Great Mottes

The Greater Mottes

Below is a table of all the mottes which may have been over 30' high, though like all guesses these figures cannot be accurate as mounds slump as well as can be mined for their substance. However, what can be said is that these mounds were bigger than most, some of the smaller examples being only a few feet high. Also, some are not ‘true' mottes, being artificially scarped hillocks rather than manually built hills. That aside, they all took a great deal of construction and much organised manpower. This by implication would suggest that the controlling authorities who built these monuments were the richest and most powerful of men.

Early in the Norman Conquest of England, King William I (d.1087) or his ‘viceroy', William Fitz Osbern (d.1071), would seem to have been responsible for many great mottes built throughout England. In the Welsh Marches contemporary evidence suggests the great mottes at Clifford, Ewias Harold, Gloucester, Hereford, Monmouth and Wigmore were built by Fitz Osbern before his death in February 1071. Further William was also recorded as building a castellum at Berkeley. The motte that currently survives here is relatively small and encased in a later shell keep. At Chepstow castle, on the other side of the River Severn, William's castle probably had no room for a motte, it being a long narrow site and apparently fortified in stone from the first. It is also possible that Fitz Osbern may have been responsible for other castles, namely the main castle at Hay on Wye (not the diminutive motte), Castell Bwlch y Dinas, New Radnor, Longtown and Pont Hendre. The former 3 have no mottes (although the Radnor ringwork for some obscure reason always seems to be described as one, which is why it is included here), while the later 2 have powerful and possibly early mounds. Regardless of all this original evidence, there is absolutely no proof as to who built one, let alone any of these mottes. The same is true for the other fortresses, all we have are chronicle references to buildings and subsequent suppositions.

It would appear that King William I (d.1087) built great mottes - certainly they appear at castles he was responsible for founding or refortifying, viz. Cambridge (1068), Cardiff (1081), Chester (1070), Durham (1072), Ely (1070), Huntingdon (1068), Lincoln (1068), Norwich (1067/8), Old Sarum (bef.1070), Shrewsbury (1070? Partially collapsed into the River Severn), Stafford (1070), Warwick (1068), Windsor (bef.1070) and both mottes at York (1068-69), while Hastings (1066) and probably Nottingham mottes have both been destroyed. However, it should be remembered that the king was also responsible for work at Earl Harold's castle of Dover as well as Colchester, Newcastle, Pevensey (1066), Rochester and the Tower of London (1066). None of these have any trace of any motte at all, nor was one required at the pre-existing fortification of Exeter when William built his castle there in 1068. Similarly, no great mottes are attributed to King William I in France, yet William's son, William Rufus (d.1100), seems to have built great mottes in Normandy - Chateau sur Epte and Gisors in particular and possibly Warkworth in Northumberland.

Regardless of who built what, it should firmly be noted that the king might order his men to help a baron in the construction of a castle. It is also possible that a mediocre baron could make use of a pre-existing mound for his motte. This could well have happened at Brampton, Bradfield, Castle Canfield, Haughley, Clifford's Hill (Little Houghton), Montacute and Oxted, if indeed all of these are castles. This is suggested as these places seem odd positions for the building of massive royal castles, which their size would tend to indicate that they are. Other sites were certainly built upon older pre-existing mounds, viz. Canterbury Dane John, Marlborough, Silbury Hill, Skipsea and Thetford as has been proved by excavation or core sampling. Other sites are at least partially or even wholly natural and scarped, viz. Dunster, Launceston, Oswestry, Radnor, Richards Castle, Tickhill, Tutbury, Tremarton and Wigmore. Another great motte, Sandal, has been shown by excavation to consist of an emotted great tower keep which takes up the top 20' of its height. Richards Castle is similar and several other mottes could contain stone towers as the upper part of their height as quoted here. Again only excavation could prove this point.

In summary, the size of motte cannot actually tell us anything substantial. As ever, only detailed field and historical research can really shed any light upon this interesting subject.

