Bollers, probably a son or descendant of Baldwin, by his second
wife, and who had it in 1162. He was succeeded by Robert de Bollers,
1176–1203, who died childless, but left a widow, Hilaria Trusbut, who
had dower till 1241. The heir was Robert’s brother, Baldwin, 1203–7,
who also died childless, and whose widow, Wenllian Tet, had dower till
1243. This ended the male line.
The next heirs were the Fitz-Urses. Reginald, Becket’s murderer,
had a daughter and heiress, who married Robert, and had William de
Courtenay, Lord of Montgomery, who died 1214, childless, leaving Ada a
widow with dower, who died 1217. The next heir was the descendant of
Margery, sister of Reginald Fitz-Urse, who married Richard Engaine,
1177–85, and had Richard, 1185, father of Vitalis Engaine, 1217, who
claimed the Honour on the death of William de Courtenay, but only
obtained a portion of it. Thomas de Erdington was a rival and more
successful claimant. He held the castle, 1215–18, but much of the
Honour was granted, in 1216, to William de Cantilupe, with certain
reservations. In 1225 the king, who had all along treated the castle as
a royal fortress, claimed the Honour as an escheat, and the whole was
taken by the Crown, the dowers being allowed. Erdington, who had been
the custos of the king’s castles of Shrewsbury, Whitchurch, Shawardine,
Morton, Clun, Montgomery, Moreton, and other Shropshire strongholds,
was repaid the outlay he had made upon them. Some sort of castle
undoubtedly occupied the rock of Montgomery between 1102 and 1225,
and it is said to have been twice taken and destroyed by Llewelyn,
who, on the death of John, gained some advantages in Wales, and was
allowed the custody of all the land that had belonged to Gwenonwhyn
in “Wales and Mungumer,” of which he had been disseized during the
war between John and the Barons. This he was to hold till Gwenonwhyn
came of age. Probably the result was that when Henry entered he found
the rock laid bare, for, from that time the Sheriff’s accounts show
annual and very considerable payments for military works there for many
years, and we read of the king’s new castle of Montgomery. As early as
1225, when the Welsh war made the place of great importance, nearly
£1,000 is paid out; £1,100 in 1224; and above £500 in 1225. Master
carpenters are sent to construct defences of timber, _brétasches_, to
strengthen the castle, and miners or quarrymen from the Forest of Dean,
no doubt to prepare stone, and to hew out the cross ditches. A fit
chaplain is to be appointed to serve in the castle chapel, under the
parson of Montgomery, and the king is to decide about the emoluments
or “obventions” of the chantry. These were afterwards allotted to the
mother Church, that is to the parish church of Montgomery, which was
the mother church of the chapel; of the whole district Chirbury was
the mother church. To the parson was also given the corn tythe of the
land newly cultivated, of which he already had the small tythe. Sums of
money are also allowed for assisting in clearing the lands of underwood
and harbours for robbers; and on one occasion the king alludes to the
time “when we took in hand our castle of Montgomery.” Henry himself was
there in 1224, and all the masonry now standing is pretty evidently his
work, and of this period.
1223 was the year of Llewelyn’s submission, and Godescal de Maghelines
was castellan, and received drafts of miners and carpenters, and
quarrels from St. Briavel’s forges. Henry, the king’s brother, and
other knights, formed the garrison; and the chapel was in use.
In 1224 the king granted an annual fair in “our manor of Montgomery,”
and Hubert de Huse was coupled with Godescal as custodes of the castle,
honour, and vale of Montgomery, and soon after Baldwin de Hodnet
was seneschal, and William de Cantelupe had seizin of the fees of
the knights and free tenants annexed to the Honour. A fair was also
proclaimed to be held under the castle, and protections were granted to
those attending.
