Priory in 1119, and afterwards removed three canons into the chapel
of his castle. A later Robert shared in the defeat of Lewes, and
was in consequence obliged to yield up Leeds in exchange with Roger
de Leyburn, a powerful Kentish baron, father of that William whose
unscrupulous boldness is well described in the Roll of Caerlaverock,
which designates him as “A valiant man, without ‘but’ or ‘if.’”
Out of the disputes between the dispossessed and the dispossessor
Edward seems to have established a title by the strong hand. He gave
to the fief the character of a royal manor, was a frequent visitor at
the castle, and appears to have completely remodelled the fortress of
the Crevecœurs, giving it the aspect which in many points it presents
at this day. By Edward it was settled upon the queen, part of whose
funeral charges were incurred here in 1291. Here also the king founded
a chantry in the castle chapel for her soul’s health, and it was about
this time that he caused the bath to be constructed.
Upon Edward’s second marriage Leeds was again settled upon his queen,
and for several reigns this continued with some exceptions to be the
practice. It was also much used for the reception of visitors of
distinction who rested here on their way from Dover to London.
In 1321 the king’s defences were put upon their trial. The castle seems
to have passed by an exchange to Bartholomew de Badlesmere, a great
lord, who in 1321 was away in the North plotting with other barons the
fall of Despenser, while his wife and children remained in the castle,
the Constable being a certain Walter Colepeper.
One night in midsummer, Queen Isabella, with a large retinue, presented
herself at the gates demanding hospitality. The Constable, dreading her
designs, boldly refused it. “Nor queen, nor any other, should enter
without his lord’s order.” The “She-wolf of France” ordered an instant
attack, in which several of her people were killed, whose skeletons,
bearing marks of violence, have recently been discovered before the
barbican. The attack failed, and her Grace had to lodge as best she
might outside. Of course, this event had its consequences. The king
proclaimed a levy _en masse_ through four counties and raised besides
the “posse comitatus” of Kent. The muster place was Leeds Castle, the
day the 23rd of October. Thither at the appointed time came the king
and his brother and a large force, the command of which was given
to Aymer de Valence, who pressed the siege vigorously. Badlesmere
attempted a diversion, also by the display of a force, much inferior,
however, in numbers, at Kingston, where he was on the 28th of October.
All attempts at a negotiation between Badlesmere and the king failed.
The castle held out till the 1st of November, when this, its only known
siege, ended in a surrender, apparently to the king in person. The
brave Constable and twelve others were hanged, and Lady Badlesmere and
her family committed to the Tower. It was thought that the execution
of Badlesmere himself, when taken afterwards at Boroughbridge, was
partly in revenge for his having, in writing, sanctioned Colepeper’s
resistance.
Edward, having thus recovered the castle, was frequently there, his
last visit being on the 15th of June, 1326.
Edward III. settled the castle upon his queen, and it was placed with
other royal buildings under the surveyorship of William of Wykeham, who
in 1359 seems to have laid out £16. 6s. 8d. upon it, of which sum £5
went to replace glass windows blown in by a hurricane, 24s. to repair
Aymer de Valence’s injuries to the bridge, and 70s. was spent upon the
old chapel. In 1367 occurs a curious charge for habergeons, basnets,
and other harness for a body of archers, for materials for making
armour, and for the carriage of two beds from Leeds to Canterbury
for the use of the Count of Flanders, and of six to Leeds from
Sittingbourne. The castle cannot boast of any attentions from Edward
III. in person.
Leeds formed a part of the settlement of Anne of Bohemia, the queen of
Richard II., who was himself much here. A list of the military stores
of the place in 1385 is preserved, and includes the following curious
items relating to the defences of the great gate or barbican:—“Duas
portas nudas vocatas portes colys, et viginti pikes cum viginti platis
de ferro, quatuordecem platas de ferro longas, viij platas de ferro
curtas, centum sexaginta et quinque clavos de ferro pro eisdem portis
dictis portes colys novo ferrando, unum circulum ferreum pro barreris
juxta molendinum, unum magnum crowe, unum parvum crowe de ferro, unum
magnum slegge, unum parvum slegge, unam magnam cathenam, unam parvam
cathenam, sex forcipes, unum vertinuel, sex vyles, unum cable, unum
nayltol,” etc. The “nudæ portæ” were, of course, open timber gratings
upon which the iron was to be plated. The barriers near the mill show
them to have been in advance of the centre entrance, and the crows,
sledge hammers, chains, and files would all be necessary for the
setting up of portcullis or drawbridge.