Castle	height above bailey	height above ditch	artificial	summit diameter	basal diameter
Arundel	65'	95'	y	90'	230'
Bampton	40'	43'	y	70'	150'
Barnstaple	30'	40'	y	75'	200'
Berkeley	20'	25'	y	100'	100'
Berkhamsted	30'	45'	y	70'	170'
Bradfield	60'	63'	y	30'	120'
Bramber	15' (claimed once 30')	18'	y	55'	130'
Bridgwater	destroyed	-	-	-	-
Brinklow	40'	55'	y	50'	260'
Burton in Lonsdale	30'	40'	y	70'-110'	170-190'
Buellt	25'	60'	y	60'	200'
Cambridge	33' damaged	53'	y	40'	200'
Canterbury Dane John	35'	35'	IA	30'	115'
Cardiff	40'	60'	y	75'	200'
Carisbrooke	55'	80'	y	80'	190'
Castle Canfield	48'	65'	y	100'?	280'
Caus	40'	60'	y	40'	150'?
Caer Beris	22'	25'	y	65-78'	140'
Caerleon	45'	65'	y	80'	200'
Chateau sur Epte	40'	65'	y	65'	190'
Chester	25'	45'	y	160'	260'
Christchurch	25'	40'	y	70'x50'	180'x150'
Clare	80'	100'	y	65'	200'
Clifford	40'	70'	partial	90'	200'
Clun
Dorstone	20'	30'	partial	75'	200'x180'
Dunster	80'	80'	n	180'x100'	230'x150'
Durham	45'	60'	y	75'	150'
Ely	40'	filled with motte?	y	55'	180'
Ewias Harold	30'	50'	y	100'	240'
Fotheringhay	25'	40'	y	80'	180'
Gisors	35'	40'	y	90'	230'
Gloucester	destroyed	53'	y	100'	230'
Guildford	25'	35'	?	120'x140'	230'
Huntingdon	10'	35'	y	destroyed	damaged
Kilpeck	30'	50'	y	90'	180'
Hastings	destroyed	-	-	-	-
Haughley (Suffolk)	60'	80'	y	85'	210'
Hereford	destroyed	75'	y	70'	264'
Launceston	70'	110'	partial	70'	230'
Lewes	45'	75'	y	90'	250'
Lewes Black Mount	30'	45'	y	65'x70'	190'
Lewes priory	43'	43'	16th C	28'	150'
Lincoln shell	45'	75'	y	90'x70'	210'
Lincoln II	35'	50'	y	50'	130'
Little Houghton, Clifford's Hill (Northants)	35'	50'	y	90'	400'
Longtown	30'	50'	y	50'	150'
Marlborough	50'	60'	IA	70'	280'
Monmouth	destroyed
Montacute	50'	50'	y	165'x100'	220'x180'
Nether Stowey	30'	40'	?	100'	220'x200'
Castle	height above bailey	height above ditch	artificial	summit diameter	basal diameter
Newcastle on Tyne	destroyed	-	-	-	-
Nottingham	destroyed?	-	-	-	-
Norwich	20'	40'	partial	230'	380'
Okehampton	35'	65'	y	80'x40'	180'x140'
Old Sarum	30'	50'	partial	280'	360'
Ongar	45'	50'	y	70'	220'
Oswestry	40'	40'	partial	80'x60'	230'x170'
Oxford	50'	60'	y	75'	215'
Oxted	30'	30'	y	50'	200'
Pickering	45'	65'	y	75'	170'
Pleshey	30'	50'	y	120'x70'	250'x200'
Plympton	35'	45'	y	80'	190'
Pont Hendre	24'	55'	partial	unfinished	150'
Radnor	20'	40'	partial	165'x130'	280'x150'
Richards Castle	35'	73'	partial	65'	180'
Sandal	10-30'	40-60'	y	80'	180'
Shrewsbury	35'	60'	y	80'x50' damaged	180'x160'
Silbury Hill	100'	100'	IA	100'	550'
Skipsea	35' (26' manmade)	42'	IA partial	120'	280'
Southampton	destroyed	-	-	-	-
Stafford	20'	60'	y	180'x100'	280'x240'
Stebbing	40'	45'	y	50'	180'
Tamworth	35'	45'	?	100'x80'	250'
Tickhill	60'	75'	partial	75'	215'
Thetford	64'	72'	IA partial	80'	330'
Tonbridge	45'	65'	y	90'	200'
Totnes	55'	70'	y	80'	210'
Trematon	40'	65'	partial	96'x72'	210'
Tutbury	30'	45'	y	75'	170'
Wallingford	43'	43'	y	80'	200'
Warkworth	25'	40'	y	100'	200'
Warwick	40'	70'	y	70'	220'
Wigmore	45'	40'	partial	170'x95'	320'x230'
Windsor	50'	50'	y	120'x100'	250'
Wiston	25'	35'	y	55'	170'x130'
Worcester	destroyed	-	-	-	-
York Clifford	50'	50'	y	70'	190'
York II	25'	35'	y	55'	130'
Castle	height above bailey	height above ditch	artificial	summit diameter	basal diameter

Shanid	25'	35'	y	70'x80'	150'

Index

Home