Warkworth
Warkworth first enters history in about 737AD when Werceworde was recorded as a land of King Ceolwulf which he held when a monk at Lindisfarne. King Henry II
(1154-89) later confirmed Tynemouth priory's lands. These
included the gifts of Earl Roger of Northumberland (1080-95) amongst
which were the tithes of Corbridge, Newburn, Warkworth (Werchewrth)
and Rothbury. These would all later be held by the lords of
Warkworth. Warkworth is next mentioned in 1165 when it was noted
that Roger Fitz Richard (d.1178) had been given land worth £20 in
the borough of Newcastle and £32 2s in Wercheswrda.
Although the castle is described as a ‘well-documented example of
a twelfth century tower keep castle' the above and what follows shows
that this is not true and the origins, buildings and even if the castle
was of a tower keep design is far from certain.
The foundation of Warkworth castle is undoubtedly entwined in the
Norman annexation of Northumberland which occurred increasingly after
1070. It would therefore be logical to fortify Warkworth, as the
major crossing point of the River Coquet half way between Bamburgh and Newcastle, at any time after Newcastle was founded in 1080. As the land was royal land when reclaimed by Henry II in 1157, it would seem likely that the fortress was a royal construction. The least likely builders would be Henry I (1100-35), King Stephen when he held Northumberland between 1135 and 1139, or Henry II
between 1157 and 1165 by which time he had given it away. It
therefore seems most likely that the motte and bailey castle was built
either between 1139 and 1152 by Earl Henry (d.1152), the lord of Northumberland during that period, or by William Rufus (1087-1100). It is most unlikely that Earl Henry's son, the later King William I of Scotland
(1165-1214), would have built the fortress as he was only the nominal
lord of Northumberland from 1152 until 1157 by which time he had just
reached the age of 14. With the choice between Earl Henry (1139-52), who is known to have built no mottes and William Rufus
(1087-1100), the logical choice would be King William as the
builder. Certainly he may have wanted a castle commanding the
route from Newcastle to Bamburgh during his campaign of 1095.
King William II (1087-1100) is
recorded in only one contemporary source, Florence Worcester, as
having built ‘a siege castle' called Bad Neighbour during the
campaign against Robert Mowbray. Later twelfth and thirteenth
century chronicles elaborated on this story, but with how much
knowledge is unknown. The sources are examined under Bamburgh castle,
but the implication ‘might be' that the siege castle was actually
the foundation of Warkworth castle. Certainly the scale of the
earthworks suggest a royal castle. Further, there is no evidence
that Earl Henry (d.1152) ever built a motte, let alone one on the scale of Warkworth.
Whatever the case of Warkworth's founding, the district including the castles of Norham, Wark, Alnwick, Newcastle, Harbottle and Bamburgh were much fought over in the period following the death of Henry I in 1135 and the establishment of King David of Scotland in Northumberland and Cumberland by the treaty of Durham in 1139. At this point Earl Henry (d.1152) was supposed to become earl of Northumberland in exchange for returning the castles of Bamburgh and Newcastle to King Stephen. However, he seems to have retained both these castles until his death in 1152, while Harbottle, Norham and Wark
were certainly destroyed in 1138 and apparently not rebuilt until the
late 1150s. It is quite possible that Warkworth was similarly
overthrown in this period 1136-39. Consequently it seems unlikely
that Earl Henry would have been troubled to build Warkworth castle if
it didn't exist at this time when Harbottle, Wark and Norham were certainly destroyed. Alnwick,
as the fortress of Eustace Fitz John, not the king, was also allowed to
survive. In 1157 all the surviving fortresses of Northumberland
and the sites of the others were returned to King Henry II (1154-89) who ordered Norham and Wark rebuilt as well as possibly Harbottle. No fortress was mentioned at Warkworth at this time, although Roger Fitz Richard witnessed a royal charter at Newcastle upon Tyne
during the early months of 1158. Possibly he already held the
castle or castle site. Certainly the castle existed by 1164 as
King Henry's brother, William (d.1164), witnessed the king's grant to
Roger Fitz Richard of the castle and manor of Warkworth with all
purtenances just as King Henry I (1100-35) had granted the manor. This charter was recorded in the Quo Warranto
proceedings of the 1290s. The question is, was the castle granted
by Henry I or not, as the late thirteenth century copy clearly states
that Henry I only granted the manor, while Henry II (1154-89) granted
the castle and manor. It also seems unlikely that Henry I could
have granted Warkworth to Roger Fitz Richard if his provenance is
correctly assessed below of him being of the house of Clare. It
is therefore possible that Henry II confirmed Warkworth to Roger on the
strength of a verbal assurance that Henry I had granted the place to
Roger or his predecessor. Certainly no original charter of the
transaction has survived.
Warkworth is mentioned contemporaneously for the first time in 1165
when it was noted that Roger Fitz Richard (d.1179+) had been given land
worth £20 in the borough of Newcastle and £32 2s in Wercheswrda. Roger Fitz Richard was a baron of some weight at the start of the reign of Henry II
(1154-89). At the end of August 1153 Roger was the second of the
3 recorded lords helping Duke Henry of Normandy (d.1189) in the siege
of Stamford castle.
The other 2 were Hugh Beauchamp (d.1187) and Hamon Falaise. Two
months previously Roger had been at Coventry when Duke Henry was
attended by Earl Roger of Hereford (d.1155), Walcheline Maminot (d.1190, of Dover), Warin Fitz Gerold the chamberlain (d.1159), Hugh Piraris (d.1166+, of Corfham)
and Roger Fitz Richard. His good service was obviously rewarded
for in 1156 he was recorded as having been given 7s 7d worth of land in
Suffolk, pardoned 10s Danegeld and 7s 1d gift in Essex, 40s Danegeld
and 50s 8d gift in Warwickshire. In 1158 he was pardoned 35s gift
in Essex as well as being given £58 worth of land in
Northumberland and receiving a gift of 40m (£26 13s 4d) from the
king in the same county. He was also pardoned giving a gift of
62s to the king in Warwickshire. In 1159 he was gifted £52
12s in Northumberland and the next year, 1160, he was given land to the
value of £20 in the borough of Newcastle
and Warkworth worth £32 12s. Quite obviously the land worth
£32 12s included the site of Warkworth castle if the fortress was
not still functional. These payments continued until around
Christmas 1177, although the payments for Newcastle had ceased in
1176. There is no direct evidence as to the provenance of Roger
Fitz Richard, but it should be noted that he was important enough to
marry into the Vere family when he married Alice (d.1185+), the widow
of Robert Essex (d.bef.1140) of Clavering. To this end, and the
fact that the family used Fitz like the Fitz Walters of Dunmow, it is
possible that Roger Fitz Richard was a member of the Clare
family of Essex. The most likely origin of Roger was that he was
a son of Richard Fitz Baldwin who died in 1136, quite possibly
defending his uncle, Richard Clare, who was ambushed and killed at the
start of the Great Welsh Revolt on 15 April 1136.