Ten years later, 15th of July, 1395, Richard from hence despatched the
proxies who were to plight his troth to the French king’s daughter,
and at the same time received a visit from Froissart, who was a great
favourite, and accompanied the king to Eltham, where he was to discuss
the French match with the magnates of the realm.
It was also at Leeds, and at the same time, that Richard signed two
mandates, one for the expulsion of the Lollards from Oxford, and the
other directing the University to sit in judgment upon the “Trialogus”
of Wycliffe. Leeds was also one of the places to which Richard was
carried after his deposition.
Henry IV. was at Leeds in 1401, but he seems to have granted the
castle to Archbishop Arundel, who thence followed up Richard’s edicts
against the new heresy, by citing in 1413 Sir John Oldcastle to appear
before him in “the greater chapel of Leeds Castle,” where also, on his
non-appearance, he passed upon him for contumacy the sentence which led
to his martyrdom in the following reign.
In that reign, 4 Henry V., 1416, Leeds gave hospitality to the Emperor
Sigismund on his return from London to Dover, when its resources must
have been taxed to house the very splendid retinue provided for him.
Two years later a royal but enforced visitor here was Joan, mother of
the Duke of Brittany and stepmother to the king. Her stay at this time
as a prisoner was short, but she resided here after her liberation in
the next reign.
On the accession of Henry VI., Katherine of Valois was put in
possession of Leeds, but Henry was there in 1436–1438, and ordered
certain repairs to the roof of the keep. In 1441, Duchess Eleanor of
Gloucester was tried for sorcery in the chapel by Archbishop Chichele.
Under Edward IV. Leeds ceased to be assigned to the queen consort, and
remained vested in the king, but the castle was no longer visited by
royalty, and seems to have been allowed to fall into decay until the
reign of Henry VIII., under whom Sir Henry Guildford resided here, and
seems to have made considerable alterations, especially in the keep.
Edward VI. alienated Leeds from the Crown in favour of Sir Anthony St.
Leger about 1550, whose descendants, after 1618, sold it to Richard
Smith of the Strangford ancestry, whose heir, after 1631, resold it
to Thomas Colepeper of the family of the former constable. The Smith
occupation was marked by the construction of a handsome Elizabethan
mansion at the north end of the larger island. The Colepepers, created
barons in 1644, farmed the castle, in 1655, to the Government for the
safe keeping of about 600 French and Dutch prisoners, under the general
charge of John Evelyn, who records himself to have “flowed the dry
moat, made a new drawbridge, and brought spring water into the court of
the castle to an old fountain.” The prisoners, however, much damaged
the building and set fire to part of the keep.
The Colepeper heiress carried the estate to her husband Thomas, fifth
Lord Fairfax. Robert, the seventh lord, repaired the dwelling-house and
laid out the park, and here, in 1778, entertained George III. and his
queen, the latest of very many royal visits to the place.
Lord Fairfax left the castle to his sister’s son, Dr. Martin, known
later as Dr. Fairfax, who died 1800, and was succeeded by his brother,
General Martin, on whose death, in 1821, it descended to Fiennes
Wykeham, representative of the younger branch of the Wykehams of
Swalcliff, where they held lands as early as the Domesday Survey, and
whose son, Charles Wykeham Martin, was the author of the history of the
castle.
LEICESTER CASTLE.
The town of Leicester stands upon moderately high ground, and on its
western side is divided by a narrow valley from the opposite elevations
of Glenfield and Braunstone. This valley gives passage to the Soar,
the river of the county, which, flowing northwards, meanders through
the meadows of the Abbey of St. Mary de Pratis, and thus, before
agriculture had drained these lands, securely covered the western and
northern, and, to a certain extent, the southern fronts of this very
ancient and once well-fortified place.
Down the western valley, but outside the stream, and along the edge of
the higher ground, was carried the Fossway, which thus, on its passage
from Bennones or High Cross towards Lincoln, left the old Roman “Ratæ
Coritanorum,” known to us as Leicester, about a furlong to its east.
Whether Ratæ be an original Roman, or a Latinised British name, is
uncertain. Ratcliffe and Ratby occur in the district, and at the latter
is a large camp of doubtful origin. Upon the language to which “Rat”
belongs, depends the question of the British origin of the town.