In 1227 Henry changed his policy, and granted the castle to Hubert
de Burgh, with 200 marcs yearly for its custody for life, and an
augmentation in war time, which speedily occurred; for in 1230,
Llewelyn, having hanged William de Braose, marched towards Montgomery,
the garrison of which suffered from an ambuscade near Kerry, whither
they had gone to cut down a large wood. The Welsh followed them to
the castle, and besieged it. Henry came to their relief. In 1233 de
Burgh lost Henry’s favour, and with it Montgomery, and a constable
was appointed by the king. A windmill was erected near the castle, to
grind for its use. In 1235, a tower beyond the castle wall had been
repaired, as had the town walls, for which nine wooden turrets were
provided. Wine and various stores were sent to the castle, which, in
1245, was attacked by the Welsh under David, and, notwithstanding
all the money so recently spent upon it, was found not to be in good
repair, as appears from an inquisition held upon it in 1249, which
specifies particularly the donjon or keep; the chamber and chapel;
the wooden turret or _brétasche_, and the bridge near the chapel; the
balister’s house; the wooden turret next the town; the stable; the
wooden turret beyond the outer gate; the grange and wall round it; the
pentiscie, pent-houses, or lean-to’s, carrying the woodwork belonging
to five wooden turrets; the small tower or garrit, outside the gate;
the “barrier” (jurullum) near the chapel; and the porter’s lodge. For
the repairs of these is wanted £59. 3s. 8d. At this time there is also
a water-mill connected with the castle, “Stanlawes Mill,” which only
worked in winter.
In 1254 Henry granted Montgomery to Prince Edward, who, with the
consent of the king and council, appointed a custos. In 1264, after
Lewes, Henry, then in durance, ordered Adam Fitz-Philip to surrender
the castle. Adam, however, refused, unless the order was backed by
Prince Edward. In 1267, 29th September, Henry was here, and received
Llewelyn’s homage, and recognised his principality, for which he was to
pay 30,000 marcs.
Edward I. let the castle in farm to Bogo de Knovill, for £40 per
annum, which rent was mostly expended upon the town defences, the
town being a royal borough, under a charter from Henry III., in 1227,
strengthened by one from Hubert de Burgh, by which leave was given to
enclose it within a wall and ditch, of which the four gates remained in
Leland’s days. In 1274 Prince Llewelyn was summoned to meet Edward’s
Commissioners at the ford of Montgomery, a favourite trysting-place in
that reign: but the Welsh prince did not attend.
[Illustration: MONTGOMERY CASTLE.]
The reduction of the principality by Edward I. necessarily destroyed
the value of the castles along the march, as bulwarks against the
Welsh, and the strong domestic government of that sovereign put an
end to the continued rebellions of the Marcher Barons. Under these
circumstances the border castles were either allowed to fall into
decay, or were employed only as county prisons. In any case they had
little or no military value; nor, with the exception of a few passages
in the reign of Edward II., and for a while, during the Glendower
rebellion, were they regarded as defensible or so employed. Long
afterwards, indeed, during the wars of Charles and his Parliament,
such of these castles as remained tolerably perfect were garrisoned,
defended, usually taken and retaken, and finally slighted or blown
up by the prevailing party. Montgomery seems to have had its share
of these misfortunes, and no doubt its walls and towers suffered;
but in all probability, here, as elsewhere, far more damage has been
done by the use of the ruins as a quarry in modern times of peace and
prosperity than by the violence attendant upon war. Here, as in most
other border castles, the military history of the building closes with
the reign of Edward I., up to which point, or nearly so, all that can
be said of the castelry, honour, and descent of the castle, has been
collected from the original records, combined, digested, and recorded
by Mr. Eyton, in his admirable “History of Salop.” For the later
history of the castle, may be read with advantage a paper by the Rev.
George Sanford, recently printed in the Montgomery Transactions.
The position of Montgomery Castle is formed by nature, and needed only
to be seen to be recognised as very suitable for a border fortress. A
narrow and lofty ridge of rock, lying nearly north and south, rises
abruptly between two valleys; that to the east very suitable for
the town which has sprung up within it; that to the west, narrower
and equally steep, but rising on its further side to far loftier
elevations, one of which is crowned by the encampment of Frydd-Faldwin,
and the other, rather lower and more to the south, is occupied by a
much smaller work of very different, and, probably, English type.
The ridge is in length about 500 yards, and that part of its summit
occupied by the castle and its works about 330 yards. Its greatest
breadth is about 60 yards, of which the castle may occupy about 40
yards. The ridge is reached from the south-east, or town quarter, by
a steep road, but towards the north it terminates in a sharp point,
whence a very steep slope falls to the top of a cliff of rock, the
whole height being perhaps 250 feet. The contiguous sides are also
very steep, so much so that a stone set rolling from the top does not
stop till it reaches the gardens and orchards 150 feet or more below.
