barbican, terminating its wall and resting upon the counterscarp of the
main ditch. It is of rude construction, composed of two solid masses
or cheeks of wall, 46 feet long and 9 feet thick, rounded at the outer
end. Most of the northern wall is gone, and with it the roof or vault
of the entrance passage, and the details of the gateway. This sort of
entrance between the high and long walls is found at Conisborough and
Berkhampstead. The other or inner end of the barbican wall, at the
south-west corner, ends abruptly, and probably descended a little way
down the counterscarp of the main ditch, so as to prevent an entrance.
In the wall is a recess 6 feet 4 inches broad and 3 feet deep, which
may have been a public garderobe, similar to that in the wall of the
middle ward of Corfe Castle.
The lesser barbican covers the south entrance, the way to which does
not, however, appear to have lain across it. It is of earth only,—that
is, has no walls, but is of great strength; in shape, and, indeed, in
function, it is a lunette. Its diameter, in the direction from the
gate outwards, is 20 yards, and its breadth 100 yards. It rests upon
the counterscarp of the main ditch, here about 20 yards broad. It has,
also, on its front and sides, a ditch of its own about 20 yards broad,
and communicating with the main ditch. In parts this work seems to
have been revetted. It was connected with the main work or body of the
castle by a narrow bridge, which sprang from its eastern angle, and
of which traces remain. There does not appear to have been any outer
gatehouse at this end; probably the approach was by a boat across the
ditch, or by a plank bridge upon trestles.
Besides the above-described works there is another and much larger,
though less strong, earthwork, which covers the whole east face of
the castle, as well as the flanks of its barbicans. It is about 30
yards broad, and outside the main ditch, on which it rests, and upon
the ditches of the barbicans. It had also, towards the field, a ditch
of its own, now converted into a hollow road. The approach to either
gate of the castle, from the east, lay across this outwork, which was
probably stoutly palisaded, and intended to give a moderately safe
refuge to the peasantry and their cattle, during invasions from the
Welsh.
It is evident from the general design, position, and capacity of
this castle, that it was not intended, like Caerphilly, for the
accommodation of a great military baron, nor like Morlais or Castell
Coch for a mere military port. Its central part is nothing but a
fortified area, like Framlingham, at which place, however, there seems
to have been, as at St. Briavels, a keep. Here certainly there was
none. It is and always was a mere shell, composed of a strong and lofty
curtain, mural towers, and a gatehouse. There do not appear to have
been any of the usual buildings contained within a large castle. The
accommodation within the walls seems to have consisted in timber-sheds,
resting on stone foundations, and built against the walls. In this way
a very large number of soldiers might have been accommodated.
Moreover, the capacity for lodging a large body of troops was not
confined to the inner ward. The outworks are also spacious and strong,
and could contain a small army, or the _élite_, or perhaps the cavalry,
of a large one, besides affording accommodation for a considerable herd
and flock of cattle and sheep. Such a place would be secure against
any ordinary inroad of the Welsh, and supported, as it would be, by
the equally strong, though less capacious, castles of Grosmount and
Skenfrith, not to mention Chepstow and Caerleon, which were not always
in friendly hands, not only would the entrance of a Welsh army into
Gwent be difficult, but its retreat, once within the line, would be
almost impossible.
As to the age of White Castle, it is difficult to speak positively.
The earthworks are not at all of an English, still less of a Welsh,
character. Nor, as a general rule, did the Normans ever throw up
earthworks on so immense a scale. The masonry is probably of the age
of John, or, perhaps, even of that of Henry III., contemporary with
Skenfrith, or perhaps a trifle later, and the earthworks may be of the
same date. They are certainly designed to suit a castle in masonry,
not the mere palisaded residence of a Mercian Thane. They do not at
all resemble the earthworks connected with Offa’s Dyke, or those known
to be the work of Æthelflæd or Eadweard. On the whole, it seems more
probable that, looking to the extreme importance of the position, the
early Norman invaders exceeded the usual character of their earthworks,
and designed and executed those which are still seen.