Whatever his origins, in 1168 Roger Fitz Richard was assigned to view the works going on at Newcastle
at a cost of 47s 4d and further work paid for from Lancashire which
cost £18 18s 8d. In the latter view he was associated with
Robert Stuteville (d.1186). At this time the value of his lands
in Northumberland were valued at 1m (13s 4d) tax for the 1 knight's fee
he held in the county. Presumably this was Warkworth. Roger
paid scutage for 1 fee in Yorkshire in 1172 as he did not participate
in the Irish campaign of that year. During the Young King's war
Roger supported Henry II
(1154-89) and was sent £30 for retaining his knights at Newcastle
by the writ of Richard Lucy. According to the chronicler
Fantosme, during the summer of 1173 King William of Scotland invaded Northumberland and besieged Wark castle, forcing its commander, Roger Stuteville (d.1185+), to request a 40 day truce and send to Henry II (1154-89) for instructions. The Scottish host then went to Alnwick
and called on the young bastard William Vescy (d.1206) to surrender or
make a truce like Wark. This was refused and the king then
marched on nearby Warkworth.
They came to Warkworth, not bothering to stop;
Because the castle was weak, the wall and the earthworks.
And Roger Fitz Richard, a valiant knight,
Had had it in custody; but he was not able to keep it.
Instead Roger waited for the Scottish host within the much more powerful Newcastle.
The implication is that there was no effort made to defend the
castle. That the castle was not mentioned in the subsequent
attack on the borough the next year would suggest it was destroyed in
the summer of 1173.
After taking the undefended Warkworth castle, King William again baulked at an open assault, this time at Newcastle against one of the major fortresses in the North defended by Roger Fitz Richard in person. Instead King William set off for Carlisle via Prudhoe,
both of which he hoped might be easier prey. Therefore the
Scottish attack of 1173 proved largely unsuccessful and King William
was soon forced back over the border by Richard Lucy (d.1179).
However this was not the end of the affair and the Scots invaded again
the next year.
A contemporary source stated that the new campaign of 1174 began with King William of Scotland sending his brother Earl David of Huntingdon (d.1219) to Leicester, to lead the men there against King Henry II (d.1189). William then went with his army to besiege Carlisle
where he tarried a few days, leaving part of his army around the
castle. He soon went in person with the rest of his host to
Northumberland, laying waste the lands of the king and his barons, on
route taking Liddel castle as well as Appleby and Brough,
the latter 2 being royal castles which Robert Stuteville (d.1186) was
keeping. Next they moved against Warkworth castle, which Roger
Fitz Richard held in custody. Finally the Scots took Harbottle castle
which was held by Odinel Umfraville. It is interesting to note
the taking of Warkworth castle is therefore placed in 1174 here.
Yet when the chronicler talks about the attack on Warkworth in detail
no castle is mentioned.
But Earl Duncan at once
divided the army into 3 parts; one part he kept with him and the
remaining 2 he sent to burn the surrounding towns and to slay folk from
the greatest to the least, as well as to carry off spoil. And he
himself with the part of the army which he had chosen entered the town
of Warkworth and burned it, and slew in it all whom he found there, men
and women, great and small; and he made his followers break into the
church of Saint Laurence which was there and slay in it and in the
house of the priest of that town more than a hundred men, besides women
and children; oh, the sorrow! Then you might hear the screaming
of women; the crying of old men; the groans of the dying; the despair
of the young!
Quite clearly the chronicler blundered in his summary which mentions an
attack on the castle in 1174. Fantosme confirms this
scenario. After the attack on Warkworth castle the previous
summer, the early summer of 1174 saw King William back in the North of England besieging Prudhoe for 3 days without result, other than losing good men. He therefore withdrew to besiege Alnwick castle
and on route part of his army violated St Laurence's church in
Warkworth, castrating 3 of the priests there and killing some 300 men,
presumably on route rather than in the church itself. The lack of
mention of the castle probably means that it had not survived the
attentions of the Scottish host in 1173 and that Hoveden compressed the
attack on the castle in 1173 and the attack on the town in 1174 into
one event. In reality the castle seems to have fallen 1173 with
the townsfolk being massacred the next year. Alternatively both
may be right and the castle was sacked on both occasions.
Regardless, after the attack of Warkworth borough in 1174, Roger Fitz
Richard (d.1179+) joined his forces to those of Odinel Umfraville
(d.1182. Prudhoe), Bernard Balliol (d.1190, Barnard Castle) and their
companions and marched on Alnwick where they surprised and captured King William on 13 July 1174. Despite this victory, Roger fell out of favour with Henry II
(1154-89) and was fined 40m (£26 13s 4d) for misdeeds in the
forest of Essex in 1177. Further, his Norfolk and Suffolk manor
of ‘Stanham' was seized by the Crown during the early summer of
1179. It would therefore seem that Roger was stripped of
Warkworth for some failure at the same time. Possibly this was
allowing it to fall to the Scots in 1173/74. King Henry did not
take kindly to other barons who had abandoned their charges without
resistence during that war, viz. Appleby.
Roger Fitz Richard was still alive in 1178 when he fined 20m (£13
6s 8d) for his misdeeds in the Essex forest of which he paid 10m
(£6 13s 4d), the rest being required under Norfolk. He was
last heard of the next year when he and his son, William, paid the last
10m (£6 13s 4d) of his fine in Norfolk. Roger's
Northumberland lands, however, appear to have been in royal hands,
probably since 1174. Roger in 1179 would have been over 44 years
old and left his wife, described as a 60 or 80 year old widow by 1185
when she had 2 recorded sons who were knights. Presumably this
was Roger's heir, Robert Fitz Roger (d.1214) and William Fitz
Roger. There was also a daughter, Alice, who had been born before
1155 and who was by 1185 married to John Fitz Richard (d.1190), a
grandson of Eustace Fitz John of Alnwick (d.1157).
In 1187 the royal borough of Warkworth and its appurtenances of Acklington, High Buston (Werbuttesdun)
and Birling, were taxed £6 6s 8d of which the final 63s 4d was
paid the next year. That these monies were collected by the
sheriff shows that Warkworth was under royal control, even though the
sons of Roger Fitz Richard (d.1179+) were of age by 1185, if not much
earlier. A tallage of 63s 4d was also given from the same places
as a gift to Richard I in
1189. There appears to have been another family of similar names
to the dispossessed lords of Warkworth around at this time with a Roger
Fitz Robert appearing in Dorset in 1188 and a William Fitz Roger,
clerk, and his brother Ralph appearing in Hocton and Hawthorpe (Horthorp)
in Lincolnshire as well as in Suffolk, Essex and Warwickshire with
Leicestershire. Whenever Roger Fitz Robert did die towards the
end of the reign of Henry II
(1154-89), he was eventually succeeded by his son, Robert Fitz Roger
(d.1214). He does not seem to have been the man mentioned from
1185 to 1187 in Nottingham and Derbyshire, Lincolnshire, the honour of
Bristol and Warwickshire and Leicestershire. This man seems to
have ended his days as an outlaw. The Robert of Warkworth had
witnessed his father's foundation of Aynho hospital in 1170 and
appeared as a knight in 1185. This suggests that he had been born
before 1164.
The affairs of Robert Fitz Roger (d.1214) improved immeasurably for the better when Richard I took the throne in 1189. Around the time of the death of King Henry II
(6 July 1189) Robert was granted Blythburgh in Suffolk. This
property was previously held by Hugh Cressy (d.1189), the deceased
first husband of Robert's wife, Margaret Caisneto (d.1230). It
consisted of some 11 fees in East Anglia. A year later in the
Spring of 1190, it was also recorded that the sheriff of Northumberland
was allowed £16 12d in his account as Werkewurda
with purtenances were now no longer a part of the royal demesne from
that time forward by royal charter. However, it was noted that a
gift of 60s 4d had been raised on the borough and its purtenances,
presumably before this grant was made. Therefore it seems
that Warkworth was under royal control from to 1174/79 to 1190.
