[943]Fœdera(O.E.), xiii. 251. See p. 179.[944]The internal evidence determines its date.[945]"Collectanea quædam eorum quæ ad Historiam illustrandam conducunt selecta ex Registro MSS. sive breviario Monasterii sancti Johannis Baptistæ Colecestriæ collecto (sic) a Joh. Hadlege spectante Johanni Lucas armigero. Anno Domini, 1633" (Harl. MS., 312, fol. 92). This charter (which, being in MS., was unknown, of course, to Prof. Freeman) has also an incidental value for its evidence on the Clare pedigree, Gilbert, Robert, and Richard, the witnesses, being all grandsons of Count Gilbert, the progenitor of the house. Among the documents in theMonasticonrelating to Bec, we find mention of "Emmæ uxoris Baldewini filii Comitis Gilberti et filiorum ejus Roberti et Ricardi," which singularly confirms the accuracy of this charter and its list of witnesses. This is worth noting, because the charter is curious in form, and has been described as having "a suspicious ring." It is also found in (Morant's) transcript of the Colchester cartulary (Stowe MSS.).[946]Cart., 1 John, m. 6.[947]Mon. Ang.(1661), ii. 66b.[948]Cart., 1 John, m. 6 (printed in Appendix 5 toLords' Reports on Dignity of a Peer, pp. 4, 5).[949]Ed. Howlett, p. 184.[950]"In operibus Turris de Gloec' viili.vis.iid." (Pipe-Roll, 2 Hen. II., p. 78).[951]Henry I. gave land to the abbey (1109) "in escambium pro placia ubi nunc turris stat Gloecestrie" (i. 59).[952]Mediæval Military Architecture, i. 108.[953]Ibid., i. 79.[954]Ibid., i. 29 (cf. "Mota de Hereford"—Rot. Pip., 15 Hen. II., p. 140).[955]Rotuli scaccarii Normanniæ(ed. Stapleton), i. 56. The "turris" had been added by Henry I. (vide infra, p. 333). With the above entry may be compared the phrase in one of Richard's despatches (1198)—"castrum cepimus cum turre" (R. Howden, iv. 58); also the expression, "tunc etiam comes turrem et castellum funditus evertit," applied to Geoffrey's action at Montreuil (circ.1152) by Robert de Torigny (ed. Howlett, p. 159).[956]Chronique de Jordan Fantosme(ed. Howlett), ll. 1423, 1424, 1469, 1470.[957]It is even applied by Giraldus Cambrensis to the turf entrenchment thrown up by Arnulf de Montgomery at Pembroke.[958]M. M. A., ii. 420.[959]English Towns and Districts, p. 152.[960]Mediæval Military Architecture, ii. 514.[961]There is a strange use of "castellum," apparently in this sense, in William of Malmesbury's version (ii. 119) of Godwine's speech on the Dover riot (1051). The phrase is "magnatesillius castelli," which Mr. Freeman unhesitatingly renders "the magistrates of thattown" (Norm. Conq., 2nd ed., ii. 135), a rendering which should be compared with his remarks on "castles" on the next page but one, and in Appendix S. Mr. Clark is of opinion that "whether 'castellum' can [here] be taken for more than the fortified town is uncertain" (M. M. A., ii. 8).[962]Skeat'sEtymological Dictionary; Oliphant'sOld and Middle English, p. 37. It is not, therefore, strictly accurate to say of the expression "ænne castel," in the chronicle for 1048, that it was "no English name," as Mr. Freeman asserts (Norm. Conq., 2nd ed., ii. 137), or to imply that it then first appeared in the language.[963]Norman Conquest(2nd ed.), ii. 189.[964]Ed. Howlett, p. 106. Robert also mentions (p. 126) the "towers" of Evreux, Alençon, and Coutances as among those constructed by Henry I.[965]"About the Tower," as the chronicle expresses it.[966]"Henricus Rex circa turrem Rothomagi ... murum altum et latum cum propugnaculis ædificat, et ædificia ad mansionem regiam congrua infra eundem murum parat" (Robert of Torigny, ed. Howlett, p. 106).