constructed the Norman castle. William was here in 1086 in person,
and at Lammastide met his Witan in the celebrated gemote which has
been described in glowing terms by the great master of topographical
history. Here in the vast open plain about the fortress assembled a
host reputed at 60,000 men, composed of “all the landowners who were of
account over all England, be they the men of what man they might, and
they all submitted to him, and were his men, and swore to him oaths of
fealty, that they would be faithful to him against all other men”; an
oath by which the great king broke down the intermediate power of the
nobles, and with that sagacity which in him was intuitive avoided the
rock on which the two great monarchies of the Continent were destined
to make shipwreck.
We may suppose that during this meeting William dwelt on the central
mound, where no doubt the walls of the castle within rose at an equal
rate with those of the cathedral without. But whether he was harboured
in the unaltered English residence or in the rising Norman fortress,
whether the host was Edward de Sarisburie, the Sheriff of Wilts and a
great man in that county, and ancestor of the Earls of Salisbury, or
whether Bishop Osmund acted as the castellan, here William was present,
and here he transacted his first and most important business, face to
face with his new subjects.
William Rufus was here in 1096 to meet his Council, and decide upon
the celebrated wager of battle in which William, Earl of Eu, was
worsted and tortured to death. Henry I. was here in 1106 and 1116, when
his nobles swore to recognise Prince William as his successor. The
Pipe-roll of this reign, 1130–1, records a charge of 20s. “in ostio
faciendo ad cellarium turris Sarum,” so that the place was then in the
king’s hands.
Bishop Roger, who held the see from 1102 to 1139, and crowned the
mighty mound of the Devizes and the strong knoll of Sherborne with
their celebrated works in masonry, is likely enough to have completed
the inner shell above as well as the city wall below. He is further
said to have walled in the borough and extra-parochial district
outside the city, covering, with it, above 72 acres. He at first
supported Stephen, but had to surrender the castle, which was taken
and retaken, and finally much injured. Maud created Patrick, son of
Edward de Sarisburie, Earl of Salisbury, and probably invested him with
the government of the castle. He died 1167. In 1154, when the castle
was held by Henry II., it was in ruins. Henry, in the early years of
his reign, authorised payment (as appears in the Pipe-roll) for the
constable, porters, and watchmen of the castle, and for buildings at
the prison; and in 23 Henry II. £61 was spent in repairs there. In
1164–5, when the Liber Niger of the Exchequer was compiled, the bishop
was lord of the manor, and under him were thirty-three knights under
the old feoffment, and three under the new. Earl Patrick held two
knights’ fees, and a third by the tenure of guarding the castle.
So long as the bishops held the castle, either independently or for
the Crown, the position of the cathedral was sufficiently secure, but
when lay castellans took their place, and were men powerful enough to
ill-treat their neighbours, the clergy began to suffer, and to make the
most of the natural disadvantages of so high and exposed a situation.
They suffered “ob insolentiam militis et ob penuriam aquæ.” Peter of
Blois, himself a canon, says, “Est ibi defectus aquæ.” The wind was
high, water was dear, and the soldiery held the gates even of the city
ward, and went so far as to threaten the buildings from their ramparts
above, and even to shut out the ecclesiastics when returning in
procession to their homes. The church was “castro comitis vicina,” and
the vicinity was unpleasant.
Under Bishop Herbert le Poer, who succeeded in 1194, these disputes
reached their height, and he decided to remove the cathedral to a spot
of ground near the confluence of the Wily and the Nadder with the
Avon, rather above a mile distant. Merefield, a marshy spot but with
an excellent foundation, was granted by Richard I. for the site of the
new church. Bishop Herbert died in 1219, but his successor and natural
(germanus) brother, Richard le Poer, obtained from Honorius III. the
bull necessary for the translation, in which the causes for it are set
forth. They are the dangerous position, as regarded the castle, of the
houses of the clergy; the exposure, the wind being at times so high
that the clergy could not hear one another’s voices in the choir, and
which produced continual need for repairs; and finally the scarcity of
water, only to be obtained at a great cost and with the castellan’s
leave. This latter objection may have been exaggerated, for, besides
the well in the castle, there were, says Leland, four wells in the
outer ward, and at this time there are two not very deep wells in
gardens not very much below the cathedral level. No doubt, however, the
removal was called for:
Quid domini domus in castro, nisi fœderis arca
In templa Baalim? Carcer uterque locus.
