Orford
It is uncertain when Orford became a port, but a market is thought
to have been mentioned there in 1105. Early in his reign (1135-54), when King Stephen was at
Eye, he made a general confirmation mentioning Orford church.
It was probably at this time, around 1137 that he gave the honour of Eye with Orford, Dunwich, the lost Goseford and Walton
to William Ypes, one of the king's most successful military supporters.
This would appear to have been setting him up as a counterbalance
to Hugh Bigod (d.1176) of Framlingham
as well as giving him a port to bring Flemish mercenaries and traders
into the country. The same could be said of his position in Kent.
Unfortunately the rest of the Ypres tenancy of Orford is shrouded
in mystery, as to is the question to whether William founded a castle
here or not. However a c.1140 confirmation of the grant of Orford
to William Yres records the port as Orfort, just perhaps this stands
for the fort at Or.
With William Ypres' death in June 1164 the vill of Orford appeared in
the pipe roll of September 1164. It was recorded that Sheriff
Oggerus Dapifer (1163-68) rendered £18 for the farm of
Orford for the third part of a year, ie since the beginning of June
1164. In the treasury he paid £16 and owed 40s, but these
had been spent on the works of Orford limekiln and mill. The
building of a limekiln can probably be attached to the desire to build
a masonry fortress there as a limekiln was necessary to make mortar, a
major
ingredient of a stone castle. Tradition holds that the land
previously belonged
to Peter Valognes (d.1109+) of Benington
at some point after Domesday and then passed down his
family until acquired by the Crown. If this did occur then King
Stephen reclaimed the land from Peter's son, Roger Valognes, who was a
known Angevin in 1141 and died before June 1142. Acquisition of
Orford gave the Crown a potential caput in Suffolk, although the castle
never
seems to have been used as such, Norwich remaining the seat of the sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk.
In 1165 Sheriff Oggerus returned that the farm of Orford was worth
£24 for the year which was paid in 2 tallies under the honour of Eye,
presumably for the castle works there. Under the same account the
sheriff accounted for £56 14s 6d for the ships at Orford.
Possibly this was for bringing stone to the new castle site or the
building of a fleet that was settled in the port and was mentioned
repeatedly as the customs of the ships of Orford for the next few
decades. The next year in 1166, £64 12d was accounted for
the ships of Orford (Nauibus de Oreford).
The same year work had begun in earnest on building Orford
castle. Firstly it was recorded under the accounts for Norfolk
and Suffolk that under the observation of Bartholomew Glanville, Robert
Valognes (d.1184, a younger grandson of the Domesday Peter) and William
the chaplain, £266 4s 9d had been allocated to the works of
Orford castle, together with £100 from the increment Henry II had placed on the counties. In later entries under the honour of Eye,
which was in the king's hands since the death of Count William of Blois
in 1159 (the castle had been seized by the king in 1157), it was
recorded that £194 16d, plus £64 1s, plus £26 6s 8d
and £19 6s 3d had been spent at the castle under the view of the
same 3 overseers. This gave a total of £670 spent in the
one year. Additionally a cost of 69s 8d was run up for taking 2
piles of wood from Havering in Essex to Orford. Presumably this
was also for the castle works.
Work continued at the castle under the same 3 overseers in 1167,
although there appeared problems with the account. Initially
£19 6s 10d were spent on the works, while a further £48 8s
1d was owed. There then followed a series of smaller amounts
including £60 1s paid for the ships of Orford and Sheriff Oggerus
accounting for £26 13s 4d farm of the vill, which was then spent
on the castle. In addition to these sums 38s 4d was spent on
munitioning the castle and Bartholomew Glanville received 20m
(£13 6s 8d) as the first castle custodian. In total this
accounted for £372 18s 6d spent on the building works for the
financial year of 1167. It is also apparent that the castle was
sufficiently complete to be garrisoned this year. This could well
suggest that preparation began in 1164 and the actual building of the
keep and enceinte involved the 3 building seasons of 1165, 1166 and
1167. What is surprising is that the great ditch around the
enceinte does not seem to have been dug at all until 1173 in a reversal
of the normal castle building methodology. This would also mean
that the stone for the castle was not quarried on site.
