Castles Coursework

A.D 450 saw the creation of castles. Romans were “replaced” by Anglo Saxon foes, and these did leave behind a system of castles however these were for Motte and Bailey castles built in the reign of Edward the confessor.

The Norman invasion of 1066 was one of the causes for castles to become an important part of defence. After king Harold’s defeat by William the conqueror, William was concerned about how he would control the country with only a limited number of troops facing a hostile environment. He did not have enough troops to station them everywhere, so he used a very useful tactic that had worked in Normandy previously. This was a simplified castle known as a “Motte and Bailey”.

A Motte and Bailey had many advantages. First, it was constructed out of wood, which was a readily available resource almost anywhere. Secondly they could be erected with a lot of speed, which gave a further advantage if the forces you were fighting were due to arrive very soon. Also, the earth that it was built on, was not suitable for heavy masonry, therefore wood had to be used. The castle acquired its name simply from the different areas. The “Motte” was a large mound of earth that rose high and on top of it would be a place where the fortified keep would rest. The “bailey” was an area (often quite large), which housed the residents of the castle. It also contained stables, kitchens and other utility areas. A Motte and bailey could have more than one Motte, however they normally only had one keep.

The castle was simple to navigate for friendly forces, however if an enemy were to attack, it would be considerably more difficult. The castles entrances are heavily defended with the surrounding walls (known as palisade walls) manned with archers. The pathways and ladders that allowed reach to important areas of the castle have been removed or destroyed; and the enemy are at a disadvantage because they are facing attack from a raised level.

As time progressed, the situation in England changed. The Normans were now in control of England and there was little resistance from hostile sources, therefore a concentration on the development of castles occurred.

Less time was needed for castles to be constructed quickly and therefore time could be used to search for better materials for building. This meant that stone could be used instead of wood, which was used previously. By 1100, the earth that had held Motte and bailey castles had now settles, and was capable of sustaining much larger weights. With the change to stone castles, fire was not a concern as it was when Motte and baileys were in use.

Square keeps were used when the development of stone castles were quite young. They were often built in the most important places, to show how powerful the Normans were. Square keeps were good because of the immense thickness of the walls. The walls in square keeps were often up to 5 metres thick, and 30 metres high. This added to the strength of the castle because the walls could easily withstand attacks from siege weapons such as magonels and trebuchets.

Because of the enormous dimensions of these keeps and castles, they were unable to be built on a Motte, and instead were incorporated into the bailey. Because the well was a very vulnerable target for opposing forces during a siege, it sometimes was located within the keep itself to ensure its safety. The well was the castles only water source and therefore was a target for enemies using rotten and dead livestock. They could poison the water relatively easily if a carcass was launched from a trebuchet into the bailey.

The stone what composed the keep was not all perfectly cut. The internal sections of the walls were made out of rough, gritty stone as apposed to the smoothly cut outer walls.

Windows were a weakness in any castle. Therefore they were kept as small as possible. Windows were small slits and could be fired out from. These were aptly named “arrow slits” and came in assorted sizes and shapes. The window is designed with an outward sloping inside to allow the archers maximum range to fire. The cross shape was a popular design of arrow slit.

The door to the keep was also a weak point. It was normally kept on the first floor, and reached by either a ladder or walkway that could be pulled up or destroyed if the castle was under siege.

Early stone keeps also had a weakness when soldiers were firing from the crenelations at the top. Because poking out from behind the battlements would have been very dangerous, there was an area that was often referred to as “dead ground”, where the soldiers were unable to see. This was an area also exposed to weaknesses. The other problem with square ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

The door to the keep was also a weak point. It was normally kept on the first floor, and reached by either a ladder or walkway that could be pulled up or destroyed if the castle was under siege.

Shell keeps were also developed at the same time as the square keeps. These were comprised of a round stonewall built on top of a Motte. Also they were normally encased in a curtain wall, which ran along the outside of the bottom of the bailey. The square and shell keeps were both of Norman origin.

Castle improvements continued over the centuries. By the middle of the 13th century, a new type of castle had been developed. This was the “keep gatehouse”. In this castle design, the keep had been brought from the centre of the castle, to the gatehouse itself. Here, the castellan (keeper of the castle) could direct the defence itself. The castellan would only station his most trusted men there, because even if the rest of the castle deserted the castellan, or was overrun by forces, the castellan could defend the keep for long periods of time after that. The only problem with keep gatehouses was that because of the large machinery that was used for the drawbridge, there was little living space. The keep was supposed to be a place to live as well as work/ defend, and therefore the option for keep gatehouses faded out in the middle ages, due to people preferring a home as well as a fortified house.