Est ibi defectus aquæ, sed copia cretæ,
Sævit ibi ventus, sed philomela silet.
Early in 1219 the new cathedral was founded. It was forty years
building, and was consecrated in 1258.
Rex largitur opes, fere præsul opem, lapicidæ
Dant operam; tribus hic est opus, at stet opus.
And finally Henry III. in 1227, confirmed the “translatio de castro
nostro Saerisberiæ ad locum inferiorem,” and declared the city “quæ
dicitur nova Sarisbiria, sit libera civitas.” The city had thus
followed in the train of the cathedral. The taxation accounts of
the reigns of Richard and John show it to have been but moderately
populous, but it probably took some time to remove, for it was 44 Henry
III., 1260, before the new city was granted by the king to the bishop
“in capite,” as parcel of the temporalities of the see, the citizens
being the demesne men of the bishop.
All parties gained greatly by the change. The new church was
constructed at one period, and in a very pure style, and has ever
since been regarded as the pride of the Western counties. The citizens
exchanged an arid and stormy position for one sheltered and fertile,
watered by the confluence of three streams, and shaded by forest
trees of uncommon grandeur. The lords of the castle had no longer a
cause for their perpetual disputes with the clergy and the burghers,
and held their watch and ward undisturbed by chants and processions.
Circumstances, however, rendered the castle, as a military post, of
less importance than heretofore, and, though the powerful earls who
bore its title were even more distinguished than their predecessors,
their distinction was but little associated with their castle, which
fell gradually into disuse. The Montacutes, indeed, continued to
possess it, but the Nevills concentrated their power on the Midland and
Northern counties, and Warwick, Raby, and Middleham were to them what
Sarum had been to their precursors in the title. Finally, when arms
yielded to the gown, and the great minister of the great Queen chose,
under her successor, Salisbury for his title of honour, he had more
regard to the thriving city, or to the greatness attached to the name,
than to the ruined fortress, of which he was not even the possessor.
Considering the importance of the castle, and the power of those
who bore its name, it is surprising that so little should be known
of its history. Mr. Nichols, in an excellent paper printed in the
volume of the Archæological Institute for Salisbury in 1851, enters
upon the history of the earldom, and shows that, beginning with the
Conqueror’s sheriff, who must have taken his name from the place,
there was a second Edward de Salisbury, whose successor was Walter, a
baron under King Stephen, the father of Patrick, the first earl, whose
son, William, the second earl, was father of the celebrated Countess
Ela. All these lords seem to have held the castle under the Crown,
themselves appointing castellans.
Ela, the heiress of William of Salisbury, the second earl, laid the
fifth stone of the new cathedral. She married William with the Long
Sword, son of Henry II., who became earl in her right, and held the
castle. He was much abroad, and the castellan, his deputy, resided.
This officer, in King John’s time, was Robert de Vipont, and Irish
prisoners were kept here. In 1208 the Sheriff of Wilts was to repair
the bridge, the ditch, and the houses in the castle. In 1266 the king
addressed the earl as his brother on matters relating to the castle;
and in the reigns of Richard and John occasional payments were made
for repairs, and for the sustenance of the soldiery there. The king’s
houses in the castle are mentioned, and wine stored there is issued to
Gloucester and Bristol, treasure was sent thence to Southampton, and
plate to Westminster for the coronation. King John had a balistarius in
pay there at 9d. a day, 100 hogs were supplied to Vipont, and in 3 John
the earl gave thirty marcs to have the county, town, and custody of the
castle; and Walter, the son of Albreda, gave 76s. 8d. for the charge of
the prison. The earl (William) was then sheriff, and was allowed for
£29. 6s. 8d. spent by the king’s order in work at the castle.