The parish church stands within the town upon an eminence opposite to,
but lower than the castle. The view from the ridge extends over the
plain of the Severn to the Welsh mountains in one direction, and to the
Shropshire hills in the other. Below, in the direction of Chirbury,
Offa’s Dyke may be discerned about a mile distant, the castle being
upon its outer or Welsh side. The ridge is traversed by three ditches
quarried in the rock, and dividing it into four platforms, which
formed the four wards of the castle, each of which appears to have
been enclosed by walls or palisades, and connected with the others by
bridges of timber. The northern and strongest ward is also by some
feet the highest ward, and formed the donjon, or citadel; keep there
was certainly none. This ward was about 52 yards north and south, by
32 yards east and west. It is nearly rectangular, and its four faces
are scarped and revetted, that portion of the wall being about 15 feet
high. Upon this stood the curtain and the outer walls of the contained
buildings. A considerable building stood on the west face, along the
southern half of which a wall remains about 9 thick, which supported a
basement and two upper floors, of which holes for the joists are seen.
In the first floor is a recess with a window and two garderobes, with
shafts in the wall. The window was pointed, and that is all that can
be ascertained. In the upper floor is also a garderobe. Connected with
this fragment of wall is half a horseshoe tower, 30 feet in diameter,
projected 25 feet from the wall. This also had a basement, and two
upper floors, but little of it now remains. In the outer side of its
wall, to the north, are the remains of another garderobe shaft, and,
high up, part of a straight mural staircase. From hence, northwards, is
a mere curtain. On the three other faces only the revetment, or traces
of it, remain. A heap of rubbish at the south end may be the foundation
of the gatehouse. There is no trace of a well, hall, or chapel. The
only ashlar remaining is a sort of quoin in the substance of the great
wall, and in a window jamb in the horseshoe tower. The masonry is rude
but coursed rubble.
Between this and the third ward was a ditch about 20 yards broad,
dammed up at its lower or west end to form a pond, probably for
the benefit of the castle cattle. There is no trace of a bridge of
masonry here. The third ward is a regular oblong, carefully scarped,
and probably revetted all round. Only the eastern face is visible,
and there the wall is about 20 feet high, with the remains of three
half-round solid buttresses, 6 feet in diameter, and something like
traces of two more. There is no masonry above the surface of the
platform, which is about 40 yards north and south by 35 yards east and
west. A ditch of about 8 yards broad divided it from the second ward.
The second ward is roughly oval, about 50 yards long by 30 yards broad,
and its southern end is occupied by a rocky mound. There is no trace
of masonry connected with this ward, which may have been defended
with timber. The ditch dividing this from the first ward is not above
4 yards or 5 yards broad, and very irregular, the depression being
apparently in part natural.
The first ward is smaller than the rest, irregular and rocky. It bears
traces of dry walling, and upon its platform are the foundations of
a rectangular building, and at the south end of a sort of tower,
indicated only by a heap of earth. It may have been about 25 yards by
15 yards. It may be that the first and second wards were merely natural
platforms palisaded with timber _brétasches_, as they are called in the
close roll, but the third and fourth wards were certainly walled and
must have been strong. To the north, 20 feet to 30 feet beyond, below
the north ward, is a level triangular platform of turf about 60 yards
in the side, and protected by a light bank on which may have been a
fence. This platform, by nature so strong, was probably intended for a
pasture for cattle. At the other or south end is also a platform, 20
feet or 10 feet below the level of the first ward, and now occupied by
a cottage. Here was the entrance, which probably was covered by some
sort of tower, protected in advance by a palisade.
Scanty as are the remains of this castle, it may safely be concluded
that they present no masonry of Norman date, whether early or late.
The plan of the works is, of course, dictated by the natural outline
of the rock, and it therein resembles Bere, though that is a little
earlier than Henry III., and Dolforwyn, probably a work of that king’s
reign. Henry III.’s border castles had no keep. They were mostly mere
enclosures, the curtains being set rather thick with towers.