The name White Castle,—in Welsh, “Castell Gwyn,”—is said to be derived
from Gwyn ap Gwaethvoed, a brother of the reputed founder of Skenfrith,
and one of the Welsh lords of this district. If so, he must have held
it during the troubles preceding and subsequent to the death of Harold,
but any works that he may have found or thrown up were probably effaced
by those of the present castle. The castle was held, with those of
Grosmount and Skenfrith, sometimes by the De Breose family, sometimes
by the Crown, and, finally, by the Dukes of Lancaster. No doubt it
shared in the general neglect of the Border castles; that is, of such
as were not the seat of any baronial family. In the time of James I. it
was a ruin, and had been so beyond the memory of man.
WHITTINGTON, SHROPSHIRE.
Among the baronial families which rose upon the ruins of the house of
Montgomery, and wielded the fragments of that power, which, united
in the hands of Earl Roger and Robert de Belesme, had proved so
formidable, the lords of Clun, Oswaldestre, and Whittington, De Say,
Fitz-Alan, and Fitz-Warine occupied, in the northern parts of the great
earldom, and upon the borders of Wales, by much the chief place. De
Say indeed, speedily, by an heiress, became absorbed in Fitz-Alan,
and probably in the same convenient way, “Felix Austria nube,” the
broad lands of Peverel, merged in Fitz-Warine, so that the lords of
Oswaldestre and Whittington held about co-equal rule in the Marches,
and were alike exposed alternately to the encroachments of their
sovereign on the one hand, and to the fiery assaults of the Welsh on
the other—dangers which probably prevented them from turning their arms
against one another, so that they remained vigorous and warlike for
above two centuries, although the battlements of their castles were
plainly visible, the one from the other, and scarce two miles apart.
The position of Oswaldestre has already been described. Whittington
lay about two miles to the north-east, and about four and a half
miles within or to the east of Offa’s Dyke, while Watt’s Dyke
extended between them. The site of Whittington was probably selected
as the centre of a fertile estate, rather than for any very striking
military advantages, for the position is low and marshy—a feature of
which, however, the ancient engineer largely and judiciously availed
himself. By whom or when the original fortress was founded is utterly
unknown. Certainly long before its occupation by those Norman invaders,
who identified it with their fame. As, like Shrewsbury, Clun, and
Oswaldestre, its keep was placed upon a moated mound, its origin, like
theirs, may probably be attributed to the reign of Edward the Elder,
or the earlier part of the tenth century, and to the fierce Mercian
Saxons, who, as early as the middle of the seventh century, seem to
have established themselves along the Welsh border.
The central mound, which is the main feature of these and many ninth
and tenth century fortresses, is here wholly artificial, about 30 feet
in height, and about 150 feet by 100 feet diameter upon its rounded and
table summit. At the foot of the mound is a ditch, from 40 feet to 60
feet in breadth, and beyond this are three elevated platforms, as was
not unusual. Of these, the first lies towards the north and east, and
is also moated. Across it lay the principal entrance from the outer
road, and to the keep. On the west side is a second platform, also
moated, and in strength rivalling the keep mound itself. The third
platform, far superior to these in area, and also moated, is placed
beyond them, towards the north-west.
The cluster of four islands, thus protected from the exterior and from
each other, is covered to the south and west by three banks and three
ditches, arranged concentrically, and including within their sweep
about one-third of a great circle of eight hundred yards radius, within
which figure, roughly triangular, is contained the castle. The defence
upon the north and east was formed, not by banks and ditches, but by a
broad expanse of what is still marshy ground, and must formerly have
been an impassable morass. This tract was flooded by a small but rapid
brook, which descends from the north-west, skirts the ends of the
ditches of the castle, and supplied them also with water. At present
the brook skirts the south edge of the old morass, and, running in
front of the outer entrance, turns off to the south-east, probably
again communicating with the ditches of the castle at their other or
eastern end. The earthworks thus described, palisaded or even planted
with a stout thorn hedge along the outer banks, would possess great
strength. The ditches, probably, all contained water, and with the
marsh would be only the more impassable were the water drained off and
its area replaced by mud. What the Norman baron who obtained the estate
found or supplied in the way of defences cannot now be ascertained. Of
the masonry now remaining there is nothing which can be regarded as
earlier than the reign of Henry III. This could scarcely have been the
first masonry employed in the defences; and yet if walls and towers
were built in the reigns of Henry II. and John, they would assuredly
have been of a substantial and marked character, and would scarcely
have been removed either by time or the hand of man in the lapse of a
century or a century and a half.