Earl William died in the castle in 1226, when Ela, his widow, had
custody of it. Her son and grandson seem to have claimed, but never
to have obtained, the earldom, though, when the latter died in 1256,
his daughter Margaret, who married Henry de Lacy, Earl of Lincoln, was
known as Countess of Salisbury, probably on the death of Countess Ela
in 1261. In 39 Henry III., 1254, an Inquisition declares that no fiefs
are held by castle guard of the castle; and, in 52 Henry III., the
bridge within the castle was under repair, and that and the gate were
reparable by the Abbess of Shaftesbury. In 3 Edward I., the castle and
manor were in the Crown, and two years later mention is made of the
mill near the castle, no doubt the same that is entered in Domesday,
and still remains at Stratford.
In 5 Edward III., 1332, the king granted licence to the bishop, dean,
and chapter of Sarum to remove the walls of the cathedral and canonical
houses within his castle of Old Sarum, and to employ them in the
repairs of the church and close of New Sarum. No doubt, under this
licence the whole material was removed down to the ground level or even
below it, and probably the licence was held to include the outer wall
also. At the same time, the bishop, &c., had leave to rebuild a certain
chantry on a part of the old cathedral, and to use it.
In 1337 Edward’s son-in-law, William Montacute, was created Earl of
Salisbury, and 15 Edward III., 1341–2, an Inquisition was taken as to
whether the earls were seized in demesne as in fee of the castle and
vill of Old Sarum, and how they lost it. Probably this was connected
with a suit brought by Bishop Wyvil against the earl on a writ of
right as to his title to the castle. In this Inquisition we find the
seizure of the castle, &c., by King Henry III. from Earl William,
the son of the Countess Ela, thus described: “Et Juratores dicunt
quod tempore ipsius Willielmi junioris, propter diversas discenciones
motas inter Henricum Regem Anglie tercium proavum domini Regis nunc
et predictum Willielmum juniorem, maxime pro eo quod idem Willielmus
contra defensionem dicti Regis Henrici exivit regnum Anglie licencia
Domini Regis non optenta, Dominus Rex Henricus seisire fecit in manum
suam dicta castra villam et officium et ea in manum suam retinuit.” The
matter was at first to have been tried by battle, and each party named
a champion; but finally it was settled by a compromise, the bishop
paying 2,500 marcs, and the earl quitting the castle to the see for
ever. This probably severed the connection between the earls and the
earldom in the feudal sense.
When the castle proper was dismantled has not been discovered. The
views occasionally exhibited of it seem taken from the representation
of Sherborne upon Bishop Wyvil’s brass in the cathedral. In Leland’s
time the ruins were considerable; there was a lady chapel, part of the
old cathedral, the parish church of Holy Rood, and the remains of a
chapel over the east gate. Also in the east suburb, outside the gate,
stood a chapel, the remains of the parish church of St. John, and
dotted about were a sufficient number of wells of sweet water to throw
a doubt upon the validity of a part of the alleged grievance of the
ecclesiastics. Probably, as the new city expanded, the value of the old
material rose, and the destruction went forward with accelerated speed.
It seems probable that, with a very little labour, the foundations of
the inner ward could be cleared, and the well opened. It is also much
to be regretted that the outer ward should be under the plough. The
loss upon laying it down in turf would be trifling, and it is not too
late to preserve the remaining inequalities of the surface.
SCARBOROUGH CASTLE.
On the north-eastern shore of England, where the cliffs of Yorkshire
rear a bold though broken front towards the German Ocean, there is
seen, midway between the Tees and the Humber, or, more nearly, between
Whitby and Flamborough Head, a tall and rugged and almost isolated
headland of rock, which, from times beyond the records of history, has
borne the appropriate name of Scarborough. The scaur or rugged cliff,
the tall summit of which forms the natural burgh or strong place,
rises precipitately about 300 feet from the sea beach, and has on its
northern side the small bay of which Scalby-ness forms the opposite
horn, and to its south the deeper and more spacious inlet, on the
strand of which, under the protection of the scaur, is nestled the
ancient seaport town of Scarborough.