By the next year, September 1168, Orford had its own account, which was
possibly drawn up in the newly commissioned castle. This recorded
that the new farm of Orford brought in £26 13s 4d and that all of
this had been spent on Orford castle under the view of Bartholomew
Glanville and Robert Valognes (d.1184). In total, the sheriff of
Norfolk and Suffolk, Oggerus Dapifer, accounted for £120 1d spent
on work at the castle under the supervision of Bartholomew
Glanville. In September 1169, 50s 4d were spent in sending timber
and boards to Orford from Yorkshire, presumably by sea. Again
Orford has its own short account in the pipe roll. This and
other accounts showed that Sheriff Oggerus had spent some £275 7s
on the castle works under Bartholomew and Robert Valognes
(d.1184). Further Ralph Hautville (Hauuvill')
was allowed £8 3s 4d to repair the bird houses (aues) for those
works. Presumably the Hautvilles were already importing hunting
birds from Scandinavia, a trade well established by the reign of King John (1199-1216). A further sum of 9s was spent on the king's houses in Orford. Presumably these were within the castle.
The year 1170 saw further, lesser expenditure at Orford castle
totalling £149 19s 6d, as well as the installation of a new
sheriff of the counties, no less a person than Constable Bartholomew
Glanville of Orford, although he was helped in his office over the next
5 years by Wimare Capell (the chaplain? Capellanus)
and William Bardolf. Further the enclosure of the marsh of Orford
was carried out at a cost of £4 11s 8d. In 1171 the monies
spent on the works of Orford castle dwindled to just £30.
Supplies of bacon were sent to Eye, while the undersheriff, Wimare
Capell, rendered an account for 66s 8d from the old farm of Orford and
£26 13s 4d from the new farm and £35 16s 8d from the custom
of ships. There then followed much information about expenditure
on the town and district of Orford which included the enclosing of the
marsh, making a new mill for £12 9s 4d as well as stocking some
of the ships in the port. It appears from this that the king was
doing his best for Orford and its district.
In 1172 the castle works at Orford cost only £8 10s by the view
of Robert Valognes (d.1184) and Norman Ipswich, although 4s was put
aside for Ralph Fitz Oslach in exchange for his land which had been
enclosed in the marsh. Possibly this low expenditure marked the
fact that the castle had been completed, but with the coming of war to
Britain in 1173 there was another sudden burst of building work at
Orford. This is seen in Sheriff Bartholomew Glanville of Norfolk
and Suffolk's account. This shows that a great ditch was dug
around Orford castle with stockading and brattishing for the works of
the stone bridge there costing £63 2s 8d at the writ of Richard
Lucy and under the view of Robert Valognes (d.1184) and Norman
Ipswich. The bridge and ditch therefore marked the completion of
the building of Orford castle in its final form. From 1174
onwards only repairs to the fortress would be made with no known
additions made to the structure. The cost of the castle had
therefore been, 1166 £670; 1167 £372 18s 6d; 1168
£120 1d; 1169 £275 7s; 1170 £149 19s 6d; 1171
£30; 1172 £8 10s and 1173 £63 2s 8d. In total
over the 8 years the castle had therefore cost the king a recorded
£1,689 17s 9d, with the castle probably being operational from
September 1167 when a total of £1,042 18s 6d had been expended on
the site.
The new castle was munitioned for the war with 200 loads of wheat from
the measure of Ipswich at £21 13s 4d; 100 bacons at £10 and
500 cheeses at £4 3s 4d, 40s of iron, 25s of salt and 3 measures
of tallow (pensis sepi) at 21s
and 20s for ropes and lesser cords and 3 handmills at 4s and coal at
25s. Further there had been 5s taken in Orford castle and 20s
lost through the plundering of the Flemish (solidte/solidate amisse pro
rapina Flandr). Entries concerning Orford continue after the
record of the munitioning of the other East Anglian castles of Eye, Norwich, Thetford,
with 55s being accounted for sending 2 ships from Orford to Sandwich
for 15 days. Finally the garrison at Orford was mentioned with
£87 6s 8d being spent on keeping knights there. Further
payments of 25s to the knights of Orford and 75s to the knights and
serjeants of Orford were made. On the Orford account 25s 4d was
paid of the old farm by Oggerus Dapifer, while Vinar Capell owed
£40 of the new farm, of which he paid £20, claimed 4s for
the exchange in the marsh and gave £6 13s 4d to the knights and
serjeants at Orford, leaving him with a dept of £13 2s 8d.