[967]I can make nothing of Mr. Clark's chronology. In his description of the Tower he first tells us that "all save the keep [i.e.the White Tower] is later, and most of it considerably later than the eleventh century" (M. M. A., ii. 205), and then that "the Tower of the close of the reign of Rufus" (i.e.before the end of"the eleventh century") ... was probably composed of the White Tower with a palace ward upon its south-east side, and a wall, probably that we now see, and certainly along its general course, including what is now known as the inner ward" (ibid., ii. 253). Again, as to the Wakefield Tower, which "deserves very close attention, its lower story being next to the keep in antiquity" (ibid., ii. 220), Mr. Clark tells us that Gundulf (who died in 1108) was the founder "perhaps of the Wakefield Tower" (ibid., ii. 252); nay, that "Devereux Tower ... may be as old as Wakefield, and therefore in substancethe work of Rufus" (ibid., ii. 253); and yet we learn of this same basement, that "the basement of Wakefield Tower is probably late Norman, perhaps of the reign of Stephen or Henry II., although this is no doubt early for masonry so finely jointed" (ibid., ii. 224). In other words, a structure which was "the work of Rufus,"i.e.of 1087-1100, can only be attributed, at the very earliest, to the days of "Stephen or Henry II.,"i.e.to 1135-1189.[968]The very same phrase is employed by Robert de Torigny in describing her husband's action at Torigny ten years later (1151): "dux obsederat castellum Torinneium, sed propter adventum Regis infecto negotio discesserat; combustis tamen domibus infra muros usque ad turrem etparvum castellum circa eam" (ed. Howlett, p. 161).[969]Ord. Vit., ii. 296.[970]A curious touch in a legend of the time brings before us in a vivid manner the impression that this mighty tower had made upon the Norman mind. Hugh de Glos, an oppressor of the poor, appearing, after death, to a priest by night (1090), declared that the burden he was compelled to bear seemed "heavier to carry than the Tower of Rouen" ("Ecce candens ferrum molendini gesto in ore, quod sine dubio mihi videtur ad ferendum gravius Rotomagensi arce."—Ord. Vit., iii. 373).[971]W. Rufus, i. 245-260.[972]"De arce prodiit" (Ord. Vit., iii. 353).Arx, here as above, is used as a substitute forturris.[973]"Conanus autem a victoribus in arcem ductus est. Quem Henricus per solaria turris ducens" (ibid., iii. 355). "In superiora Rotomagensis turris duxit" (W. Malms.).[974]W. Rufus, i. 256, 257.[975]Ord. Vit., v. (Appendix) 199. See p. 422.[976]Robert of Torigny(ed. Hewlett), p. 153.[977]My alternative explanation of the choice of style, namely, the importance of the keep itself relatively to the "castellum," must also be borne in mind.[978]"[Rex] inturride Bristou captivus ponitur.... [Imperatrix] obseditturrimWintonensis episcopi.... Robertus frater Imperatricis in cujusturriRex captivus erat" (Hen. Hunt., p. 275).[979]"In turri Cenomannica" (Annales Veteres, 311).[980]The Tower of Rouen, we have seen (p. 334), was styled "arx regia."[981]A fine "motte" is visible from the line between Calais and Paris (on the right); another, as I think, stood on the Lea, between Bow Bridge and the "Old Ford," and is (or was) well seen from the Great Eastern line.[982]Archæological Journal, xx. 205-223 (1863).[983]Anglia Sacra(ed. Wharton), i. 337, 338.[984]Gentleman's Magazine, N.S., xv. 260.[985]Mediæval Military Architecture, ii. 421, 422.[986]William Rufus, i. 53, 54.[987]"Egregia turris" is the expression of Gervase (Actus Pontificum).[988]The "castrum lapideum" (compare the three "castra lapidea" erected for the blockade of Montreuil in 1149) is so styled to distinguish it from the "castrum ligneum," which occurs so often, and which Mr. Freeman so persistently renders "tower."[989]Mediæval Military Architecture, ii. 419.[990]Journ. Brit. Arch. Ass., xxxi., 471, 472.[991]Both writers, also, mistake a general exemption from thetrinoda necessitasfor a special allusion to Rochester keep.[992]Mediæval Military Architecture, ii. 421.[993]Mr. J. R. Boyle has shown that nearly £1000 was spent upon it between 1172 and 1177, when it was, therefore, in course of erection.[994]Mediæval Military Architecture, i. 186.[995]Norman Conquest, iii. 182.[996]Histoire du Château d'Arques, by A. Deville, pp. x., 412 (Rouen).[997]Ed. Howlett, p. 106.[998]Cours d'antiquités monumentales(1835), v. 227, 228.