On 5 April 1194 King William of Scots petitioned King Richard to restore the counties of Northumberland, Cumberland,
Westmorland and Lancashire to him to hold as his ancestors had held
them. The king deferred his answer until he could take the
opinion of his council. On 8 April Richard was attended by
William St Mere Eglise (d.1224), Robert Fitz Roger, Robert Tregoz
(d.1214) and Guy Dive at Northampton. Presumably Robert was part
of this council and on 11 April the king refused the petition of the
Scottish king. Then on 16 April 1194, the king granted Robert the
manor of Iver (Eura)
in Buckinghamshire. Those laymen with the king at this time
included Earl David of Huntingdon (d.1219), Earl Ranulf of Chester
(d.1232), Earl Roger Bigod (d.1221), Earl William Ferrers (d.1247),
William St Mere Eglise (d.1224)..., William Marshall (d.1219), Geoffrey
Fitz Peter (d.1213), Hugh Bardolf (d.1197), William Warenne (d.1240),
Osbert Fitz Hervey, William Lestrange (d.1203+), Robert Tresgoz
(d.1214) and Philip Fitz Robert. The next day King William took
part in King Richard's second coronation. Robert was still with
the king at Portsmouth during May when he attempted to Cross the
Channel to Normandy and presumably then campaigned with Richard in
Normandy after the crossing was achieved. During September 1194
it was recorded that the grant of Iver in Wallingford lordship had
cost Robert 500m (£333 6s 8d). Around the same time King Richard
granted him 11 fees in Eye lordship. The same year, 1194, Robert
was recorded as owing £9 12s 4d from the farm of Saham in Norfolk
in 1193, but Robert claimed the amount was required from the earl of
Clare. This again could suggest a link between the lords of
Warkworth and the Clares.
Two years later Robert was found with the king in Normandy, this time at the building of Chateau Gaillard.
He would appear to have remained with the king for the bulk of the
royal campaigns against King Philip Augustus of France and was present
at the peace treaty made between them at Les Andelys in June or July
1197. Before 1 September 1197, allegedly in 1195, Robert founded
Langley abbey, Norfolk. Finally in 1197, Robert fined
for 100m (£66 13s 4d) to obtain the marriage of the son and heir
of Hugh Cressy which was granted by the advice of the archbishop of
Canterbury and other relatives of the child.
During the reign of King John
(1199-1216) Robert's career continued apace. In 1199 Robert was
confirmed in his knight's fee in Northumberland, wrongly said to have
been granted him by Henry II in
1168. This was probably Warkworth which was still valued as a
loss to the Crown of £32 2s pa. The same year it was
recorded that Robert had paid 300m (£200) to have his charters
renewed, these being the gift by King Henry and King Richard
by which he held seisin of his lands. This transaction was
carried out under Norfolk and Suffolk, although it is widely stated
that this referred solely to Warkworth. However, it was on 23
July 1200, King John made an important charter to Robert Fitz Roger
where he confirmed to him the gift which King Henry (1154-89) made to Roger Fitz Richard in hereditary fee for his service, namely the castle of Werkewrd and the manor with all its purtenances just as King Henry
(1100-35), Henry's grandfather, had held them. Possibly King
Henry II's charter actually said this as Henry often harked back to the
days of his grandfather in his chancery. The evidence as it stands
strongly implies that Warkworth castle was standing during the reign of
King Henry I (1100-35) and therefore strengthens the impression that William Rufus
was probably responsible for the castle's foundation in 1095.
Certainly I can think of no mottes actually built by Henry I (1100-35).
Around the accession of King John, Robert also briefly acquired the honour of Tickhill in Yorkshire and possibly Aylsham (Aillesham) and Cawston (Causton)
in Norfolk, although these may have belonged to another Robert Fitz
Roger. In 1200 Robert became sheriff of Northumberland until 1202
and the king reset his many debts to 450m (£300) which had to be
paid off at 100m (£66 13s 4d) pa. Before this was even
begun the king forgave him another 200m (£133 6s 8d) .
Robert soon paid what remained of his debt at the correct rate.
Warkworth had 2 mentions when King John confirmed the properties of
Brinkburn priory on 19 February 1201. One of the gifts was a toft
from German Tisun in Werkewurth
as well as a salt works from the same vill by Robert Fitz Roger.
The same year the tithes of Warkworth were also confirmed to Tynemouth priory.
On 13 August 1204, King John
told Robert, no doubt in his capacity as sheriff of Northumberland, to
repair those royal castles he had in custody by the view and testimony
of honest men. This explains Robert spending £33 4s 3d on
castle works at Bamburgh and Newcastle
that Michaelmas. Robert then made the last major addition to his
lands when the king granted him the farm of the manors of Corbridge and
Rothbury on 15 October 1205. Robert remained sheriff of
Northumberland for the rest of his life, although he usually had a
companion working with him.
On his tour of the north King John's scribe wrote 3 letters from
Warkworth on 2 February 1212. Within six months Robert Fitz Roger
was dead, aged at least 50. Consequently, on 12 August 1212, King John gave a charter to John Fitz Robert Fitz Roger confirming the gift by Henry II
(1154-89) to the castle and manor of Warkworth with all purtenances as
that king had given to Roger Fitz Richard the father of Robert and
which King Richard I (1189-99) had confirmed to Robert for the service of 1 knight; also from the gift of the same King Henry the manor of Clavering
with purtenances as was given to Robert and which was confirmed for the
service of 1 knight and the manor of Newburn for 1 knight and the
service of Robert Trukelegna for the service of 40s pa and the manor of
Whalton with all the barony which was Robert Cramaville's for the
service of 3 knights; and the manor of Corbridge at fee for a rent of
£10 for which John returned the charters of King Henry and King
Richard. At September 1214, it was recorded that John held the
following places with their notional value, viz. £32 2s in
Warkworth and purtenances, £30 in Newburn, £30 in
Corbridge, £20 in Rothbury, 40s in Whittingham with the
custody of the heir of William Flamville, in Durham bishopric £23
14s 3d in the wapentake of Seberge [within which stood Barnards Castle] and in the town of Newcastle £50.
John Fitz Robert at some point married into the Balliol family, taking
Ada Balliol (d.1251) as his wife. She brought him Stokesley,
Yorkshire, as her dower. During the Baron's War of 1215-17, John
Fitz Robert was named as one of the surety barons for Magna
Carta. King John appears not to have moved against Fitz Robert
this year, for attacks by the king were recorded around the castles of Alnwick, Mitford, Morpeth and Wark, but not Warkworth. John Fitz Robert appears to have remained initially loyal and was on 1 May 1215 made constable of Norwich castle
for King John. This must soon have been revoked for by 16 March
1216 the king had seized his manor of Aynho. Certainly after the
battle of Lincoln in May 1217, he submitted to the new government of Henry III
(1216-72) on 25 July 1217. Despite this on 8 November 1217, he
was stripped of his farm of Corbridge and ordered to hand it over to
his old colleague, Philip Oldcoats (d.1221). Regardless one John
Fitz Robert was still sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk on 31 October
1217. On 3 February 1221, John of Warkworth was amongst various
northern barons who were ordered to assess and then destroy Skipsea castle due to the rebellion of Earl William Aumale of Cockermouth.