He also accounted for 105s received through the customs of the
ships. Finally a payment of £27 5s 8d was made to the
knights and serjeants of Orford. As the days these forces were
stationed in Orford are not numbered, nor are the number of knights
recorded, it is impossible to say how many troops were stationed at the
castle and for how long. Certainly it appears that the Flemings
attacked the district, even if they made no serious attempt on the
castle.
The next year more detailed records were kept for the royal forces in
Orford. Perhaps this shows order being created from the initial
disorder of war which appeared in the rushed accounts for troops
paid. In 1174 Bartholomew Glanville, as both sheriff and
constable of Orford castle, was granted £20 for the 20 knights
who resided at Orford castle by the writ of Richard Lucy. At the
same time as other military affairs were accounted for £11 19s 4d
was set aside for repairing the brattishing at Orford castle under the
view of 2 Normans. Ralph Breton was also given 5m (£3 6s
8d) for his houses which were transported into Orford castle.
These 2 entries together with last year's comments would tend to
suggest that some kind of attempt was made on Orford castle by Earl
Hugh Bigod (d.1176) and his Flemings. The following Orford
account noted the new and old farm payments and that Bartholomew
Glanville had apparently used some of the revenues for his own
purposes. Probably these were for military affairs in defending
his constableship. This view is strengthened in 1175 when, under
the Orford account, the vill was restocked due to the damage caused
during the war at a cost of 28s. It was also noted that the farm
of Orford hadn't been paid due to the war. The same year an
assize was held in Orford itself and in which the men of Orford were
fined £6 16d. Presumably this was on account of them
defying their king during the war. The same September the
sheriffship of Norfolk and Suffolk passed from Bartholomew to his
undersheriff, Vinar Capell, who was to remain sole sheriff until 1186.
It was sometime during the sheriffship of Bartholomew Glanville that a
wild man was caught in the nets of the local Orford fishermen and
brought back to Orford castle. As the castle was operational and
there is no mention of war during the several months of the man's
imprisonment, presumably this happened between the completion of the
castle around the end of 1167 and the beginning of the Young King's war in 1173. The story holds that the wild man [hominem silvestrem
- or man of the woods] was caught in the sea by fishermen. He was
naked but covered in hair having a really long beard, dishevelled hair
on his head and a shaggy chest. He was handed over to Constable
Bartholomew who had him guarded day and night and then had him tortured
while hung upside down at the castle. However he said nothing,
but lived in a feral manner, heading for his bed the moment the sun
went down and staying there until it came up again. He also ate
raw food as avidly as cooked. He preferred fish and ate them by
squeezing them between his hands and sucking the juice out of
them. He showed no sign of recognition or veneration in
church. Eventually he was taken to the sea and allowed to swim
within an area demarked by a line of 3 nets. Despite this the man
escaped the nets and then frolicked in the sea, apparently taunting his
erstwhile captors. Then, suddenly of his own accord, he came
ashore and spent another 2 months with his captors, before he is said
to have secretly fled, presumably to the sea, never to be seen
again. After writing up this alleged event that had happened some
30-40 years before, Ralph Coggeshall then went on to speculate that
this man was unlikely to have been a demon as he was so benign.
Conversely he thought the story worth being recorded as so many still
spoke of these events with wonder. In modern times it has been
argued that his capture led to the establishment of a fashion for wild
man carvings on the fonts of the nearby coastal parts of Norfolk and
Suffolk where there are about 20 of them. However, it is just as
possible that the story was spawned by the fonts as much as the other
way around.