[999]Colchester, inArchæologia, to which he refers, was attributed to Edward the Elder, and Rochester was, of course, as yet, believed to be the work of Gundulf.[1000]Compare Professor Freeman on Falaise: "More probably, I think, of the twelfth than of the eleventh [century]" (Norm. Conq., ii. 175).[1001]Château d'Arques, pp. 307-312.[1002]Ibid., pp. 48, 267.[1003]Compare the "castrum in cacumine ipsius montis condidit" at Arques with the "castellum novum super flumen Tyne condidit" at Newcastle.[1004]Compare, on this point, the acute criticism of Dr. Bruce (repeated by Mr. Freeman) that "Wace (v. 12,628) speaks of the horse of William Fitz Osbern [in 1066] as 'all covered with iron,' whereas in the [Bayeux] Tapestry 'not a single horse is equipped in steel armour; and if we refer to the authors who lived at that period, we shall find that not one of them mentions any defensive covering for the horse.'" Compare also the expression of William of Malmesbury, who lived and wrote under the tower-building king, that the Norman barons took advantage of the Conqueror's minority "turresagere," these being the structures with the building of which the writer was most familiar.[1005]"A flight of steps, beginning upon the north face, passing by a doorway through its most westerly buttress, and which then, turning, is continued along the west face" (M. M. A., i. 188). Cf. Deville (p. 298), and the plan of 1708 (ibid., Pl. XII.).[1006]M. M. A., i. 188, ii. 432.[1007]Report of 1708 (Deville, p. 294).[1008]It is only right to mention that, according to theAcademy, "Mr. Clark has long been recognized as the first living authority on the subject of castellated architecture;" that, in the opinion of theAthenæum, all those "who in future touch the subject may safely rely on Mr. Clark;" that his is "a masterly history of mediæval military architecture" (Saturday Review); and that, according toNotes and Queries, "no other Englishman knows so much of our old military architecture as Mr. Clark."
[943]Fœdera(O.E.), xiii. 251. See p. 179.
[944]The internal evidence determines its date.
[945]"Collectanea quædam eorum quæ ad Historiam illustrandam conducunt selecta ex Registro MSS. sive breviario Monasterii sancti Johannis Baptistæ Colecestriæ collecto (sic) a Joh. Hadlege spectante Johanni Lucas armigero. Anno Domini, 1633" (Harl. MS., 312, fol. 92). This charter (which, being in MS., was unknown, of course, to Prof. Freeman) has also an incidental value for its evidence on the Clare pedigree, Gilbert, Robert, and Richard, the witnesses, being all grandsons of Count Gilbert, the progenitor of the house. Among the documents in theMonasticonrelating to Bec, we find mention of "Emmæ uxoris Baldewini filii Comitis Gilberti et filiorum ejus Roberti et Ricardi," which singularly confirms the accuracy of this charter and its list of witnesses. This is worth noting, because the charter is curious in form, and has been described as having "a suspicious ring." It is also found in (Morant's) transcript of the Colchester cartulary (Stowe MSS.).
[946]Cart., 1 John, m. 6.
[947]Mon. Ang.(1661), ii. 66b.
[948]Cart., 1 John, m. 6 (printed in Appendix 5 toLords' Reports on Dignity of a Peer, pp. 4, 5).
[949]Ed. Howlett, p. 184.
[950]"In operibus Turris de Gloec' viili.vis.iid." (Pipe-Roll, 2 Hen. II., p. 78).
[951]Henry I. gave land to the abbey (1109) "in escambium pro placia ubi nunc turris stat Gloecestrie" (i. 59).
[952]Mediæval Military Architecture, i. 108.
[953]Ibid., i. 79.
[954]Ibid., i. 29 (cf. "Mota de Hereford"—Rot. Pip., 15 Hen. II., p. 140).
[955]Rotuli scaccarii Normanniæ(ed. Stapleton), i. 56. The "turris" had been added by Henry I. (vide infra, p. 333). With the above entry may be compared the phrase in one of Richard's despatches (1198)—"castrum cepimus cum turre" (R. Howden, iv. 58); also the expression, "tunc etiam comes turrem et castellum funditus evertit," applied to Geoffrey's action at Montreuil (circ.1152) by Robert de Torigny (ed. Howlett, p. 159).