Then, on 19 February 1221, he was ordered to join the full feudal host
of England that was ordered to converge on and destroy Bytham
Castle. Like his father John became sheriff of Northumberland, in
his case from 1224 to 1227. On 16 April 1225 he was ordered, as
sheriff, to repair the king's houses in Newcastle keep, while in August 1224 he had participated in the siege of Bedford castle.
John Fitz Robert died a little before 20 February 1241 when he held
lands in lands in Buckinghamshire Northumberland, Oxfordshire, Norfolk
and Suffolk and was aged over 50. He was succeeded by his young
son Roger who died young a little before 22 June 1249 when his son
Robert was just 1½ years old. At this time he was holding Clavering in Essex for 1 fee of the honour of Raleigh, Datchworth (Thacheworthe)
in Hertfordshire, Aynho in Northampton for 1 fee and Warkworth which
was extended in full. This consisted of a borough and new town, a
mill from which the prior of Tynemouth received 3m (£2) yearly, a
fishery with a small ship called ‘Cobel', a little round wood
called Sunderland and the vills of Acklington, Birling, Buston and a
quarter of Togston out of which were due to Durham church 20s pa
for sustaining 4 wax tapers about the body of St Cuthbert by the deed
of Robert Fitz Roger (d.1179+). Roger was also accustomed to give
yearly for the keeping of the castle and manor £18 6s 8d, 3 robes
and hay and oats for 2 horses. Warkworth church was held by the
bishop of Carlisle. There were also
the vill and forest of Rothbury with the towns of Rothbury, Thropton,
Snitter and Newtown from which 20s was due yearly at the
Exchequer. For the land of Cherland there was a forester with a
horse who had 40s and a robe yearly for his service, while 3 foot
foresters had 60s and their robes. Rothbury church was in the
gift of the bishop of Carlisle by the collation of King Henry I
(1100-35). On 5 May 1241, the king assigned as dower to John's
widow, Ada Balliol, the manors of Newburn and Whalton in Northumberland
and Iver in Buckinghamshire. It should be noted that another John
Fitz Robert survived his namesake and was still lord of half a fee at
Haregworth in Northamptonshire and another half at Pottun in Bedford
and Buckinghamshire on 6 November 1241. Possibly he was the same
man who had been sheriff of Norfolk in 1215.
John's son, Roger Fitz John, died young, at least 20 years old, around
the beginning of June 1249, at a tournament apparently in Argences,
Normandy. He left a 1½ year old son, Robert Fitz Roger
(d.1310) as heir. On 14 August 1249, the king granted the
wardship of two thirds of the lands late of Roger Fitz John to William
Valance (d.1296), the lord of Goodrich castle.
These lands were extended at £145 8s 6½d, except for
£4 8s 10½d which the king granted to him for the keeping
of Warkworth castle on condition that this extend is deducted from
William's yearly fee at the Exchequer. By this act Valance was to
hold the barony until the coming of age of the heirs, or if they died
he would give up the lands and receive the like money back from the
Exchequer as his yearly fee. He was also granted the marriage of
Isabel, the widow of Roger. She also, no doubt, received the
remaining third of the barony as dower, although the king refused the
offer of Ada Balliol (d.1251) to buy the custody of her grandson for
1,200m (£800). Interestingly, at this time Matthew Paris (d.1259) described the castle as noble (nobili castro de Wercwurthe).
On 21 May 1268, William Valance (d.1295) made an agreement with Robert
Fitz Roger whereby he returned the manors of Blythburgh and Blickling,
the land that belonged to Margaret Cressy the daughter of William
Cheynne, with West Lexham (Westlechesham) and Filby (Phileby)
lately held by Stephen Cressy, deceased. Valance, in 1266, had
negotiated to acquire the whole land in the right of Robert Fitz Roger
(d.1310). The same year Robert agreed that he owed William 450m
(£300) to be paid off at 200m (£133 6s 8d) per annum, or
have the sums raised from his lands and chattels in Essex and
Northumberland, but this agreement was immediately cancelled and the
payments quashed. With Robert's coming of age he became much
involved in the wars of the times. He fought in Wales in 1277 and
1282-83, was at the parliament that condemned Dafydd ap Gruffydd
(d.1283) and then was much active in the Scottish wars until his death
in 1310.
In 1292 Warkworth briefly paid host to King Edward I. On 21 November Edward left Norham where Edward Balliol had paid him homage and moved via Wark to Roxburgh on 26 November. He left Roxburgh on 11 December and began a perambulation around Northumberland which saw him staying at Alnwick on 17 December and then Warkworth on the eighteenth. He eventually spent Christmas and New Year at Newcastle upon Tyne
where Edward Balliol again paid homage to him. In 1295, Robert
Fitz Roger (d.1310) was called before the Quo Warranto commission to
see by what right he held the right of wreck on his part of sea coast
in Warkworth liberty, his free forest in Rothbury, his rights in
Corbridge and free warren in Warkworth, Whalton and Newburn and
his markets and fairs. He claimed most of these dated back to
antiquity or the time of King John. On 11 September 1297 Robert
was captured at the battle of Stirling Bridge, but was realised in time
to fight at Falkirk the next year with his son and heir, John Fitz
Robert. He also took part in the siege of Caerlaverock in 1300, the defence of Berwick in 1302 and the battle of Methven in 1306.
Robert Fitz Roger died aged over 62, a little before 29 April 1310,
leaving his son, John Fitz Robert or John Clavering as he was otherwise
known aged over 40. Robert's lands were listed and included, Iver
in Buckinghamshire, Clavering
in Essex, Horsford in Norfolk, Blythburgh in Suffolk and the bulk of
his lands in Northumberland - viz. Whalton, Widdrington, Lynton, Eshott
and Bockenfield, Horton, Ogle (O[ggille?]), South Gosforth, Newham,
Denton, Fawdon, Kenton and Newbiggin on the Moor, Shotton in Glendale,
Herle, Kirkharle, Herle and lands called Cheuervile, Ripplinton,
Newburn with the hamlets of Walbottle, Deuelawe and Botirlawe, Throckelawe, Deuelawe,
Corbridge, Warkworth castle and borough including the new borough with
the hamlets of Birling and Acklington, Upper Botilston, Togston and
Rothbury with the hamlets of Newtown, Thropton and Snitter. The
king granted John his father's lands on his doing homage on 29 May
1310. The barony was obviously in trouble from the first and it
soon becomes apparent that John was continually short of money.
On 20 November 1311, the king granted John land to the value of
£400 a year in Norfolk around the manor of Costessey as well
as lands in Suffolk and Northamptonshire on condition that John willed
his castle of Warkworth with the manors of Rothbury, Newburn, Corbridge
and Iver to the king on his death. In the meantime he and his
wife, Hawise, were allowed to hold them for life. The value of
John's lands was reckoned at £700 in value.
On 8 July 1316, John Clavering received protection for 1 year for his
chattels in his manors of Newburn, Corbridge, Rothbury and Warkworth,
Northumberland, from which nothing was to be taken. It would
therefore appear that he was being pursued for debts. Piracy was
also taking place in the district. On 13 November 1316, a
commission of oyer and terminer was granted concerning a ship laden
with provisions for Berwick on Tweed that
was forced by piratical attacks into Warkworth port where the ship was
boarded by Richard Thirlewal, Robert Arreyns, Eustace le Constable of
Warkworth, John Aketon, Hugh Gulum and John Lescebury and stripped of
its contents. The ship was then impounded. In 1318 the
castle garrison, with those of Bamburgh and Alnwick
combined to seize the 2 ‘piles' of Bolton and Whittingham which
were opposing the king. A little more is learned of the castle
garrison on 28 September 1319, when King Edward II
(1307-27) accounted for an addition to the garrison for the castle of 4
men at arms and 8 hobelars to enhance the existing force of 12 men at
arms.