In 1176 the Orford pipe roll account carried further entries concerning
the farm of Orford and some of the recent expenses. Money had
been advanced to the knights, both foot and mounted, as well as foot
serjeants in the king's castle of Orford in time of war for garrisoning
the fortress at a cost of £80 44s 2d. This was done at the
king's writ by the number and times the knights and serjeants both
horse and foot served (quod continet numeros et terminos militum et servientium equitum et peditum).
By 1177 Orford seems to have settled down into a normal routine with
the farms of the vill being recorded under its own account heading as
was now normal. In 1178 further restocking of the manor took
place at a cost of £40 6s 4d.
It was 1181 before further work needed to be done at Orford and this
consisted of repairs to the fortress and houses within at a cost of
£15 under the view of Adam and Ralph the clerics. By
September 1183 there had been a change at the castle when John
Beclinges was called constable and was allowed £20 to repair the
king's houses in his castle. In 1187, the king acknowledged that
he had appropriated a single knight's fee of Roger Sturmy for 20s as he
held the fishery of Orford, which belonged to Roger, in his own
hand. In 1188 repairs were necessary to the doors and keep
(turris) at a cost of £10 12s 2d under the view of Ralph and Adam
the clerics.
Richard I was never so careful
as his father in regards to the custody of royal fortresses so it is no
surprise that he sold the custodianship of Eye
and Orford castles to Walter Fitz Robert (d.1198) for £80 in
1191. The same year he also spent £25 8s 8d in repairing
the castles of Norwich, Eye and Orford by the view of Robert Bret and John Tauerham. The sheriff also received £59 for guarding Orford and Eye
castles this year and £4 for restocking the manors. Both
these events presumably occurred before Walter bought the
custodianship. By 1193 the country was again in a state of civil
war with the forces of the Crown being deployed against Prince John
(d.1216). One result of this was the government placing garrisons
in Eye and Orford castles for the whole year,
it costing £73 for 6 knights and £21 for 7 horse serjeants
and £18 3d for 12 foot serjeants. Further the ships of
Ipswich, Dunnow and Orford carried the chancellor over the sea to
Germany at a cost of £29 and half a mark, while Walter Fitz
Robert (d.1198) received 40m for the custody of Eye and Orford
castles. By 1195 King Richard had sold the men of Orford the
custody of their own vill and given them a charter to that effect for
the sum of 60m (£40). Three years later in 1198 the king,
in the form of the archbishop of Canterbury found it necessary to order
5m (£3 6s 8d) worth of repairs to the king's houses in Orford
castle.
By September 1199 the vill of Orford had been farmed out to Thomas
Arden at 40m (£26 13s 4d) per annum for 2 years. Of this
sum he was eventually quit by the king's writ under the account for Eye as the constableship of the castle which had also been granted to Thomas came with a stipend of £40 per annum set by Henry II.
In any case Thomas paid 20m (£13 6s 8d) and was quit. In
1200 the rather measly sum of 5s 7d was spent in repairing the houses
in Orford castle, while the 40m (£26 13s 4d) farm of the vill was
paid: 5m by Robert Fitz Roger (Robert had been sheriff from 1196 until
1200) and 5m by the sheriff (probably Richard Gosfield, Robert's
undersheriff) who kept the remaining 30m (£20) as custodian of
the castle. On 26 December 1200 King John
informed Theobald Valence, who was obviously constable of Orford
castle, that as soon as he saw the king's letters, he was to turn
Orford castle with the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk with all the
stock in the castle and counties over to the bishop of Norwich.
John Grey was bishop from September 1200 until 18 October 1214.
In 1202 another 20m (£13 6s 8d) were spent on the works of Orford
castle by the view of Geoffrey Fitz Peter and Michael and Roger
Petersetrie. The same year it was recorded that Robert Gray
(probably the nephew of the bishop) held the farm of Orford for 1201
and 1202 at 40m (£26 13s 4d) per annum, although he had the
custody of the castle at 60m (£40) per annum. However he
owed £6 9s 4d that had been spent on repairing Orford mill and
consequently Robert now owed £6 17s 4d. In 1203 Bishop John
Grey of Norwich owed the county of Norfolk and Suffolk £6 17s 4d
from his farm of Orford for last year and 40m (£26 13s 4d) for
this year, but paid nothing. Against this he was allowed 25m
(£16 13s 4d) for the custody of Orford castle and therefore owed
20m 4s (£13 10s 8d). At this time life seems to have
progressed quietly at Orford although the king was obviously intent on
keeping the port well maintained. The year 1207 saw more work on
the sea defences with 40s being spent on stones to strengthen Orford
dyke.