[Illustration: WHITTINGTON CASTLE—GROUND PLAN.]
The central mound has been scarped vertically, probably in the time of
Henry III., and is included within a revetment wall of great strength,
and about 30 feet high. This seems to have been surmounted by a
parapet, and to have been reinforced by a number of flanking towers,
of which one and a part of two others remain. The most perfect is
cylindrical, about 30 feet in diameter, with walls 10 feet thick. Its
base is occupied by a circular pit, probably a dungeon; and, if so, a
gloomy and damp one, not having a single loop or air-hole. The floor is
a foot or two above the bottom level of the ditch, and the platform of
timber covering it, the floor of the first story, was on a level with
the top of the mound. This stage had two loops, cruciform, with the
lower limb very long, and terminating in a dovetail. They are placed in
large recesses, low-pointed. There was an upper floor, of which only
fragments remain. The pit was probably reached by a ladder, for a door,
seen in its base to the east, is an insertion. The first-floor door is
represented by a breach on the south-west side. This tower flanked the
inner gateway of the keep. Of the corresponding tower, to the west, a
portion only remains. It was of the same size and shape, and between
the two was a space of 12 feet, occupied by the gateway and drawbridge,
of which the pit remains.
A fragment of the base of a similar tower is seen at the south-west
angle of the mound, and there were two, or perhaps three more, to the
south-east and north-east; but this part of the work is concealed by
loose earth and thick vegetation. Altogether, it appears that the
keep was a mound, scarped or faced by a strong revetment wall, in a
polygonal form, and capping each angle was a lofty round tower, rising
out of the ditch. There is said to be a well in the south-west corner,
but it is not now visible. From the inner gatehouse a bridge crossed
the inner ditch, and landed upon the opposite bank, a few yards in
the rear, or west of the outer gatehouse. This was a rectangular
structure, having at its eastern or outer end two three-quarter drum
towers, corresponding in size and workmanship with those flanking the
inner, as do these the outer gateway. They are looped with cruciform
and dove-tailed loops, and between them is a depressed pointed arch
of plain pattern, chamfered, and with an exterior roll moulding.
There is said to be an escutcheon in the wall above the gateway; but
if so, it is concealed by ivy. Above is a corbel table, pierced with
machicolations. The half of this gatehouse, south of the entrance
passage, is tolerably perfect. It contains a chamber in the south
wall, in which is a window of three lights, acutely pointed, under an
acutely pointed head. The heads of the lights are cinquefoiled, and the
apertures in the head quatrefoiled, the whole being late Decorated.
This window is said to have been removed from the old parish church
when “restored.” The northern half of the gatehouse is nearly all
destroyed. There remains part of a curtain wall, passing southwards
from the gatehouse to the edge of the ditch. A similar wall on the
north side passes backwards along the edge of the ditch, and upon it
are the remains of two round towers, connected with the gatehouse. What
masonry remains is composed of large square blocks of red sandstone.
The whole of the older part seems of the reign of Henry III., and is,
no doubt, Fitz-Warine work. There is little or no trace of masonry on
the several platforms or banks, save that on one bank to the south-west
is a mark of a revetment wall which may or may not be old. Probably the
masonry was confined to the keep and barbican-like platform occupied by
the outer gatehouse, which would include an area for a very sufficient
garrison. The banks, like those at Berkhampstead, are narrow, and would
scarcely have carried a wall. The ditches were all filled from the
brook, with which they communicated at each end.
The castle seems to have been laid out as a fancy garden a century or
so ago, as there are traces of pebble-laid walks, and here and there
modern brickwork. The church has been rebuilt early in the present
century, and is altogether what might be expected. Recently some arches
have been inserted in better taste in the Norman style. Mr. Lloyd, of
Aston, is the lord of the manor and owner of the castle.
Whittington occurs in Domesday as “Wititone,” when Earl Roger de
Montgomery held it, with seven and a half berewicks. King Edward had
held it, but in his time it was waste. Ethelred, Edward’s father, had
held it as three manors, which seem to have been Maesbury, Whittington,
and Chirbury. In Earl Roger’s time it yielded £15. 15s. The berewicks
are the later townships, comprising those of Welsh Frankton, Berghill,
Daywell, Fernhill, Hindford, Henlle, Ebnall, and half of Old Marton.