At no period when life and limb were valued and endangered could the
advantages of Scarborough as a place of dwelling or of refuge have been
overlooked. What art has executed at Flamborough, Nature, with a bolder
hand, has here provided. The bay gave facilities for fishing or for
pursuits connected with the sea, and the half-isolated cliff afforded
security from attack from any quarter. And yet there is no evidence
that Scarborough was regularly inhabited by either the original
Brigantes or their Roman invaders. The adjacent wolds are scarred
with traces of early contests, but are of too cold and too barren a
character to have supported any considerable population, or indeed any
population save a few shepherds. The vale of the Derwent, now rich
and fertile, was, in Roman times, a chain of impassable swamps and
morasses, flanked with dense and equally impenetrable forests. Neither
Holderness nor the south of Cleveland contain many Roman remains, nor
does there appear to have been any regular settlement by that people
between Delgovitia and Derventio (Millington and Stamford Bridge or New
Malton) and the eastern coast.
The tract between the Humber and the Whitby Esk was invaded in the
sixth century by a tribe of the Engles, who from invaders became
settlers, and, as was the manner of the Teutonic tribes, finally
consolidated themselves into a kingdom, the nucleus of the well-known
Deira. That they inhabited the coasts of Holderness and Cleveland, the
edges and valleys of the Wolds and of Pickering and the adjacent plain
of York, is a matter of history, and is shown by the names of their
settlements and the existing peculiarities of the speech of the people,
their descendants, and by the very marked Burh of Skipsea, which has
survived all its subsequent additions; but the rock of Scarborough,
though as strong and almost as grand a natural feature as Bamborough,
is not on record as a Deiran fortress, still less as a regal seat, nor
does it exhibit, nor indeed did it need, any of those remarkable and
well-defined earthworks which indicate the later Saxon residences. Its
first appearance in history, though late, is creditable. When, early in
1066, Harold Hardrada and his traitor ally Tostig wasted and pillaged
the earldom of Morkere, the men of Scarborough met the invaders in
arms, and made a brave, though fruitless, resistance.
Scarborough is not named in Domesday, though the soke of Walesgriff,
or Falsgrave, of which it seems to have formed a part, is therein
recorded, and then belonged to William de Perci, the lord of eighty-six
Yorkshire lordships, and the ancestor of that Agnes whose Louvaine
descendants assumed her family name. Percy, however, did not long
retain this manor, for Eudo of Champagne, kinsman, and by marriage
nephew to the conqueror, on the departure of Drogo le Brevere, the
reputed founder of the Norman works at Skipsea Castle, received from
William the land of Holderness, and with it, probably, the adjacent
manor of Falsgrave. Their son, Stephen, besides his paternal heritage
of Holderness, held maternally the Norman territory of Aumarle, or
Albemarle, from whence his mother Adeliza was styled “Comitissa de
Albamarla,” and Stephen, who died in 1127, bore the same title.
His son, William, the second earl, lord of Holderness and founder of
the Abbey of Meaux, took a very active part in English affairs, and
was in his time the most powerful baron in the north. He commanded at
the battle of the Standard in 1138, and received from King Stephen
what Dugdale calls the earldom of Yorkshire. He died in 1179, having
been a liberal benefactor to many Yorkshire religious houses, and
according to William of Newburgh, who wrote in about 1190, the builder
of Scarborough Castle. If this be so, it must have been when William
came into the earldom, that is, soon after 1127, for on the accession
of Henry II., in 1154, Scarborough was one of the castles selected
for demolition, and upon the earl’s resistance, Henry himself, after
a severe struggle, took possession of it, and, becoming acquainted
with the value of its position, instead of destroying, attached it
to the Crown. Taking all this into consideration, and having regard
to the material evidence afforded by the remains of the keep and the
older parts of the curtain, the most probable conclusion is that Earl
William’s fortress was of a temporary character, and the keep (arx
magna et præclara) and the older parts of the existing masonry are the
work of King Henry at a later period.