In 1210 £20 was spent on repairing the castle under the
supervision of William Blome and Stephen the merchant. In
September 1215 it was recorded that the sheriff, John Fitz Robert Fitz
Roger (d.1240), [owed] 5m for the farm of Orford. He presumably
also held the castle although this wasn't mentioned in the dire state
England had now fallen into until the administration finally collapsed
in 1216. By that time many barons had revolted and the country
was plunged into a civil war which culminated in the arrival of Prince
Louis of France on 21 May 1216. After taking many castles in the
south of England Louis and the rebels who supported him seized Berkhamsted castle in December 1216 following on the death of King John that October. With much of the south of England fallen to the rebels, the government of the young King Henry III (1216-72) bought a short truce with Louis by surrendering to them the castles of Norwich
and Orford. The rebels then went on to seize all the castles of
Essex and Suffolk. Quite clearly from this there was no military
action at the changing hands of these fortresses.
At the end of the civil war in 1217 the castle was returned to the rule of Henry III,
it then being granted to the powerful Hubert Burgh (d.1243) who held
the office of sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk from that date until
1224. An attempt to restore financial stability to the realm was
undertaken with a general tax being levied on the manors of the
counties. This shows that the port of Orford was already in a
state of decline considering its low tax rate. Norwich paid £100, Yarmouth 60m (£40), Aylsham (Ailesham)
25m (£16 13s 4d), Dunwich 100m (£66 13s 4d), Orford 15m
(£10) and Ipswich 30m (£20). Presumably Hubert was in
residence at Orford castle on 9 September 1219 when a royal fine was
made at Orford.
In 1220 Orford mill was repaired at a cost of £11 19s 2½d,
while the 2 millstones were replaced at a cost of 4m (£2 13s
4d). Whether this was due to damage when the castle changed hands
or general wear and tear is sadly not known. At the same time 35s
was spent on the marsh enclosure. The year 1221 saw the repair of
the castle houses and minor work on the castle bridge at a cost of 5m
(£3 6s 8d) as well as repairs to the marsh enclosure and sheep
run for 100s. In 1223 Sheriff Hubert Burgh spent 63s 1d on
repairing Orford castle, which was deducted from the 10m (£6 13s
4d) he owed for the farm of the vill. The same year a tallage was
rendered from the king's demesnes, which money was to be assigned to
aid in the enclosing of these vills. In Norfolk and Suffolk the
following towns paid varied amounts of money, undoubtedly based upon
their perceived worth. Orford raised 20m (£13 6s 8d), while
Norwich borough raised £100, Yarmouth
80m (£53 6s 8d), Dunwich 60m (£40), Aylsham 20m (£13
6s 8d) and finally Ormesby 10m (£6 13s 4d).
At some point Hubert passed the fortress onto his brother, Thomas Burgh
(d.1235), who held the fortress and vill from September 1221 until
apparently September 1224. Richard Aguillon then took over Orford
in the summer of 1227 and held it all through 1228. By 1230 the
vill and castle were back in the hands of the sheriff. The castle
later passed into the hands of Robert Bruce from half way through 1233
until the first half of 1234. Presumably he died in the spring of
1234, in which case this man was probably the great grandfather of King
Robert Bruce (d.1329). On 7 June 1235 Thomas Hengrave was granted
the profits of Norfolk and Suffolk for an annual render of £100
and that he may have 20m (£13 6s 8d) a year for the custody of
Orford castle from the farm of Orford and £52 for the custody of Norwich castle. For the next few decades little of note was recorded of Orford.