From Earl Roger, Whittington descended to Robert de Belesme, and,
on his forfeiture, passed to Henry I., who seems to have granted it
to William Peverel of Dover, whose nephew, William Peverel, held it
against Stephen in 1138. The second Peverel died childless. The last
one of his co-heirs married Guarin de Metz, sheriff of Salop, in 1083,
but the king seems to have resumed possession of the castle, and to
have granted it, in 1164, to Geoffrey de Vere, who married Isabel de
Say of Clun. Next year, 1165, Henry resumed it, and granted it to Roger
de Powys, a Welshman, who held office in South Wales. He was also
custos of the Fitz-Alan Castle of “Dernio,” which Mr. Eyton takes to be
Edeyrneon Castle, in Merioneth. In 1173 Roger was allowed aid for its
repairs. Meredith, son of Roger, succeeded, and was followed by Meyric,
Meredith’s brother, who died about 1200. He was called Meyric de Powys
of Wales, and paid fifty marcs to King John to have Whittington and
Overton. The Powys tenure was that of “king’s messenger in Wales.”
The Fitz-Warines seem always to have kept alive their claim from their
ancestor Guarin, though Wrenoc, son of Meyric, succeeded, and paid
eighty marcs to John for the villages and castles of Whittington and
Overton, but Fulk Fitz-Warine seems to have obtained the castle from
the Prince of Wales, which John at first resented, but finally, in
1204, confirmed to Fulk, as his “right and heritage,” when he paid
200 marcs and two “destriers,” and gained a judicial decision in
his favour. 5 Henry III. he had licence to fortify the castle. The
Fitz-Warines continued to hold the castle and manor until the failure
of their elder male line, by the death of Fulk, the eleventh lord, in
1420. The Hospitallers held a manor in Whittington by the service of
finding a chaplain for the chapel of the castle.
A little before 7 Henry III., Prince Llewelyn laid siege to the castle,
and it sustained a severe attack from the Welsh on the Friday preceding
Midsummer, 6 Henry IV. It appeared, from an inquiry dated 1 Henry V.,
that Richard II. had granted the castle, pending the minority of Fulk
Fitz-Warine, to Yvion Fitz-Warine, who sold the wardship to Elizabeth,
Lady Botreaux, a daughter of Sir Ralph d’Aubigny, and she held it when
attacked. Probably she expected the attack to be repeated, for, on the
Sunday after Midsummer, Thomas, Earl of Arundel, with soldiers from
Oswaldestre, took charge. Elizabeth resigned her wardship to William de
Clinton and Anne, his wife, and her daughter.
It is much to be desired that some person resident in this most
interesting district would take up the subject of its earthworks, of
which there are many of all ages, and some not set down in the Ordnance
map. Many of the earthworks are so placed, with regard to Offa’s and
Watt’s Dykes, as to show whether they are of earlier date or subsequent
to those lines.
Among the most curious of these earthworks is one within the domain
of Porkington, and which bears its ancient name of Brogyntyn. It is
a regular circle, 50 yards or so across, contained within a bank of
earth, about 4 feet to 6 feet high, outside of which is a ditch. The
central area has been levelled for a bowling-green, but was, no doubt,
always flat, and although a drift has been driven across and below the
circle, and the ditch is planted and contains a modern walk, there is
no reason to suppose that the character of the work has been materially
altered. In Ireland it would be called a rath; but in Ireland it would
not crown a rather steep eminence, but be placed in the midst of land
that might readily be cultivated, which this could not. It is pretty
clear that its figure is intentionally and not incidentally a circle,
by no means often the case with Welsh camps.
WIGMORE, HEREFORDSHIRE.
The Castle of Wigmore, the head of the Hundred and Honour of that
name, the chief seat of the great House of Mortimer, and the centre
of that territorial power which made its lords so formidable to their
sovereigns, and at last brought about their fall, stands in the
north-west corner of the border shire of Hereford, and about eight
miles on the English side of Offa’s Dyke. It is one of a chain of
strongholds of which Clun, Hopton, and Brampton Bryan, lay to its
immediate north, and Lingen and Lyons Hall to its south; while in its
rear were posted Croft and Richard’s Castle, assuring to its garrison
a speedy communication with the great central fortresses of Ludlow and
Shrewsbury.
