THE CASTELLATED MANSION AND MANOR-HOUSE
The reason for the disuse of castles is popularly attributed to the
invention of gunpowder, but the introduction of cannon can hardly be
accepted as entirely responsible for the decline, and we must therefore
seek for other reasons which, added to the first, eventually succeeded
in effecting their destruction and abandonment. The use of gunpowder was
introduced into England in the first half of the fourteenth century, the
first authentic date being 1327, when Edward III. employed it in his
campaign against the Scots. The first reference by Froissart is in 1339,
cannon being specifically mentioned, while at Cressy in 1346 there were
a number of those weapons in use. These early pieces were, however, of
small calibre and were provided with such indifferent powder that
against the walls of a castle they were practically innocuous, and it
was not until the invention of trunnions for cannon, and of bombards
capable of throwing heavy spherical shot in the fifteenth century, that
fortified places had anything to fear.
But long before 1327 the English castle had begun to show signs of
falling into abeyance, in fact but very few new structures of that class
were erected after the close of the thirteenth century, and those that
did spring into existence no longer exhibited the overwhelming strength
and powers of resistance which stamped the erections of the preceding
century. When prosecuting his war with France, Edward III., in 1337,
endeavoured to leave the Kingdom in as defensible a condition as
possible during his absence, and with that object in view ordered the
keepers of the Royal castles to put their respective charges into
first-class order. In spite of this a report upon their efficiency a few
years later revealed the fact that several were utterly unfit to
withstand a siege. In 1322, when the incensed Edward II. raised forces
to avenge the insult to his queen by Bartholomew de Badlesmere at Leeds
Castle, and quickly captured that place, Tickhill, Warwick, Tutbury, and
others, the ease with which they fell into his hands indubitably proves
that they were no longer in a thoroughly defensive condition. And this,
be it remembered, was before the introduction of gunpowder.
The economic conditions prevailing in the fourteenth century were also
in antagonism to the persistence and growth of castles in the land.
Military feudalism was in its death-throes, and the laws passed in the
reign of Edward I.--notably the statute of Quia Emptores--were
undoubtedly responsible for it. The barons no longer held the same
position as formerly when they dictated terms to their own sovereign,
and although a recrudescence of the power of the military nobility
occurred during the time of the Wars of the Roses, that struggle was in
reality but duels upon a large scale between a number of nobles who had
been successful in maintaining a semblance of their former power. The
Statute of Winchester gave almost unlimited rights to the King, whereby
he could summon the commons to arms if a baron proved recalcitrant. The
baronial castle necessarily became an anachronism to a large extent,
since its owner no longer had the power to fill it with numerous
retainers, and also because the King, by his overwhelming numbers,
could easily capture it.
The art of war had also changed consequent chiefly upon the
extraordinary efficiency displayed by the English archer, whereby he
became supreme upon the field of battle: the development of this superb
infantry was under the entire management of the Crown and, consequently,
the King became immeasurably superior in striking strength to any
individual baron. The advantage began to rest with him who could put the
most efficient battalions in the field, and not as formerly with the one
who owned the greatest number of castles. Combined with these conditions
there was the indubitable fact that a castle had acquired the reputation
of being connected with oppression of the people, resistance to lawful
power, and a refuge from justice for the wrongdoer. This was entirely
incompatible with the great reforms insisted upon by Edward I., and
passed into law by parliament; law and order became the rule and not the
exception, and the position of the castle grew anomalous.
[Illustration: SKIPTON CASTLE, YORKSHIRE.]
With the ascendancy of an efficient administration of justice came the
desire for comfort and a display of luxury, and probably no one who
has become acquainted with the internal disposition of an early castle
will qualify the assertion that the acme of discomfort and inconvenience
must have prevailed within them.
Consequent upon this alteration in the economic conditions of the
nation, the need for the impregnable stronghold of the past ages ceased
to exist, and in many parts of England, but more especially in the south
and east, the existing structures were largely altered or added to in
order to afford conditions suitable to the changed amenities of social
life. These alterations in nearly every case were made at the sacrifice
of efficiency, and many castles which had played a notable part in the
history of the nation became merely the residences of their lords, who
made no attempt to put them to their original uses in time of war.
Arundel, the great midland castles of Warwick, Kenilworth, and many
others, fall under this category.