On 15 September 1322, Earl David of Athol (d.1326) was appointed as
chief warden of Northumberland and its marches and various lords were
ordered to give him aid with their entire posse as he commanded, but
keeping sufficient force to guard their castles. The order was
given to Henry Percy (d.1352) for Alnwick, Ralph Neville (d.1331) for Warkworth, Roger Horsle for Bamburgh, John Lillebourn and Roger Mauduyt for Dunstanburgh, the constable of Prudhoe and Richard Emedlon as chief warden of Newcastle upon Tyne.
At the time Warkworth garrison sent 26 hobelars for the ill fated
Scottish campaign. Ralph Neville (d.1331), the keeper of
Warkworth castle, was married to John Clavering's daughter, Euphemia
(d.bef.1301). He was also lord of Brancepeth castle.
On 2 August 1326, John Clavering was ordered to repair to his castle of
Warkworth as ‘magnates having castles and fortresses in those
parts should stay there for the defence of those parts'. Within 2
months the king complained to Neville that small Scottish forces were
penetrating the district and that he, with the constables of Alnwick, Bamburgh, Dunstanburgh and Norham, were doing nothing to repel them.
On 20 February 1327, it was noted that
John Clavering (d.1332) had granted Edward II
(1307-27) the reversion of Warkworth castle and other lands in
Northumberland on a promise that he should have a suitable marriage for
one of his sisters, but this was not done; therefore in recompense for
the loss of the marriage and his expenses in going to Scotland as
king's messenger he is released of his arrears of the farm of Corbridge
which he holds for a yearly rent of £40 and which is greatly
impoverished and wasted by the frequent attacks of the Scots.
Consequently he is to have that town for life without payment of any
rent. This immediately followed the Scots attacking Norham castle on 1 February. Then on 30 June 1327, Ralph Neville (d.1331) was granted £157 7s 6d out of the customs of Newcastle to discharge the debt for his wages as well as the wages of the men at arms and hobelars who he retained in the service of Edward II when he was constable of Warkworth castle. In August 1327, Robert Bruce's forces are said to
have attacked Warkworth castle after they had unsuccessfully attacked Alnwick.
This is obviously an anachronistic entry as it is stated that Warkworth
belonged to Henry Percy (d.1352). This transfer did not happen
until 1328, which means the chronicler was writing after this
date. Scottish sources only mention attacks on Norham and Alnwick
castles after the July to August Weardale campaign. Then, towards
the end of the year, while Edward III was preparing for his marriage to
Philippa of Hainault, Bruce entered Northumberland again and besieged Alnwick, Warkworth and other castles, although they all held, killing some of Bruce's men.
The next year on 1 March 1328, a royal grant was made to Henry Percy
(d.1352) in fee simple of the reversion of Warkworth castle after the
death of John Clavering (d.1332), tenant for life and in the event of
his death without male issue of all the other lands in the county held
by him in fee tail, provided that the 500m (£333 6s 8d) yearly
now payable to Percy in time of peace or war by indenture, that he
remains with a certain number of men at arms shall cease and also that
he accounts for any excess if the issues of the castle and lands exceed
500m (£333 6s 8d) . This was the same day the treaty of
Northampton, actually ratified on 4 May 1328, was said to begin
from. The treaty recognised that Robert Bruce should possess the kingdom of Scotland without any homage. That his son, David Bruce
(d.1371), should marry Joan Plantagenet (d.1362) and that England and
Scotland should become ‘good allies' and subjects of either
kingdom should not hold any lands in the other. For this Bruce
would pay 30,000m (£20,000) within 3 years and King Edward III
(1327-77) would use his influence to have the pope release Bruce and
his subjects from excommunication and interdict. Both these
latter points were fulfilled. On 13 May 1329, King Edward
consented to receive 5,000m (£3,333 6s 8d) on account of the
10,000m (£6,666 13s 4d) due, the balance to be paid at
Martinmas. After King Robert's
death on 7 June 1329, the king acknowledged receipt of the first 5,000m
(£3,333 6s 8d) on 26 June. Another 5,000m was paid on 12
November 1329, 5,000m around 3 April 1330 and the final 10,000m
(£6,666 13s 4d) on 15 July 1330. Both parties therefore
kept their promises according to the treaty.
John Clavering, aged over 62, died without male heir in 1332, although
no inquest post mortem was carried out on his lands. This was
probably due to the agreement with Henry Percy (d.1352), which the king
ordered to take effect as John was dead on 23 January 1332 and Percy
had paid homage for these new lands of Warkworth castle, Rothbury and
Newburn with all his lands in Northumberland. The next year, on
29 July 1333, King Edward III stayed briefly at Warkworth when on campaign at Berwick on Tweed.
A year later on 24 September 1334, Henry Percy (d.1352) tried to ensure
his lands were enfeoffed to him in tail male, these included Alnwick
and Warkworth castles, these included Alnmouth, Long Houghton, Lesbury
and Chatton with land in Wooler held by Isabella Vescy as well as
Newburn held by Ralph Neville (d.1331) and the dower part of
Warkworth, Corbridge, Acklington and Rothbury with the
hamlets of Snitter, Birling, Thropton and Newtown held by Hawise
[Tibotot] the widow of John Clavering (d.1332), all in
Northumberland. However, the attempt was abandoned due to
previously enacted laws being violated by the grant, but the act was
later successfully carried out on 4 January 1335 with the exception of
the church advowsons.
John Glanton, on 1 November 1336, asked the king for recompense for the
time when he was constable of Warkworth castle and held the Scottish
prisoner of war, William Bard, there for 3 weeks short of 3
years. Presumably this had occurred recently during the wars of Edward Balliol
and before Percy took over the castle. Modern sources state that
Warkworth town, but not the castle was sacked in 1341, the same year
that King David II returned to
Scotland. This may well have happened for 3 years later on 19
October 1344, the men of many Northumberland parishes which included
Warkworth, Chatton and Rothbury claimed
that for the most part their
crops and other goods had been burned and otherwise destroyed and their
animals plundered by the Scots.
They therefore requested remission from the current taxation of a
ninth. The next year, on 18 February 1345, John Clavering's
widow, Hawise Tibotot died and her dower in Clavering
passed to her blood heir, her much married daughter Eva (d.1369).
The rest of the barony of Warkworth was now totally consumed within the
Percy honour with both Henry Percy (d.1352) and his son Henry (d.1368)
granting charters throughout their careers at Warkworth and indeed both
dying there.
The elder Henry Percy died on 26/27 February 1352. Soon
afterwards an inquest post mortem was carried out on his lands.
Within his many lands was the barony of Warkworth. This consisted
of the castle and manor with the towns of Birling, Acklington,
Rothbury, Newtown, Thropton and Snitter. These were all held of
the king in chief in fee tail by homage and fealty and by the service
of 2 knights. There then followed an extent of the castle and
manor. This included herbage of the castle moat, the pasture of
Wooler, rents from the towns of High Buston (Ourebotleston) and
Togston, a fishery in the River Coquet and a wood called
Sundreland. The extent of Acklington included the site of a chief
messuage, a windmill, park, and halmote, while Rothbury included 20
shielings (skalinge) in the forest and rent of burgages. Newtown
included a land called ‘Storeland' and a fulling-mill.