In the Pipe-roll of 4 Henry II. the sheriff of Yorkshire is allowed £4
for works on the castle of Scardeburc, and subsequently Henry granted
or confirmed a charter of incorporation to the town, for the farm of
which, 30 Henry II., an account was rendered by the sheriff. The town
continued to thrive, and from time to time contributed to the “dona
ad auxilium,” to talliage and scutage. King John paid four visits to
the castle in 1201, 1210, 1213, and 1216, remaining there altogether
about nine days. In 1202 and 1204 John de Builly was the constable, and
then and in 1213 military prisoners were kept there. In 1208 Builly
was superseded by Robert de Vaux, and he again in 1215 by Geoffrey de
Neville, the King’s Chamberlain, at which time sixty “servientes” and
ten “balistarii” seem to have constituted the garrison. That John kept
the castle in repair appears from frequent allowances for works. Wine
also was sent there from Portsmouth, and lead for covering a tower.
Payments occur for “servientes,” “balistarii” and others employed in
the castle. During John’s reign it appears that at one time William
de Duston was in charge, and had orders to receive William, Earl of
Albemarle, and his companions into the castle. This was William de
Fortibus, a Magna Charta baron, and Earl of Albemarle, in right of his
mother, Hawise, the daughter and heiress of Earl William le Gros.
Probably he took advantage of John’s difficulties to revive a claim
to the castle, which, however, he does not seem to have been able to
enforce. In 1215 Neville was again in office, and had an order for 100
marcs, “ad opus—ad castrum nostrum de Scardeburg’ muniendum.” John de
Neville, son of Geoffrey, took charge of the castle under Henry III. in
1225, and the fortress seems to have been kept in repair all through
that reign. In 1252 Henry granted to the town a permission for the
construction of a new pier.
The strong, and, on the whole, just government of Edward I. led to the
neglect of such of the castles of the kingdom as were not necessary
for the defence of a menaced frontier, and among them of Scarborough,
but under his son they became again of importance, and Scarborough
reappears in the public records. Edward II. was here in 1312, and left
the castle in charge of Gaveston while he proceeded to York. It was
attacked and taken by the Earl of Pembroke, not by assault, but by
starvation. In 1318 the town was burned by the Scots, but they do not
appear to have been able to take the castle. Sixty years later the town
was threatened by sea by a Scottish adventurer, who, however, failed
to take it, and was subsequently made prisoner. For the next three
centuries Scarborough Castle was left to fall into decay, or only so
far repaired as to be employed occasionally as a prison. In 1536, the
year of the Pilgrimage of Grace, Aske, who was a native of Aughton on
the Derwent, led his ill-disciplined followers against it, but without
success. A little later, in 1553, during Wyatt’s rebellion, it was
taken, probably by surprise, by the Earl of Stafford, but held for
three days only.
In the contest between Charles and the Parliament in the seventeenth
century, Scarborough, with many other Yorkshire castles, more or less
ruinous, was held for the king, and in July, 1645, the Parliamentary
forces laid siege to it in form. A battery was posted upon the roof
of the chancel of the ancient parish church, about 170 yards from the
outer gate of the castle, and a second to the north of it, upon the
edge of the cliff in front of the barbican. The castle was taken and
held for a short time, and in 1648, being again held for the king, it
was a second time attacked and taken, and shortly afterwards a mine
was sprung in the ground floor of the keep, laying open its eastern
side. Probably the forebuilding covering the entrance to the keep was
destroyed at the same time.
The town of Scarborough was walled from an early period. Leland
speaks of banks and ditches, and fragments of the walls, and mentions
its two gates, Newburgh and Aldburgh, or Anborough, one of which
remains. The town ditch extended from the castle barbican along the
high ground southwards, and upon it, 550 yards from the barbican, was
the Anborough gate. The town contained three friaries and one parish
church, dedicated to the Virgin, and belonging to the Cistertians. It
is a large building near the castle, of which the chancel, or lady
chapel, has remained in ruins ever since the first Parliamentary
siege. The platform occupied by the castle is extra parochial, usually
an ecclesiastical, not a military privilege.
THE CASTLE.