So far as gunpowder is concerned the part which it played in causing the
abandonment of the feudal castle is strangely varied and dependent upon
local circumstances. A well-found castle with an efficient and adequate
garrison, supported by an army in active operation in the field, had no
more to fear from an attack in the fifteenth century than it had in the
thirteenth, perhaps not so much. Very few bombards of the period
mentioned could throw stone shot weighing over 150 lbs., whereas the
medieval trebuchet could hurl a missile of twice that weight, or even
more, and to almost as great a distance. The effect of low-trajectory
cannon upon castle walls in the fifteenth century under ordinary
conditions may almost be left out of consideration, so small was the
calibre. It is true that Sir Ralph Grey, when besieged in Bamborough
Castle in 1464, was forced to surrender in a short space of time by the
army of the Kingmaker, who used his basilisks, aspiks, serpentines,
dragons, syrens, and sakers with excellent effect; but we may justly
claim that this was an exception, the configuration of the ground
enabling Warwick to place his pieces close up to the walls, while Grey
could look for no effective relief from a sympathetic army outside. Ten
years afterwards the Castle of Harlech, under the able governance of
Davydd ap Ifan, held out against all the force that Edward IV. could
bring to bear upon it, and was the last of the castles garrisoned by
Lancastrians to render up its keys.
But perhaps the greatest argument against the belief that the "venomous
saltpetre" was the chief cause of the decline in castellation is that of
the gallant resistance made by many of these old strongholds in the
Great Civil War. At that time the newest of the castles was, perhaps,
about two hundred years old and had not been constructed entirely for
defence; the older structures were in many cases devoid of woodwork
which had perished through age and neglect. Yet these ancient buildings,
now once more called upon to play their part in deadly strife, in many
cases showed a resistance to attack which was simply marvellous,
sometimes, as in the case of Pembroke, defying the ordnance brought to
bear upon them. If a Royalist army of respectable proportions happened
to be in the vicinity of a beleaguered fortress, the Parliamentarians
appeared to regard its reduction as an impossibility, and in the first
place devoted their entire attention to the dispersal of the field
force. It is true that the condition of the unmetalled trackways, which
were dignified by the name of roads, at that time, presented almost
insuperable obstacles to the passage of heavy ordnance, and the advance
of a cumbrous baggage train was at times an impossibility.
But even if cannon of respectable proportions could be brought against a
castle in the Great Civil War, the effects produced were in many cases
out of all proportion to the enormous trouble involved. Thus at the
first siege of Pontefract Castle in 1644 a cannon throwing a 42-lb. shot
was used in conjunction with another of 36 lbs. and two of 24 lbs., the
least being 9 lbs., and yet the siege failed chiefly by reason of the
small effect produced by the 1400 projectiles which were fired into it.
Again although Scarborough Castle was quite ruinous in 1644 when its
siege commenced, and in addition was ill-supplied with ammunition or
food, yet it gallantly sustained a siege lasting for twelve months.
It may therefore be conceded from the foregoing that the assertion
respecting gunpowder causing the disuse of the castle in the British
Isles must be taken with a large degree of reservation, since many other
causes have to be considered, and even those who maintain the assertion
must admit that the reason assigned took an unconscionably long time
in effecting its object.
[Illustration: IGHTHAM MOTE, KENT.]
In the very few castles which saw their origin during the fourteenth and
fifteenth centuries in Britain, domestic comforts and attempts at
effective defensive works appear to have run side by side, often to the
almost total exclusion of the latter. The substitution of brick for
stone masonry in many of these was in itself a startling change, but
when combined with this, large and lofty apartments were introduced,
many with magnificent carved and moulded wooden ceilings, windows of
large dimensions filled with beautiful tracery characteristic of
Perpendicular architecture, walls hung with rich tapestry and decorated
with gorgeous heraldic devices and trophies of arms, costly furniture
and other fittings betokening an advanced education in domestic
requirements,--the feeling was borne in upon the minds of the nation
that the feudal castle, as such, had seen its day, and that the age of
the baronial residence and the manorial dwelling-house had superseded
it.
In these later castellated residences the kitchens, larders, cellars,
dining halls, residential rooms and general offices became matters of
supreme moment, the defensive works of secondary importance, but
designed nevertheless with a view to impressiveness and an assumption of
strength which they rarely possessed. Within these lordly halls the
noble owners held high revel, while troops of servitors, henchmen, and
servants of every degree swarmed in the passages and halls in marked
contradistinction to the old time grim men-at-arms, bearded archers, and
steel-clad retainers of the feudal fortress.