Snitter included a meadow called ‘Brademedwe' and a plot of land
called Chirland. Corbridge borough was held of the king in chief
in fee tail by fealty and by service of rendering £40 yearly to
the king for the old farm with a new increment of 10s. There was
also a plot of land called ‘Waldefleys,' a wood called
‘Lynels,' a plot of land called ‘Prendestretland,' a house
called ‘Tollebogth' farmed for 6s 8d pa, a plot of waste called
‘les Aldehals,' a yearly rent of 10s from the mill of Develeston
and two water-mills. Henry also held the advowson of the chapel
of St Mary in Warkworth. The chapel lay some third of a mile
south of the castle and was founded by Robert Fitz Roger (d.1214) and
given to the prior of Durham.
In the early fifteenth century the castle was where the Percy's planned their abortive overthrow of Henry IV which led to Harry Hotspur Percy being killed at the battle of Shrewsbury on 21 July 1403. After this his father, Earl Henry Percy (d.1408), was forced to surrender to the king at York.
In 1404 Percy was pardoned and returned to his northern castle, only to
rebel again in 1405. The result was King Henry IV (d.1413)
attacking the fortress with cannon. The king himself stated that
after 7 volleys of his artillery the well supplied castle
surrendered. It was then given to John Plantagenet (d.1435) the
later duke of Bedford. Earl Henry was killed in 1408 without
regaining Warkworth. In 1416 Henry Percy, the son of Hotspur, was
restored to his patrimony which included Warkworth. As earl of
Northumberland he was killed at the battle of St Albans in 1455 and his
son, yet another Henry, was killed at the battle of Towton in
1461. Both had supported Lancaster in the civil war. His
son, another Earl Henry Percy (d.1489), continued the family support
for King Henry VI (d.1471) and consequently lost the castle in the
fighting of the early 1460s. These campaigns are discussed under Bamburgh castle.
On 1 August 1464, the title of earl of Northumberland was given to John
Neville (d.1471), the brother of Warwick the Kingmaker. During
his 7 year tenure of the castle, he built the Montagu Tower, Neville
having the title Montagu from his grandfather, Earl Thomas Montagu of
Salibury (d.1428). After the death of the Neville brothers in
1471 the castle was restored to Henry Percy (d.1489).
Earl Henry Percy (d.1489) is said to have remodelled the castle and
began the building of the collegiate church in the bailey beneath the
motte. This work was abandoned on his killing in 1489. In
1536, Earl Henry's grandson, another Earl Henry (d.1537), bequeathed
all his estates to King Henry VIII (d.1547). Consequently the
king had his castle of Warkworth examined. The inquiry taken on
22 February 1538 found that Warkworth was:
A very proper house in good
repair. There is a marvellous proper dongeon of eight towers all joined
in one house, one of which needs repair. It rains very much in the
dining chamber and the little chamber over the gates where the Earl lay
himself. A new horse mill is wanted. Cost, £40 3s 4d and 4
fother of lead.
Around the same time Leland found:
Werkworthe castle stands on
the south side of the Coquet water. It is well maintained and
large. It belonged to the earl of Northumberland. It stands
on a high hill, the which for the more part is included with the river
and is about a mile from the sea. There is a pretty town and at
the town's end is a stone bridge with a tower on it. Beyond the
bridge is Banburghshire.
On 24 May 1543, the warden of the Marches reported back to the royal council that he had obeyed the king's instructions and had Alnwick
and Morpeth castles surveyed and had since decided to set up his main
centre of operations at Warkworth. He found the castle somewhat
decayed and out of repair. Consequently he had ordered it
‘apperrelled and put in redines' expecting it to be furnished for
his arrival in a week.
After its spell as a royal castle the fortress and the other Percy
estates were passed to Henry's nephew, who became Earl Thomas Percy of
Northumberland in the reign of Queen Mary (1553-58). In the next
reign he was executed for treason on 22 August 1572 following another
failed Pilgrimage of Grace. In 1567 Percy had ordered a survey of
the castle by George Clarkson. This found the castle in fair
condition apart from the great hall which had collapsed apart from its
east aisle, while the chambers and other buildings near them in the
bailey were found to be much decayed and threatened collapse unless
they were reroofed. After the earl's rebellion and defeat the
castle was occupied by John Forster (d.1602), the Warden of the Middle Marches,
who spoiled and wasted it, just as he did Bamburgh and Alnwick. The fortress was returned to the
earl's brother in the 1570s and he found that the roof of the old
drawing room, otherwise known as the solar in the bailey, was utterly
decayed and that the Carrickfergus Tower was in utter ruin.
Nearly 40 years later it was reported that the castle was in complete
ruin and used as a cattle fold with the gates open day and night.
The only part of the fortress still inhabitable was the great keep.
In 1617 King James visited the castle while his retinue explored the
ruins for an hour finding goats and sheep in nearly every chamber and
were ‘much moved to see it so spoiled and badly kept'. In
1644 the castle was surrendered to the Scots who remained a year.
Commonwealth forces occupied it again in 1648 and when they left they
took the doors and ironwork of the castle with them as part of the
slighting. In 1649 Algernon Percy applied for compensation for
the damage, but was allowed none. In 1672 the castle was stripped
of its remaining fabric when 272 cart loads of lead, timber and other
materials were taken from the keep alone. In 1698 it was decided
not to repair the castle when an estimate of £1,600 was given for
restoring the battlements, floors and windows.
Restoration occurred between 1853 and 1858 when Anthony Salvin was
employed to restore the keep. He partially refaced the exterior
and added new floors and roofs to 2 chambers on the second floor.
These then became known as the Duke's Chambers. Excavations took
place in the 1850s which uncovered the remains of the collegiate church
within the bailey. The Office of Works undertook excavations in
the moat in 1924 and this no doubt accounts for the excellent state of
the earthworks to the south of the castle.
Description
The motte of Warkworth castle with
its scarp blocks about 300' of the 750' wide neck of a sharp bend in
the River Coquet. The town then nestles in the loop of the river,
with a fortified fourteenth century bridge over the north end.
Other castles stand in similar positions, viz. Appleby, Caer Beris, Durham and Shrewsbury.
The motte itself is some 200' in basal diameter with a current summit
diameter of some 100'. This is now filled by the much later keep
which may have lowered and enlarged the original summit. The motte
itself is about 40' high, which ranks it with the largest in
Britain. As such it is probably a royal motte as only kings
tended to have the economic resources to build such giant
structures. The motte was surrounded by a ditch to all sides but
that to the north has been replaced by the current main road, as can be
seen in eighteenth century prints. Now there is merely a steep
scarp running down the main high street into the town towards the
church of St Laurence.
The ward of the original motte and bailey castle was about 250' east to
west by about 180' from the probable line of the motte ditch to the
south ditch. When the stone ward was constructed the eastern 70'
of the ward was abandoned, leaving a flat glacis which in eighteenth
century appeared to be merely a grassed over pile of rubble.
Presumably the original entrances were the same as today, the postern
to the north-west for access to the town and the main gatehouse to the
south.
The castle is supposed to have been first walled in stone with the bulk
of the curtain walls dating to this first masonry phase which is dated
to the rather precise and utterly unscientific dates of
1199-1213. This includes the gatehouse, Carrickfergus and postern
towers as well as probably an early tower under the site of the Montagu
Tower. There must also have been a stone keep on the motte,
though whether of the tower or shell keep variety is unknown.