Concentric castes were a further improvement in the castle design. They were being built in the reign of king Edward I, and the design was influenced fro knowledge that was gathered from the crusades. Military architects learned that Turks used the two levels of defence. If the inner walls of the castles could have overlooked the outer walls, then the enemy could have faced attack from two different levels. In addition, siege weapons could be kept away from the heart of the castle. The concentric principle was that an outside shorter curtain wall would be able to give flanking fire, and then a larger inner wall would hold more firing positions for archers and other projectile units and weapons. Concentric castles could be built from scratch, however older castles could be adapted to support a concentric design.

To the left, you can see a picture showing a plan view of a concentric castle. The thick wall towards the inside of the site shows the inner curtain wall, complete with towers, and if you look carefully there is a thinner outer curtain wall that is labelled. This castle has very good defensive capabilities because not only is it concentric in design, but it also is surrounded by a moat, which could have either been a dry moat; (and filled with sharp bramble, twigs and stones) or a wet moat, (and full with water).

Some Norman builders reasoned that a keep would be easier to defend if the corners were removed. These round keeps were also built on the ground. They used less material and were quicker and easier to roof. They work on the same principal as square keeps, but are round. Polygonal keeps were the same as round keeps, however the polygonal castle plan used towers as well.

Buttresses were found at the base of castle towers and walls. The aim for a buttress was to prevent the undermining of castle walls and towers. The buttresses were big thick extensions to the bases of the towers and walls that sloped several metres out. They were at angles to prevent rams from being able to connect with the wall.

Do the sources provide reliable evidence about the development of castles?

The first source, originating from Walter of Terouanne describes the Motte and bailey castles built by William in Normandy. The description of the castle comes from a primary source, meaning that the writer of the statement was present at the area upon the time of writing. This statement has no intent to be misleading, as its sole purpose is to inform, therefore I can assume that it is reliable.

Lambert D’Ardres, who describes a French castle, wrote the second source. This source also has the intent to inform, and was written at approximately the same time that the particular type of castle was in use. The various features such as the “great chamber in which the lord and lady slept” and the “common living rooms of the residents” suggest that he had also had seen the features first hand. I see this source as reliable as the intentions stay the same as the first…to inform.

The next source is from the middle ages, and at the time, was classed as a modern book by historian T.Rowley. This is a secondary source of information, and is taken from a history book. This book COULD have some opinions scattered amongst the facts. Yes, this also has the intent to inform, however opinions from the writer himself may be misleading. This secondary source however reliable is still less reliable than the first two primary sources.

The last source that I viewed was a series of diagrams. This is also a secondary source, because it shows progression of castle design that happened over the centuries. It would not be possible to do this with a primary source. We see a rectangular stone keep eventually adapted to a Round keep, with a buttressed base. This change in the development of castles is not backed up by WHY they actually changed, therefore making the source hard to understand if prior knowledge of castles is not available.

To conclude, all the sources are meant to inform, and all do at a reliable standard. The primary sources are however, more accurate than the secondary, because of the writers being present at the time of the quotes.

Ludlow Castle

Ludlow castle was first referred to in text by chroniclers in 1138, however the date of the castles construction is unknown. Despite this, architects have managed to date the curtain wall of the inner bailey; its flaking towers and parts of the gatehouse keep to all being from the 11th century.

The reason for its construction was to control the hostile welsh population. It was a Norman fortress built with a lot of defensive techniques. This itself is a very typical feature of the castle. Along side, this other typical features were present. Features such as the large stone keep, dungeons, fortified curtain wall and the gatehouse.

Ludlow was passed on to Peter de Geneville in 1283. When he arrived peter decided to add a range of domestic buildings in the inner bailey. The previous welsh conquests of Edward I had created sable conditions along the border, and this assisted peter in adding the buildings to the bailey, thus transforming the castle from a military outpost to more of a home.

In 1308, Ludlow was passed to roger Mortimer on his marriage to h daughter of peter de Geneville. Mortimer then constructed Mortimer’s tower, and his was a very untypical part of the castle. The construction of the tower itself was not very untypical, as many owners of castles often made their own improvements. The untypical feature of this tower construction was the purpose that it was first constructed for, and the shape of it once fully constructed. It had no known practical function.

Mortimer also added the north range to the castle, added the kitchens and altered the main entrance of the castle.