Most of these castles are of ancient date, and their earthworks testify
to the intensity and permanence of the struggle maintained by the Welsh
against the encroachments of the colony planted by the English in the
latter part of the eighth century, and protected by the mighty work
which still bears the name of Offa. These traces of the footsteps of
the invader from beyond the Severn may still be observed along the
frontier marches of the Principality from Cardiff to Hawarden, posted
wherever the valleys laid open the interior of the country; nor along
the whole line is there a grander or stronger military work than that
for which Wigmore was celebrated long before the Normans crossed the
Channel.
But the military virtues, if not triumphs, of the Welsh, identified
with this district, ascend to a period before even the common
ancestors of Englishmen and Normans appeared in Britain, and were
exercised, though equally in vain, against even a greater foe. The
great British hill camps of Coxwall-Knoll, Caer Caradoc, Brandon, and
Croft-Ambrey, are thought to be evidences of the fierce struggles
of the Britons against the Roman legions, though with how little
ultimate success against either Roman or Englishman, the parallel lines
of Watling-street and the Dyke still give silent but overpowering
testimony.
Wigmore, an English creation, bears an English name. It is first
mentioned in A.D. 921, when the Saxon Chronicle relates that King
Eadweard, in the Rogation days, that is about the 7th of May,
“commanded the burh at Wisingamere to be built.” That this command was
very rapidly as well as very completely obeyed, is clear from the fact,
stated by the same authority, that, in the same year, probably at the
commencement of autumn, the Danes with a great army laid siege to the
new burh, “beset it round about, and fought against it far in the day,
and took the cattle about it; and, nevertheless, the men defended the
burh who were therein, and then they (the Danes) abandoned the burh
and went away.” A strong place which was constructed in five months
could not have been a work in masonry, and scarcely in dry walling;
but with a proper force of men the earthworks of the mound and inner
area might have been executed in that time. But earthworks alone would
not have held an army of active Danes at bay. The slopes must have
been strengthened with palisades, so as to protect the garrison and
enable them to keep the enemy at a moderate distance. Fire was scarcely
practicable, as the wood employed must have been green. Moreover,
however hard Edward’s soldiers may have worked, it is scarcely probable
that they could have done more than throw up the burh proper, or mound,
and the banks containing the smaller area attached to it, or have
prepared palisades for a larger front, even if formed. We are told
that when Queen Æthelflæd’s warriors, in A.D. 916, took Brecenanmere,
or Brecknock, by storm, they captured there the king’s wife, with
thirty-four persons. The Burh of Brecknock, therefore, held probably
but a small garrison: and its mound and inner circle, the parts, no
doubt, then defended, are not, in point of size, greater than those of
Wigmore, for which certainly one hundred and fifty to two hundred men
would form, for a short time, a sufficient garrison. It was, then, to
the passive strength of this position, and to its narrow front, that
they owed their safety. The cattle taken probably pastured at the foot
of the mound and upper area, within what is now the lower ward of the
Castle, then, no doubt, but slightly protected.
Of the Lords of Wigmore during the century following the Danish attack,
nothing is recorded, but the castle is named in Domesday, Ralph de
Mortimer then held Wighemore. Edward had held it. There was half a hyde
there, within which was the castle. Ralph held the castle. William the
Earl (of Hereford) made it on the waste land called Merestun, which
Gunnent held in the time of King Edward. There were two hydes geldable.
Ralph had in demesne two plough-lands and four serfs. The burh there
paid seven pounds. No doubt the earlier castle had been destroyed, that
is, the destructible part of it, and William Fitz Osbern had restored
it. That earl had been active in subduing the Welsh insurrection of
1068–9, and in reward for the services of Ralph de Mortimer on this
occasion, and in putting down Edric the Forester, he had the grant
recorded in Domesday. Dugdale says that he actually besieged Edric in
the castle and took it, and thus laid the foundation of the greatness
of his family as Lords of the March; but though Ralph de Mortimer put
down Edric, there is no evidence that the latter ever owned or held out
Wigmore.