Next the Grey Mare's Tail tower was added with the turret along the
east wall and subsequently the massive great keep and even later the
Montagu Tower. This was probably built on a new plan to its
purported predecessor which probably projected to the south like the
gatehouse and Carrickfergus tower.
The Gatehouse
The castle is still entered to the south via the twin towered
gatehouse. This is a most odd structure, apparently unique.
To the south are 2 projecting 20' diameter, half octagonal
towers. The 2 southernmost angles of each tower are further
protected by half octagonal buttresses. Large crossbow loops
pierce each of the 3 ground floor faces. These are long with
massive fish tailed oillets and short sighting slits towards the
top. Again, a unique feature of Warkworth. The twin
buttresses are chamfered at the base so they stand upon inverted
pyramids on the massive sloping plinth at the base of the towers which
progresses over half way down the ditch scarp.
The gate passageway is entered via an Early English arch of 2
orders. Unnaturally there are currently no portcullis grooves on
the walls, although there are twin ‘murder holes' in the ceiling
which would appear to be the remnants of the original twin
portcullis. Quite obviously the passageway has been relined and
possibly totally rebuilt with a pointed barrel vault inserted.
There are similarities to the late rebuildings at Skipton
here. The projecting corbel line supporting the moulded string
course over the gate has been taken as evidence that a drawbridge was
once raised to this position. If it were then all trace of the
mechanism has gone. If it were a turning bridge there is no trace
of an internal pit within the gatehouse.
Within
the passageway, defended by gates at either end, are 3 varied crossbow
loops on each side. Internally the final arches over the gate
passageway have gone, but the rear of both tower entrances remain - odd
Early English arches of 2 orders as are the other gate passageway
arches. Within the tower doorways are 2 long chambers with barrel
vaults similar to the gate passageway. They broaden out into the
towers at the south end. The floors within these have obviously
been raised, making the altered embrasures useless for combat.
Presumably this was done in the nineteenth century when this gatehouse
housed the castle custodian.
Two external flights of steps to east and west curve up to what should
have been the constable's chamber on the first floor, but this has no
forward looking loops. However, there are what look like blocked
embrasures in both towers and a single large crossbow loop to the east
and west. Both towers had later vaults added at this level,
possibly to make the structure strong enough for artillery in the
Scottish fashion, viz Urquhart.
Internally the rear of the gatehouse has gone at first floor level and
the rough top of the inner wall to the south shows that the external
face of the gatehouse has been totally refaced and a later upper storey
added. Presumably this occurred where the buttresses have their
odd toppings. Internally the remains of steeply angled roof
creases remain to east and west, while in the towers on either side
were later chambers, above the earlier roof level. Above the gate
at the height of the roof are overhanging machicolations, somewhat
similar to those found over doorways at late Scottish houses, viz Hermitage and south of the border, Bywell. There are also beam holes for a hoarding.
A contemporary curtain wall ran off from the gatehouse to the
west. This had a fine sloping plinth and a later chapel on its
inside and other buildings, one possibly being a garret.
Carrickfergus Tower
At the south-west corner of the enceinte stood the Carrickfergus Tower
which partially collapsed in the eighteenth century. Like the
gatehouse towers this was south facing and semi-octagonal, also having
loops on all three southern faces, though unlike the gatehouse, there
were no buttresses at the angles. The base of the tower has a
fine sloping plinth which runs almost to the base of the ditch, while
the interior seems to have been partially infilled as the fighting
embrasures would have been difficult to occupy. Also note the
state of these loops compared to those in the rebuilt gatehouse.
The bulk of the west side and most of the south side of the tower has
collapsed. The upper 2 storeys above the fighting level on the
ground floor were residential and there are traces of a garderobe as
well as fireplaces. The windows were also quite large, while all
the internal embrasures were shoulder headed. Such features do
not occur before 1250 and fade out after 1350. This rather dates
the tower at least 50 years later than the traditional dating and
suggests that this tower is younger than the Early English
gatehouse. The refacing of all this front may have taken place at
a very late date, possibly even post medieval.
The pointed entrance passage to the ground floor of the tower is an
obvious insertion, running at a odd angle diagonally through the south
curtain. There was an odd, corbelled out projection from the
tower at the north-west corner. Presumably the tower served as
withdrawing rooms from the great chamber to the north.
Lying along the west curtain, north of the Carrickfergus Tower, but
south of the great hall, lay a 2 storey building which housed the great
chamber at first floor level. The floor of this was supported on
3 central pillars, while narrow windows, now infilled, opened into the
bailey. The west curtain wall here is nearly twice as thick as
the curtain making up the west wall of the great hall to the
north. It also contains a mural staircase. The base of this
wall, although much patched, would appear to be the earliest of the
castle masonry. Two large windows set low in the wall are
probably later insertions, while the Romanesque recess, which contains
a carved panel over what appears to have been a large, rectangular
window, was possibly a balcony accessed from the solar.
Great Hall
The great hall consists of about half the length of the west curtain
before it makes a sharp angle to ascend the motte. The wall here
is on a slightly different alignment to the thicker curtain which joins
to the Carrickfergus tower. It is also set on a plinth topped by
2 sloping courses at the base of the newer work. Presumably this
is late fourteenth century. The internal junction is even more
obvious with a first floor Romanesque arch in the great chamber at the
collapsed junction, with a shoulder headed doorway beyond in the
hall. Above the change in wallwalk between newer thinner and the
older thicker curtain is also obvious.
The original hall was widened, probably in the 1380s, with the line of
the old wall being converted into an arcade with 2 of the pillar bases
of this surviving. There are also 2 stone fire pits in the floor,
which is odd considering there is a blocked arch in the west corner of
the south wall which is supposed to be the original ‘Norman'
fireplace. As the original hall would probably have been at first
floor level, this seems perplexing.
In the late fourteenth century, when the hall was extended eastwards, 2
square towers were built, the little stair tower and the Lion
Tower. The latter was named after the grumpy and rather
sheep-like Percy lion above the main doorway. Above this again
were the arms of Lucy of Egremont.
As Matilda Lucy, the second wife of Earl Henry Percy (d.1408), died in
1398, it would suggest that this tower and sculpture was made in the
last 20 years of the fourteenth century, perhaps to celebrate their
marriage which occurred in 1381.
North of the hall lay the ‘fifteenth century' buttery, pantry and
kitchen. Beyond these the curtain is much damaged before the
Postern Tower is reached. Beneath the rebuilt section are 2
relieving arches which may suggest the original collapsed into the
river.
Postern Tower
The Postern Tower projects slightly from the curtains on either side,
while internally it has been much rebuilt and a spiral stair, now
destroyed, added to its north side. The Early English arch lies
upon a projecting string course and consists of 2 orders, the lower one
being rebated for a door. As no such rebate exists on the jambs,
which appear to be chamfered, it appears that this portal has been
rebuilt. The entrance is reached via a series of very worn steps.
Internally it is quite plain that the portal has been recently
rebuilt. Above the passageway are 2 further floors which appear
to have been hollowed out of the original structure and have nearly
square, probably fifteenth century windows. The battlements
appear of later date again and sport a curious cruciform loop to the
north.
From the postern a curtain ran straight up the motte to the new
keep. Presumably it would have originally reached an earlier
motte-top keep. Other than a boldly projecting buttress, which is
capped similarly to the gatehouse buttresses, the wall is pretty much
featureless, although there are traces of a late rebuilding towards the
motte top.