[956]Chronique de Jordan Fantosme(ed. Howlett), ll. 1423, 1424, 1469, 1470.
[957]It is even applied by Giraldus Cambrensis to the turf entrenchment thrown up by Arnulf de Montgomery at Pembroke.
[958]M. M. A., ii. 420.
[959]English Towns and Districts, p. 152.
[960]Mediæval Military Architecture, ii. 514.
[961]There is a strange use of "castellum," apparently in this sense, in William of Malmesbury's version (ii. 119) of Godwine's speech on the Dover riot (1051). The phrase is "magnatesillius castelli," which Mr. Freeman unhesitatingly renders "the magistrates of thattown" (Norm. Conq., 2nd ed., ii. 135), a rendering which should be compared with his remarks on "castles" on the next page but one, and in Appendix S. Mr. Clark is of opinion that "whether 'castellum' can [here] be taken for more than the fortified town is uncertain" (M. M. A., ii. 8).
[962]Skeat'sEtymological Dictionary; Oliphant'sOld and Middle English, p. 37. It is not, therefore, strictly accurate to say of the expression "ænne castel," in the chronicle for 1048, that it was "no English name," as Mr. Freeman asserts (Norm. Conq., 2nd ed., ii. 137), or to imply that it then first appeared in the language.
[963]Norman Conquest(2nd ed.), ii. 189.
[964]Ed. Howlett, p. 106. Robert also mentions (p. 126) the "towers" of Evreux, Alençon, and Coutances as among those constructed by Henry I.
[965]"About the Tower," as the chronicle expresses it.
[966]"Henricus Rex circa turrem Rothomagi ... murum altum et latum cum propugnaculis ædificat, et ædificia ad mansionem regiam congrua infra eundem murum parat" (Robert of Torigny, ed. Howlett, p. 106).
[967]I can make nothing of Mr. Clark's chronology. In his description of the Tower he first tells us that "all save the keep [i.e.the White Tower] is later, and most of it considerably later than the eleventh century" (M. M. A., ii. 205), and then that "the Tower of the close of the reign of Rufus" (i.e.before the end of"the eleventh century") ... was probably composed of the White Tower with a palace ward upon its south-east side, and a wall, probably that we now see, and certainly along its general course, including what is now known as the inner ward" (ibid., ii. 253). Again, as to the Wakefield Tower, which "deserves very close attention, its lower story being next to the keep in antiquity" (ibid., ii. 220), Mr. Clark tells us that Gundulf (who died in 1108) was the founder "perhaps of the Wakefield Tower" (ibid., ii. 252); nay, that "Devereux Tower ... may be as old as Wakefield, and therefore in substancethe work of Rufus" (ibid., ii. 253); and yet we learn of this same basement, that "the basement of Wakefield Tower is probably late Norman, perhaps of the reign of Stephen or Henry II., although this is no doubt early for masonry so finely jointed" (ibid., ii. 224). In other words, a structure which was "the work of Rufus,"i.e.of 1087-1100, can only be attributed, at the very earliest, to the days of "Stephen or Henry II.,"i.e.to 1135-1189.
[968]The very same phrase is employed by Robert de Torigny in describing her husband's action at Torigny ten years later (1151): "dux obsederat castellum Torinneium, sed propter adventum Regis infecto negotio discesserat; combustis tamen domibus infra muros usque ad turrem etparvum castellum circa eam" (ed. Howlett, p. 161).
[969]Ord. Vit., ii. 296.
[970]A curious touch in a legend of the time brings before us in a vivid manner the impression that this mighty tower had made upon the Norman mind. Hugh de Glos, an oppressor of the poor, appearing, after death, to a priest by night (1090), declared that the burden he was compelled to bear seemed "heavier to carry than the Tower of Rouen" ("Ecce candens ferrum molendini gesto in ore, quod sine dubio mihi videtur ad ferendum gravius Rotomagensi arce."—Ord. Vit., iii. 373).
[971]W. Rufus, i. 245-260.
[972]"De arce prodiit" (Ord. Vit., iii. 353).Arx, here as above, is used as a substitute forturris.
[973]"Conanus autem a victoribus in arcem ductus est. Quem Henricus per solaria turris ducens" (ibid., iii. 355). "In superiora Rotomagensis turris duxit" (W. Malms.).