There was naturally a period of transition during which the
characteristics of the Castle predominated over the domestic influences,
and those which sprang into existence during the reigns of Henry IV. and
V. very ably show this feature. To this intermediate period we may
ascribe those structures which were chiefly reared by the spoils
acquired upon the Continent by soldiers of fortune who "followed the
wars," and returning to their native land built palatial residences for
themselves, out of their lawful, or it may be, ill-acquired, gains. Many
of these were based upon designs which the adventurers had seen abroad,
thus our first example, Bodiam, is a replica of many castles which were
to be found at the time of its erection in Gascony. _Bodiam Castle_ is
one of the finest in Sussex, and certainly one of the most picturesque
in England; it is situated upon the Rother, which here forms the
boundary between Sussex and Kent. The building owes its origin to Sir
Edward Dalyngrugge, who had served in France and Spain under the Black
Prince with singular credit to himself and marked advantage to his
worldly estate. A portion of this superfluous wealth was expended in
erecting Bodiam Castle, which, while affording every comfort as a
residence, possessed most of the essential qualities for effective
defence.
It presents a singularly beautiful and romantic spectacle at the present
time, the towers and enceinte being entire, while a wealth of foliage
and the wide waters of the surrounding moat afford a _coup d'oeil_
seldom equalled and probably not excelled in England. The licence to
crenellate dates from 1386; the building was erected in the middle of a
lake connected with the river, thus forming a broad and deep moat. A
causeway, defended by an ingenious system of bridges and small gateways,
leads across the latter, and terminates in a small barbican, now partly
dismantled; the entrance is between two tall square towers which
present beautiful examples of machicolation upon their summits. Upon the
opposite, or south face, is the postern leading to the moat and defended
by a massive square tower, being one of nine in all surrounding the
enclosure. The interior is now simply an empty shell, all the domestic
buildings having been destroyed by Sir William Waller in 1643, after the
siege of Arundel, although the Chapel and the chief apartments are
capable of being located. We have therefore simply the outer walls
remaining of a particularly fine castle of the Perpendicular period.
The entrance consists of a vaulted passage with many openings for the
discharge of missiles upon assailants while they were endeavouring to
overcome the three portcullises and the massive wooden gate defending
it. In addition to ordinary loopholes there are round holes for the
discharge of harquebuses. The castle underwent a siege by the Earl of
Surrey in the reign of Richard III. in consequence of a descendant of
Sir Thomas Lewkenor, into whose hands it had passed, proving obnoxious
to the King.
_Shirburn Castle_ is also of the same type and very similar to Bodiam;
it dates from the year 1377 and was erected by Warine de Lisle who
had gained wealth and distinction under Edward III. It stands in the
Chiltern Hills near Stokenchurch and is a large square pile surrounded
by a broad moat.
[Illustration: WRESSLE CASTLE, YORKSHIRE.]
_Wressle Castle, Yorkshire._--The Castle of Wressle lies to the
south-east of York, near the junction of the Derwent with the Ouse, the
navigation of which it was probably designed to protect. Sir Thomas
Percy, the brother of the first Earl of Northumberland, is reputed to
have been the founder. It fell to the Crown, and Henry IV. granted it to
his son John, Earl of Bedford, and after his demise to Sir Thomas Percy,
son of Henry, the second Earl of Northumberland. The Percies seem to
have maintained their Court in the Castle with a magnificence befitting
their illustrious race, and during their occupation the Castle saw the
most glorious portion of its history.
In 1642 and 1648 it was garrisoned by the Parliamentarians and shortly
afterwards was ordered to be dismantled. Three sides of the quadrangle
were thrown down, leaving only the south façade. It was in the
possession of the Seymour family from 1682 to 1750, when it again
passed into the hands of descendants of the Percy family, and now is
owned by Lord Leconfield.
The building originally possessed five towers, one at each corner and
another over the entrance on the south side, which still remains,
together with the curtain wall and flanking towers. These present a very
imposing appearance, but the general effect of the ruins suggests the
castellated mansion of the Perpendicular period more than the grim
sternness of a medieval castle. The square corner towers appear
singularly inadequate for an effective flanking fire, and no doubt the
building relied for defence chiefly upon the broad moat which
encompassed it upon three sides and the deep dry ditch defending the
approach.