East Curtain
Running down from the south-east side of the keep is the east curtain
wall. For some reason this did not follow the path of the old
castle bailey, but took up a position some 70' west of the scarp of the
original ward, leaving a large glacis to the east. The curtain
ran in 2 uneven lengths to the south-east corner of the enceinte where
the Montagu Tower now stands. The main feature of the wall is
another boldly projecting buttress at the base of the motte. This
implies that both wingwalls are contemporary.
Running
down the motte the wall has no plinth although there is a single
chamfered offset on the level section. Between the eastern turret
and the Montagu Tower the wall gains a plinth with a sloped top course,
rather similar to some of the plinthing at Caernarfon. There is
also an inserted postern here in what must be a later section of
walling. Internally the postern is shoulder headed. Looking
down from the keep on the battlements of this wall it is rapidly
apparent that the inner face has been replaced, certainly at the top in
various late refurbishments. The same could well be true of the
outer face. Indeed an eighteenth century print of the castle
shows this curtain as standing at no more than half its current height
and the 'glacis' buried in debris.
The battlements seem to have served the garderobe in the top of the
rectangular east turret. This has a his and her's entrance,
rather similar to that found in the east turret at Moreton Corbet castle which is thought to be Elizabethan. A 2 storey stables ran along the southern portion of the
curtain, while a well house with well over 60' deep lay just west of it.
Grey Mare's Tail Tower
Near the angle in the east curtain wall at the base of the motte stands
the semi-octagonal Grey Mare's Tail Tower. This appears to have
been inserted into the curtain, at least the junctions to the exterior
of the curtain are butted upon by the more brick shaped tower
masonry. The tower has the most extraordinary elongated crossbow
loops stretching over 12' high and graced with large fish tailed
oillets and no less than 3 sets of sighting slits. Internally
these loops are serviced by shoulder headed embrasures that make the
loops impossible to use and apparently stretch over 2 floors.
Obviously the interior of the embrasures have been ‘modified' in
the late rebuildings. Whether these extraordinary loops are also
late post military insertions is impossible to know, but seems likely
as the stone surrounding them appears slightly lighter than their more
golden surrounding stones.
In the sixteenth century the tower was used to hold prisoners and
contains some of their wall graffitis. The upper level of the
tower was blind, similar to some early thirteenth century drum towers,
like at White Castle. The
ground floor entrance to the tower was gained from a hall block that
ran against the curtain and is now largely destroyed. From here
steps were accessed to the south and a garderobe turret to the
north. The internal building also gave access to the upper floor
and the upper garderobe chamber of the attached garderobe turret.
The battlements again seem to have had a hoarding, but the darker
colour of their stone suggest they may be late additions.
An attempt has been made at dendrochronology on woodwork retrieved from
2 ‘window lintels' in the tower. Presumably these came from
the odd mutilated and rebuilt crossbow embrasures within the
tower. There was no crossmatching between the samples and no tree
ring dating evidence could be produced. However, radiocarbon
dating suggested an early fourteenth century date for the felling of
the timber. This was taken as evidence for the tower being early
fourteenth century, though in reality this seems merely guesswork and
wishful thinking.
Montagu's Tower
There should have been a tower at the south-east corner of the enceinte
judging from the current remains, but all that stands there now is the
square Amble or Montagu Tower. If it was built by Montagu
it most likely dates to between 1464 and 1471 when Lord Montagu held
the castle. However, there is no proof of this and its
alternative name is the Amble Tower as it faces nearby Amble. The
tower stands 4 storeys high with the basement reached down a short
flight of steps into a low room that has probably had the floor
raised. How this was used as a stable in the sixteenth century
seems odd for a room which would make a better dog compound than a home
for anything larger. The odd entrances into the ground floor on
the lower 2 levels suggest that some part of the lower level west wall
may be older than the rest of the tower. Fireplaces and
garderobes show that the sixteenth century tower was residential.
The curtain from the Montagu Tower to the gatehouse is a modern
reconstruction lying on older foundations. The toothing of it in
the side of the gatehouse show that this wall too was very thick.
Keep
Standing upon the old motte is a large and unusual tower keep.
This probably dates to the end of the fourteenth century and bears some
comparison with Trim keep in Ireland, it being a square keep with four
projecting towers set centrally in each face to form a 20 sided
keep. All the rectangular corners have been chamfered off.
Further the keep is not symmetrical, with all the turrets slightly off
centre and the central square tower itself being by no means a perfect
square.
Despite the initial similarity to twelfth century Trim keep,
Warkworth is well unique. It stands 3 storeys high on its motte
and was entered through the west face of its south turret. This
and the adjoining south-east corner of the central tower have
unfortunately been heavily rebuilt in the Victorian era, so the
original approach is uncertain, although there are traces of an
approach wall on the south face of the tower facing the entrance
portal. Externally the keep has a fine sloping plinth, which
would be necessary with it being built upon an unstable earth
mound. The chamfered off corners of the whole have been
interestingly geometrically shaped where they meet the plinth.
The ground floor of the tower has small loops, while the windows get
larger the higher up the wall they are set. On the top storey, on
the turret corner chamfers, are coats of arms set above a projecting
string course that makes an erratic course around the building.
On the northern turret, on the top floor where a window would be
expected, is instead a large relief of a heraldic Percy lion,
displaying itself in all its fury to the borough below. This is
certainly a better looking beast than the rather sad fellow on the Lion
Tower. Elsewhere are angels holding heraldic shields which would
once no doubt have been coloured. The last feature of note about
the exterior is the postern in the northern section of the west wall,
which no doubt like the nearby postern tower, offered a quicker way
down into the borough.
The internal features of the keep are quite spectacular and consist of
rectangular rooms in the 4 corners of the central keep, with long rooms
occupying the turrets back towards the centre of the main tower.
In the very centre was a rectangular light well that collected
rainwater. Entrance to the living quarters was gained from the
main doorway, into 2 successive entrance halls, the first controlled by
a porter's lodge. There was also what appears to have been an
oubliette or pit dungeon in the south-west corner of the central
keep. From the main entrance hall a great stairway doubled back
over the porter's lodge and up to the lobby above. This led into
the great hall in the south-east corner of the keep. North of
this, partially in the east turret, lay the chapel and beyond this to
the north the great chamber. The kitchen, buttery and pantry lay
in the western third of the keep and various mural service stairs led
to the lower floor below and battlements above. On the top floor
lay the duke's rooms in the south-west corner of the keep. This
was reroofed and made habitable between 1853 and 1858. Off centre
in the keep stood a watch tower which contains 3 floors of separate
rooms. The whole, though impressive looking, was utterly
indefensible to any siege artillery.
Within the bailey are the shattered remains of the foundations of the
fifteenth century colligate church. This is alleged to be a
similar build as the kitchen, chapel and great hall extension. It
has also been claimed that there are architectural similarities between
Warkworth's keep, Bolton Castle, and the domestic buildings at Bamburgh castle.
This has led to the suggestion that the ubiquitous John Lewyn was the
master mason responsible for building all these structures. He
certainly worked at Carlisle, Durham and Roxburgh,
but the idea that he was responsible for most building work in the
North during the fourteenth century seems to be stretching the
possibilities as far as the ‘history' of James St George has been
pulled.
Copyright©2022
Paul Martin Remfry