Altogether this castle, as it now stands, seems to be the new
castle referred to by Henry III., and built early in his reign, nor
is there any trace of any earlier work, although there is every
reason to believe that such there was, and that it or they stood on
this site. Moreover, as to these earlier works, tempting as is the
position, there is nothing in the way of earthwork upon it which can
be safely attributed either to the Welsh or the English. That Earl
Roger constructed a castle of some kind at or near the present site
is certain, and it is very improbable indeed that with a position so
convenient, and made so strong by nature, he should have selected any
other, nor is there in the immediate neighbourhood any trace of any
other work likely to have been constructed later than the Conquest.
It has been mentioned that the borough of Montgomery had licence, in
the reign of Henry III., to enclose the town within a wall and ditch,
and although gates and ditches do not necessarily imply the more
costly addition of a wall of masonry, it is certain that the town was
fortified, and Mr. Sandford’s view of 1610 shows a wall including an
area somewhat wider than the present town, and, what is very unusual,
this wall includes the castle, instead of the castle forming a part of
the circuit. No traces of any wall of masonry are known to exist, but
outside it, to the west, and at the foot of the slopes of the castle,
is a bank with a ditch, looking very much like a local dyke of the age
of that of Offa, but which is reputed to be what remains of the town
wall. The curious thing is that this dyke, which, while opposite to
the castle is commanded and therefore strengthened by the castle rock,
passes southwards along the steep slope of an opposite hill, and is
there commanded from the outside, and would be utterly untenable. This
is often the case with Offa’s dyke, which, though laid out with a bank
and outer ditch, was really rather a boundary than intended at every
point for defence. Its defence was obviously the general fear of the
Mercian power, rather than the apprehension of an armed force at every
point along its line. It may be that the town wall was placed upon this
bank, but the bank itself seems older and part of an earlier boundary.
For the plan and section of the castle and castle rock which accompany
this paper, and add materially to any little value that it may possess,
the author and his readers are indebted to the skill and kindness of
Mr. Mikleburgh, of Montgomery.
MORLAIS CASTLE, GLAMORGAN.
Upon the northern limits of the county of Glamorgan, and above the
eastern and lesser of the two sources of the Taff, stand the ruins
of the castle of Morlais, so called from a small brook which rises a
little to its north-east, and which, after receiving the Dowlais, flows
into the Taff, within the adjacent town of Merthyr.
The castle is placed upon the edge of a considerable platform of
mountain limestone rock, quarried extensively during the present
century for the neighbouring ironworks, and about 470 feet above
the Taff Vechan, which, descending through a steep and narrow gorge
of considerable beauty, the boundary of the ancient districts of
Brecheinioc and Morganwg, as of the modern counties of Brecknock and
Glamorgan, escapes below the castle, through the defile and over the
fall of Pont Sarn, to join the Taff a little above Merthyr.
The position, strong upon the north and west, is open upon the east
and south; thus, in its want of complete natural defences, resembling
in position the Norman castles rather than the Celtic or Saxon camps.
It commands an extensive view over much of the upper Taff, and of
the Merthyr basin, and was, on the whole, well placed to guard this
frontier of Glamorgan against the inland tribes, to give notice of
their approach to the garrisons of the plain, and to cut off any
spoilers who, having invaded the vale, might be returning by this route
to their native fastnesses.
The ancient trackway of Heol Adda, still a parish road, the shortest,
and within memory the ordinary, way from Gelligaer and Merthyr to
Brecon, passes about half a mile north-east of the castle, and was
completely commanded by it.
The ground-plan of Morlais is very simple. A court, of an irregular
oval shape, 140 yards north and south, by 60 yards east and west,
is enclosed within an embattled wall capped by five or six circular
towers, and encompassed on the north, east, and south sides by a moat,
discontinued on the west side, which was always steep, though
recently quarried into a cliff. The only remaining entrance to the
court is on the east side, through a narrow archway in the curtain,
which could only have admitted infantry, and which is approached by a
steep path and a causeway across the moat. A broader causeway across
the moat at its south end seems to have led to a larger gateway,
probably commanded by a tower, connected by a curtain with the main
wall; but this gateway, if it ever existed, is completely buried
beneath the ruins.