_Hever_ undoubtedly owes its fame partly to its magnificent gatehouse,
which forms by far the most impressive part of the structure, and partly
to the rich store of human interest imparted by its intimate connection
with the ill-fated Anne Boleyn. It was built in the reign of Edward III.
by Sir William de Hever, whose daughter brought it to her husband, Lord
Cobham. In the time of Henry VI., Sir Geoffrey Boleyn, Lord Mayor of
London, an opulent mercer, purchased it, and added greatly to the
existing buildings, the work being subsequently finished by his
grandson, Sir Thomas, the father of Anne.
[Illustration: HEVER CASTLE, KENT.]
The latter was born in 1501, and brought up at Hever under a French
governess. After she attracted the notice of the King, her father was
created Viscount Rochford, and Earl of Wiltshire and Ormond, while Anne
was made Marchioness of Pembroke. It was in the garden at Hever that
Henry first saw her, and subsequently his wooing of that unfortunate
queen occurred there. After the execution of Anne and her brother, the
castle went to the Crown and was settled on Anne of Cleves. In 1557 Sir
Edward Waldegrave purchased it, and it passed to Sir William Humfreys
and subsequently to Sir T. Waldo, whose descendant is the present owner.
The Castle is surrounded by a double moat, fed by the river Eden; it is
a small castellated house of the fifteenth century, the chief feature
being the superb entrance, battlemented and machicoulied, and containing
three portcullis grooves in the main passage. The buildings completing
the rectangle are chiefly of the Elizabethan period, but have been very
extensively restored by the present owner.
_Maxstoke_ is one of the very few castles which have come down to us
without the expression "dismantled by order of Parliament" being applied
to it. It affords us an idea of the beauty the face of England would
present, so far as magnificent castles are concerned, if the forces of
destruction and revolution had never been let loose upon our fair isle.
It dates from 1346, when William de Clynton, Earl of Huntingdon,
obtained licence to crenellate. The Duke of Buckingham owned and
occupied it in 1444; he was killed at Northampton in 1460, and his son
Humphrey, Earl of Stafford, having died of wounds received at the First
Battle of St. Albans in 1455, his grandson Henry succeeded him but
was beheaded without trial at Salisbury in 1483. Edward Stafford,
however, succeeded to the estates in the reign of Henry VII.; his death
by beheading occurred on Tower Hill in 1521. Maxstoke came to the Crown
but was given by Henry VIII. to Sir William Compton, from whose
descendants it was purchased by the family of Dilke in whose possession
it still remains.
[Illustration: MAXTOKE CASTLE, WARWICKSHIRE.]
The gatehouse is in excellent preservation, the entrance being
flanked by hexagonal towers, while the archway contains the grooves for
the portcullis, and also the old gates themselves, plated with iron and
bearing the arms of the Stafford family. A fine groined roof is inside
the gatehouse, while the battlements have an alur behind them. The walls
of the enceinte and the four towers at the corners are in good
preservation, and show marks of the wooden buildings formerly erected
against them for accommodating the soldiers. The Chapel and a number of
the domestic apartments are original, dating from the time of Edward
III.
_Raglan_, one of the most imposing ruins in the British Isles, was
erected shortly after 1415 by Sir William ap Thomas, who had returned
rich in honours and also in worldly wealth from many a stricken field,
the last being that of Agincourt. He married the daughter of Sir David
Gam, and commenced the erection of the magnificent building which
combines in such an excellent manner the characteristics of a mansion
and a fortress. If either predominates it is undoubtedly the warlike
portion since, presumably, the builder could not at once forget his
bellicose proclivities. His son was made a baron by Edward IV. and
afterwards Earl of Pembroke, and was beheaded at Northampton, 1469. The
Castle came into the possession of the Somersets in 1503, the ancestors
of the present Duke of Beaufort. The fifth earl carried out extensive
work upon the pile, but shortly afterwards the demolition of the Castle
was ordered by the parliament. Probably the most striking feature of the
Castle is the detached Keep lying to the left of the main entrance, and
called the Yellow Tower. It is surrounded by a wide and deep moat, and
was undoubtedly a formidable obstacle before being slighted. It
underwent a vigorous siege in 1646, when Sir Thomas Fairfax assailed it
with a large force. The garrison ran short of ammunition, and, the north
wall being breached, a capitulation ensued.