The next big change for Orford came on 18 June 1256 when the men of
Orford fined for 3 gold marks to have that vill with the king's mill
and marsh, saving to the king and his heirs Orford castle. For
this boon the men were to pay £30 annually. Despite this on
22 October 1275, King Edward I
(1272-1307) ‘to avoid disputes' concerning the land granted to
the queen to enable her to have an income of £4,500, made over to
her an assortment of lands and castles, including the castles of
Bristol, Odiham, Peak (Peveril), Bolsover, Horsley, Rockingham
and finally the castle and town of Orford. These were to be held
as dower by Eleanor as queen as well as in any widowhood. After
her death in 1290 the castle reverted to the Crown and her and Edward's
son, King Edward II (1307-27),
was still undertaking the overlordship of the vill on 20 February 1326
when he granted the burgesses quittance of toll throughout the realm.
Earl Robert Ufford is said to have been granted the fortress in perpetuity by Edward III in 1336 according to Joshua Barnes' 1688 History of that Most Vicotrious Monarch, Edward III.
Certainly this year saw a French naval raid on Orford and Walton which
is thought to have officially commenced the Hundred Years War.
Consequent to the grant of the castle in 1336, the town and castle of
Orford were extended on the death of Earl Robert in 1369. This
found that they were held from the king for the yearly rent of a
peppercorn during his lifetime and £20 a year from his heirs
after his death. The grant included a market place with a fair on
the feast day of St Bartholomew, a leet held on the Wednesday after St
Hilary and a pasture called Le Kyngeston with a meadow called Kyngesmedwe.
The castle was threatened by a French and Flemish fleet a little before
1 June 1385 which caused the king to order the Suffolk militia to form
at Orford and be intendant on the countess of Suffolk in regard to the
ward of the castle if peril should happen and to protect the castle
from imminent invasion. This is the last recorded military action
at the castle which was tending towards ruin in 1600/02 when it was
drawn by John Norden. This showed the castle keep still occupied,
but the main ward gatetower partially down, although the 4 curtain
towers looked well maintained.
Description
The castle stands 1½ miles from the coast and about a third of a
mile from the River Alde. Eleven miles to the south-west lay the
Bigod castle of Walton. The caput of Bigod power, Framlingham castle, lay 13 miles to the north-west, while Norwich,
the administrative caput of Norfolk and Suffolk and only other royal
castle in the district was 40 miles away. Ipswich and Colchester
lay 17 and 30 miles to the south-west respectively. Before Orford
harbour silted up the associated port was of considerable importance
and this probably explains the reason for the founding of a castle here
to control access from the Low Countries - access that was used to
attack the kingdom during the Young King's
war of 1173-74. The port finally silted up in the sixteenth
century, by which time the castle was obviously obsolete and soon
afterwards abandoned.
The fortress consisted of a masonry ward with apparently 4 square
towers, 2 ditches and a probable outwork to the south-west. In
the centre of the site stands the last remaining part of the castle,
the great keep. This polygonal tower stands upon a sharp boss of
ground that might be totally natural or possibly a remnant of an
earlier motte, although only excavation could determine this.
Currently the mound stands some 20' higher than the surrounding land
and this fact alone, if natural, may have been the reason for the
siting of the 1160s castle here.
The site is approached from the south-west via a causeway some 75' long
and 15' wide with a dog-legged turn to the north half way across the
ditch. This was probably the bridge built in 1173 when the ditch
was dug. The causeway terminated at a probably rectangular
gatetower that was still standing in 1600, although much ruined.
All trace of this structure above ground is now gone. The ward
was small and roughly circular having a diameter of some 140', the keep
being placed somewhat towards the western side making a concentric
defence. Outworks lay all around the fortress, but their layout
and purpose is uncertain. The mound to the north is probably
modern, although whether associated with clearing the ditches or the
sand pits to the west is unknown.
A series of excavations in 2002/2003 uncovered many hidden features of
the site. A trench excavated north of the keep found the
robbed-out foundations of the curtain wall some 23' north of the
keep. These were about 11' wide and the excavators considered it
‘of probable thirteenth century date'. Similarly the ditch
beyond this with it's bottom some 65' from the keep and about 35'
beyond the curtain was about 30' wide and ‘was found to have at
least thirteenth or fourteenth century origins'. The building
dates of both features are noted above and this again goes to emphasise
how little faith can be placed upon archaeological reports.