[Illustration: _Morlais Castle._
_J.T. Clark. delt_. _J H Le Keux Sc._]
The court seems to have been divided by a wall into a northern and
southern portion, in the latter of which is the well.
Proceeding to details, A is the southern or keep tower, of two
stories. The lower, a polygon of twelve sides, 28 feet in diameter,
has a central column, with corresponding facets, branching into
twelve fan-ribs, which, forming pointed arches, support the roof, and
terminate on the containing wall in as many pilasters. The ribs are
of limestone, but the upfilling of the vault is of a calcareous tufa,
light, and very strong, and found _in situ_ below a calcareous spring
on the Heol Adda road, towards Pont-Sticcill. The whole chamber, though
extremely elegant, is quite plain, the mouldings being a mere chamfer
with no other decoration. There are neither windows nor loops, and the
entrance is by an acute lancet-headed doorway, 5 feet wide by 13 feet
high, which occupies the northern facet, and is approached from the
court by a descending flight of steps. The upper chamber was probably
not vaulted. Like Castell Coch, it seems to have contained several
large fireplaces, as well as a garderobe chamber. It was approached by
a winding stair, which appears to have terminated below upon a sort of
drawbridge across the stairs leading to the crypt, and thus to have
communicated with the eastern walls by another stair, exterior to the
tower, and also leading to its battlements. In the curtain wall, close
north-east of the keep, is a singular cavity, the use of which, if one
it had, has not been discovered.
The opposite or northern tower, B, was of much less elaborate
construction. It appears to have been a mere shell, 37 feet in internal
diameter, of two stories, divided by a timber floor, entered below from
the court on the level, and above probably by a winding stair on its
north-east side, communicating also with the ramparts of the eastern
curtain.
The east entrance, I, 5 feet broad, which was provided with a
portcullis, and had a sharply-pointed arch, destroyed about twenty
years ago, is placed between two smaller drum-towers, C and D, about
16 feet in diameter, each with its subsidiary well-stair. The northern
tower, close to the door, completely commanded its exterior, and the
southern, at some distance from the door, but nearly opposite to the
causeway, K, commanded that passage, and the steep way up to the gate.
The western wall, probably 6 feet thick, was altogether weaker than
the eastern, which was about 12 feet, and instead of two, it seems to
have contained but one tower, a chamber of, or perhaps a drain from
which, still remains. South-west of the keep are two heaps of rubbish
which evidently indicate the position of two towers, one upon the
curtain, and the other some way in advance, which latter seems to have
terminated a sort of spur wall, projecting 60 feet from the curtain,
and intended to cover the principal entrance by the southern causeway.
The well, N, is a singular excavation, rough and unlined, 27 feet
square, and now about 44 feet deep. A few years ago it was partially
filled up, and it is said before that to have been 70 feet deep.
However this may be, it is certain that no water would be reached
here at less than 400 feet, a depth which was not likely to have been
attained. Close to the well, at O, is an oblong chamber, 44 feet by 24
feet, with broad steps, which appears to have been a tank, probably
for rain-water. Near this tank is an oval oven, 11 feet by 15 feet,
very perfect, and, singularly enough, formed of limestone. Near to
this are the foundations of the kitchen. The wall dividing the court
crossed just north of the well, opposite to which are traces of a large
bow, and east of this of a doorway. In the southern court, against
the east wall, were ranges, probably of barracks, roofed with shingle
or tile-stone, with leaden trimmings, the stones and lead having been
turned up in the ruins. Near the well is a large heap of mixed iron
slag, coal, charcoal, and clinker, probably from a smith’s forge, near
to which fragments of iron have been found. The heap is evidently old,
inasmuch as it contains crystals of selenite. It also contains chlorine
and sodium in various combinations, proving, or thought to prove, that
common salt has been used in the operations of the forge, or perhaps in
smelting the ore here.
The moat, which ranges from 14 yards to 40 yards from the walls, is
about 40 feet broad and 14 feet deep, and its total length is about 370
yards. It has been quarried out of the rock, and its contents no doubt
were used in building the castle, which is almost wholly of limestone.
In the moat, at Q, is a driftway, now much broken down, but which it is
just possible may have been a private passage into the court. The area
covered by the castle, measuring from the exterior edge of the moat, is
about four acres.