[974]W. Rufus, i. 256, 257.
[975]Ord. Vit., v. (Appendix) 199. See p. 422.
[976]Robert of Torigny(ed. Hewlett), p. 153.
[977]My alternative explanation of the choice of style, namely, the importance of the keep itself relatively to the "castellum," must also be borne in mind.
[978]"[Rex] inturride Bristou captivus ponitur.... [Imperatrix] obseditturrimWintonensis episcopi.... Robertus frater Imperatricis in cujusturriRex captivus erat" (Hen. Hunt., p. 275).
[979]"In turri Cenomannica" (Annales Veteres, 311).
[980]The Tower of Rouen, we have seen (p. 334), was styled "arx regia."
[981]A fine "motte" is visible from the line between Calais and Paris (on the right); another, as I think, stood on the Lea, between Bow Bridge and the "Old Ford," and is (or was) well seen from the Great Eastern line.
[982]Archæological Journal, xx. 205-223 (1863).
[983]Anglia Sacra(ed. Wharton), i. 337, 338.
[984]Gentleman's Magazine, N.S., xv. 260.
[985]Mediæval Military Architecture, ii. 421, 422.
[986]William Rufus, i. 53, 54.
[987]"Egregia turris" is the expression of Gervase (Actus Pontificum).
[988]The "castrum lapideum" (compare the three "castra lapidea" erected for the blockade of Montreuil in 1149) is so styled to distinguish it from the "castrum ligneum," which occurs so often, and which Mr. Freeman so persistently renders "tower."
[989]Mediæval Military Architecture, ii. 419.
[990]Journ. Brit. Arch. Ass., xxxi., 471, 472.
[991]Both writers, also, mistake a general exemption from thetrinoda necessitasfor a special allusion to Rochester keep.
[992]Mediæval Military Architecture, ii. 421.
[993]Mr. J. R. Boyle has shown that nearly £1000 was spent upon it between 1172 and 1177, when it was, therefore, in course of erection.
[994]Mediæval Military Architecture, i. 186.
[995]Norman Conquest, iii. 182.
[996]Histoire du Château d'Arques, by A. Deville, pp. x., 412 (Rouen).
[997]Ed. Howlett, p. 106.
[998]Cours d'antiquités monumentales(1835), v. 227, 228.
[999]Colchester, inArchæologia, to which he refers, was attributed to Edward the Elder, and Rochester was, of course, as yet, believed to be the work of Gundulf.
[1000]Compare Professor Freeman on Falaise: "More probably, I think, of the twelfth than of the eleventh [century]" (Norm. Conq., ii. 175).
[1001]Château d'Arques, pp. 307-312.
[1002]Ibid., pp. 48, 267.
[1003]Compare the "castrum in cacumine ipsius montis condidit" at Arques with the "castellum novum super flumen Tyne condidit" at Newcastle.
[1004]Compare, on this point, the acute criticism of Dr. Bruce (repeated by Mr. Freeman) that "Wace (v. 12,628) speaks of the horse of William Fitz Osbern [in 1066] as 'all covered with iron,' whereas in the [Bayeux] Tapestry 'not a single horse is equipped in steel armour; and if we refer to the authors who lived at that period, we shall find that not one of them mentions any defensive covering for the horse.'" Compare also the expression of William of Malmesbury, who lived and wrote under the tower-building king, that the Norman barons took advantage of the Conqueror's minority "turresagere," these being the structures with the building of which the writer was most familiar.
[1005]"A flight of steps, beginning upon the north face, passing by a doorway through its most westerly buttress, and which then, turning, is continued along the west face" (M. M. A., i. 188). Cf. Deville (p. 298), and the plan of 1708 (ibid., Pl. XII.).
[1006]M. M. A., i. 188, ii. 432.
[1007]Report of 1708 (Deville, p. 294).
[1008]It is only right to mention that, according to theAcademy, "Mr. Clark has long been recognized as the first living authority on the subject of castellated architecture;" that, in the opinion of theAthenæum, all those "who in future touch the subject may safely rely on Mr. Clark;" that his is "a masterly history of mediæval military architecture" (Saturday Review); and that, according toNotes and Queries, "no other Englishman knows so much of our old military architecture as Mr. Clark."