However, the large outer banks some 100' north-west of the keep was
found to have been largely the result of modern landscaping.
Another trench was dug on the causeway, some 130' south-south-west of
the keep. This found 2 buried walls forming a 13' wide entrance
passageway which extended beyond the curtain wall. The roadway
across this was not encountered at a depth of some 6' below current
ground level. It was felt that these digs proved the smallness of
the bailey and the accuracy of John Norden's plan of 1600-02.
Keep
The keep consists of a polygonal tower some 90' high and nearly 50' in
diameter. It had 3 rectangular turrets, each with 4 faces between
them and stands 5 storeys (2 mesne) high. The entrance lies on
the first floor via a forebuilding attached to the west side of the
southern turret. Within the tower is a circular room with
chambers in the 2 northern turrets and a spiral stair in the southern
one. In the basement both northern turret rooms are blind, while
3 sloping loops light the interior, equidistantly between the turrets
to the north and east, but offset to the west due to the
forebuilding. In the centre of the floor is a 30' deep well while
the forebuilding basement holds a cell with latrine and ventilating
shafts.
The first floor contains 3 double rectangular lights directly above the
loops below and a modified fireplace to the north-east behind the
turret. The windows, being 3' high by 1½' wide were all
further defended by iron bars (2 uprights and 7 horizontals in each
aperture) and closed by shutters, of which some of the fittings remain
in the stonework. The embrasures are near-Romanesque, but they do
have the slightest of points at the top. There is also a bench
around the walls which may suggest that this was a waiting chamber with
an internal diameter of 26' and a height of 21'. The north-east
turret chamber has a single loop and is entered via a wall passage from
the window embrasure south of it. The north-west turret is
similarly entered from the southern embrasure, but has a narrow wall
passageway leading to a small latrine chamber with 2 lights to the
north. This turret is equipped as a kitchen with sink and
drains. The entrance doorway to the forebuilding has an angular
head, which is probably an insert, while the room within is lit by one
single and a pair of Romanesque windows with solid tympana. The
entrance into the tower proper to the south west has a triangular arch
of 2 courses, but is otherwise similar to the outer one. Above it
are 3 Romanesque arches with highly decorated capitals on the one side,
but not the other. Unusually they are unsupported by
pillars. The portcullis was raised from the chapel above as was
standard practise to make the castle less vulnerable to attack during
mass.
The upper part of the hall has a mesne level in the turrets, the main
stairs giving access to a passageway that leads to the forebuilding
upper chamber. As usual in such defensive structures, this was
the chapel set defensively above the main entrance from where the main
entrance portcullis was operated. Beyond the chapel lies the
north-west turret with another small latrine chamber to the
north. The north-east turret chamber is accessed via a tight vice
leading off the northern double light embrasure below.
On the floor above is another hall, similar in layout to that below and
accessed via a passageway off the main stair, which also gives access
to the summit of the forebuilding. The 3 double looped
embrasures all have wall passageways leading off them and all have
fully Early English pointed arches. The embrasure to the
south-west leads northwards to the north-west turret, while the western
embrasure has 2 short passages to either side. The north
embrasure also has passageways on either side, the northern one leading
to the north-east turret, while the southern one ends in a narrow
garderobe. The upper part of the hall is accessed via a mural
passageway that runs along the western third of the wall to the cistern
in the north-west turret. The north-east chamber is entered from
the upper part of the hall, probably via a catwalk from the mural
passageway opening opposite. The stairwell ends at the roof level
above which was equipped with a parapet and parados, while the turrets
continued on past the battlements of the main tower. The
north-west turret still supports its battlements and once contained a
bakery. The whole structure is made of coursed septaria blocks
and coralline crag with oolite and allegedly Caen quoins, dressings and
facings. The plinth is also allegedly cut from Caen stone.
The keep is often compared with those at Conisborough in Yorkshire and Mortemer in Normandy.
Copyright©2020
Paul Martin Remfry