_Herstmonceaux Castle._--One of the finest examples of the later castles
is Herstmonceaux, in Sussex, dating from the year 1440. It has been
described as "the most perfect example of the mansion of a feudal lord
in the south of England," and, when visited by Walpole in 1752, was in a
perfect state of preservation; Grose, writing a few decades later, gives
a vivid description of all the principal apartments, which seem to have
suffered but little at that time. Now, however, when there is some
rumour prevailing of an intended restoration, the building is in
ruins,--roofless, ivy-grown, and in many parts dismantled by the
falling-in of roofs and floors. It is built of the small bricks then in
use, two inches or less in thickness; they were brought to England from
Belgium, strange to say the art of brick-making having apparently been
lost since the departure of the Romans. Belgian workmen were also
brought over to erect it.
Sir Roger Fiennes, an Agincourt veteran, was the founder, and probably
the site had borne a previous fortalice. Like Bodiam, erected some
half-century previously, the plan is quadrilateral, almost square, with
four octagonal towers at the corners and three of pentagonal plan
strengthening the curtain walls. The gateway is one of the finest and
most impressive in existence; the towers which flank it rise over 80
feet in height, cylindrical at the upper parts and superposed upon 50
feet of octagonal bases, with smaller turrets rising still higher above
them. A magnificent range of machicoulis with crenellation above
protects the towers and the curtain between, the merlons being pierced
with oillets. A moat, long since dry, encircles the building, a bridge
spanning it at the principal entrance. There are three tiers of cross
loopholes, and below occur openings for matchlocks to defend the
bridge. With the exception of the grand towers of the south gateway and
the shells of some adjoining buildings, there are only broken arches and
shattered walls, piers, and buttresses now to be seen, and it is only by
the description left by Grose and Walpole that the ichnography of the
interior can be traced. Wyatt the architect is responsible for the
vandalism committed, as he dismantled the Castle to furnish material for
the owner's new residence adjacent.
[Illustration: HERSTMONCEAUX CASTLE, SUSSEX.]
Although Herstmonceaux has never undergone any struggles in the "fell
arbitrament of war," yet painful memories cling to the ruins. Thomas
Fiennes, the ninth Lord Dacre, succeeded to the estate at the age of
seventeen. The youth had already laid the foundation of a brilliant
career at Court when an escapade, planned by himself and some madcap
companions, whereby they essayed to play the rôle of poachers upon a
neighbouring estate, led to the death of a keeper whom they encountered.
His three companions were arrested and hanged for murder near
Deptford; Dacre was also tried and condemned, and the sentence was duly
executed at Tyburn in 1541, the young man being twenty-five years old at
the time.
_Tattershall Castle_, on the Witham in Lincolnshire, is contemporary
with Herstmonceaux, and constructed likewise of Flemish brick bonded
with exquisite workmanship. The tower still standing contains four
stories with a total altitude of 112 feet; large Gothic-headed windows
occur filled with Perpendicular tracery, and these windows are repeated
on a smaller scale in the four octagonal towers which clamp the angles
of the building. Massive timber balks once supported the various floors,
and a number of carved chimney-pieces are to be found. The walls are
about 14 feet thick at the base, and many passages and apartments have
been made in their thickness. The well in the base is covered by a
massive arched crypt, upon which the Castle has been erected. But
perhaps the most notable feature in this beautiful relic of the past is
the grand and markedly-perfect system of machicolation combined with the
bretasche, which is exemplified in the cornice surmounting the tops of
the curtain walls. Upon massive stone corbels is built a substantial
stone wall pierced with square apertures for an all-round fire with
various arms; in the floor of the alur are the openings for dropping
missiles upon assailants at the base of the walls; above this again are
the merlons and embrasures giving upon the battlement walk.
The Castle was erected by Ralph, Lord Cromwell, treasurer to King Henry
V., whose vast wealth sought for an opening in which to display itself,
and probably could not have done so more effectively than in the rearing
of a magnificent pile of buildings of which but a small portion, the
tower described, now remains. In its later years it suffered a partial
dismantling during the Commonwealth period, followed by a rifling in the
eighteenth century similar to that which overtook the sister castle of
Herstmonceaux.
After the middle of the fifteenth century castles were no longer built,
and we have to look to the fortified manor-house such as was designed by
the Lord Cromwell above mentioned at Wingfield, Derbyshire, or that at
Exburgh in Norfolk; these when surrounded by moats were capable of being
placed in a good state of defence, and many a thrilling tale is told
of the sieges they underwent during the Civil War when the stout
resistance they made was nearly or quite equal to the defence of the
massive ramparts and cyclopean bastions of the earlier castle-builder.
[Illustration: PENSHURST PLACE. KENT.]
_Penshurst Place._--This was originally an embattled mansion of the
fourteenth century, and gradually expanded by constant additions into an
excellent example of a combined castle and a manorial dwelling-house.
The licence to crenellate is dated the fifteenth year of Edward III.,
and stands in the name of Sir John de Pulteneye. This opulent knight
erected a stately mansion in the form of an irregular square as to plan.
It reverted to the Crown in the reign of Henry VI. and was held by the
Duke of Bedford, Regent for a time, and then by his brother, Humphrey,
Duke of Gloucester. The Staffords held it afterwards, but at the decease
of the Duke of Buckingham Edward VI. gave it to Ralph Fane and then to
Sir William Sydney, one of the heroes of Flodden Field. Its associations
with Sir Philip Sydney form one of its chief claims upon the public. The
spacious Hall measures 60 feet in length by the same in height; it is 40
feet wide, and is a grand example of fourteenth-century architecture.
The beautiful windows reach from the floor to a considerable height, the
roof is open, there is a minstrels' gallery, and an elaborate
arrangement for the fire in the middle of the Hall. Adjacent is a range
of buildings much altered in the Elizabethan period, containing state
rooms, the Queen's drawing-room, etc. Portions of the wall of enceinte
are to be found upon the south and east.
_Ightham Mote._--This building is undoubtedly one of the most perfect
examples of the combination of domestic convenience with an efficient
system of defence to be found in England. It stands about two miles from
Ightham village in Kent in a deep hollow, through which runs a rivulet
flowing into the moat surrounding the House, from which the latter takes
its name. Ivo de Haut possessed the Mote in the reign of Henry II.; it
reverted to the Crown for a time in the reign of Richard III., but was
restored to the family, and subsequently passed through the hands of
many owners.
The House appears to be of three distinct periods, Edward II., Henry
VII., and Elizabeth. The Hall is of the first period; it has a slender
stone arch to carry the roof and contains many ancient features; some
of the original shingles, for example, are still in existence, though a
modern roof covers them. Other objects are a Chapel, original, and the
Gateway Tower with the gateway itself and the doors.
There are many examples in England of the simple manorial hall of purely
domestic type whose owners found it expedient, at some critical period,
to fortify in some manner, and these additions are of the greatest
interest to the antiquarian. Perhaps the best example to be found is
that of Stokesay, near Ludlow, which is a unique specimen of a small
mansion of the thirteenth century subsequently fortified. The licence is
dated 1291, and a stone wall is mentioned; only a few yards remain of
this.
A wide ditch surrounds the area, and a high tower, similar to two towers
joined together, affords the required defence. It is embattled, the
merlons being pierced, while the embrasures have the ancient shutters
still depending. It dates from the end of the thirteenth century. The
Hall stands adjacent and vies with that at Winchester in being the most
perfect example of a thirteenth-century hall remaining to us. It is
about 50 feet long by 30 wide and over 30 feet in height. The windows
are in the E.E. style, and the corbels carrying the roof are of the same
period. The lord's apartment overlooked the Hall. It has been occupied
by the de Says, the Verduns, and ten generations of the Ludlows, the
first of whom built the crenellated parts. The prompt surrender of the
Cavalier garrison to the Parliamentarian army is no doubt responsible
for the fact that no destruction of the House occurred at that critical
time.
The examples given of the Castellated Mansion and fortified Manor-House
are necessarily meagre in number, and many more, such as Broughton
Castle in Oxfordshire, Sudley in Gloucestershire, Wingfield Manor,
Derbyshire; Hilton, Durham; Hampton Court, Hereford; Whitton, Durham,
etc., call for remark if the exigencies of space permitted.