The castle was also home to some judges, which in turn used it as a courthouse to settle local problems. This feature was untypical, as judge’s lodgings were not found at many other castles.

Ludlow also had an icehouse, which was a further untypical feature. In addition, it was used as a function headquarters and was often regarded as the capital of Wales. It dealt with a number of civil and criminal cases on a number of occasions.

It became a palace that was inhabited by Prince Arthur (the eldest son of king Henry VIII). Henry lived there with his wife Catherine of Aragon, but unfortunately, he became a victim of the plague and died.

To contrast these untypical features, it was a very typical Tudor building. The windows were very wide and occupy many of the buildings in the castle. This was once a great feature, however with all castles, as the years pass by, they face decline. This and these other features were also typical aspects of castle life. In 1689, the castle became a “romantic ruin” with no practicality anymore, and in 1811, it was purchased by Carl of Powis, and began to attack visitors. Today many other castles it has become a major tourist attraction.

What the guidebook tells us about when the castle was built

The guidebook seems to abstain from explaining the castles origin in great detail. The first section of the guidebook tells that chroniclers first referred to the castle in 1138. It also dates various structures within the castle (such as the inner bailey, flanking towers and gatehouse keep), however the dates are estimated and very little information is given. Through external sources (the internet and various books) I have established that the De Lacy family owned the manor, in which it was built on, since 1066.

What improvements were made to the castle during the middle ages?

During the middle ages, the castle saw several major improvements in the design and structure from when it was first referred to by chroniclers. In 1283, Geoffrey De Geneville passed on the ownership of his land to his son Peter.

This saw a vast improvement to the castle, and a drastic change. The calm conditions on the borders allowed improvements to a range of buildings that were of a domestic nature.

This refurbishment created a starting point for Rodger Mortimer, who married Peter’s daughter. Rodger built “Mortimer’s Tower” which was found to have no real practical use. The shape was semi-circular which added to its originality. Rodger Mortimer also built the “chapel of St Peter” in order to celebrate his escape from the tower of London on St peters day. The decorated style window with “y” shaped tracery is the most obvious remaining feature of the original chapel.

The keep went under major development in the 12th century. After the extension to a 4-storey tower and the enlargement of some windows, the original entrance to the keep was moved to add security to the rest of the structure. A new walkway was built into the curtain wall. The stones in the blocked entrance can be seen as a contrasting feature.

The north range was a very large set of buildings (primarily domestic in their functions) that started to be constructed in the late 13th century. The range has a crescent shaped plan, which fitted in with the normal curtain wall, and it replaces the earlier buildings on the site.

The furthest right on the north range is the solar block. This dates back to about 1283.Later on prince Arthur’s chamber was added. Next to this is the great hall, and this was added approximately the same time as he solar block. The top of the garderobe tower and the great chamber block were both added in the early 14th century with the Tudor lodgings on the far left added in the 16th century. The guidebook gives a great deal of information regarding the north range, and that is complimented nicely with various images and reconstruction images.

What the guidebook tells us about the castle in Tudor and Stuart times

When Edward IV, the son of the duke of York became king in 1461, Ludlow castle became crown property. It remained a royal castle for the next 350 years except during the civil war and commonwealth.

In 1473, Edward was sent by the king to be brought up at Ludlow, away from all the plague activity around London. The gentlemen and nobles who accompanied him formed a “prices council”. This council assumed responsibility for the government of Wales and the bordering counties. Until the 1530s however its control was limited.

The authority of this council of marches increased after 1534, when bishop Rowland lee was appointed lord president. His vigorous enforcement of the law was so strong that “all the theves in Wales quaked for feare”.

For more than a century Ludlow was virtually the capital of Wales and its courts were very busy with criminal activity. This resulted in further improvements to the castle, especially in the 1550s and 1580s. The castle was nor primarily a centre for administration, though it also had many of the features of an Elizabethan stately home. The council ceased to exist in 1641 but was revived with limited powers in 1660 until its abolition in 1689.

Ludlow became a royalist stronghold during the civil war of 1642-46. A strong parliamentary force then besieged the town and castle. Though there was fighting on the outskirts of the town, and suburbial areas damaged by fire, the castle was surrendered under negotiation. This seems likely to avoid damaging the castle, because if it were not for the negotiation, demolition could have occurred.

What happened as the castle declined?

After 1689 the castle was abandoned very quickly. This was due to the new policy of the government of William and Mary to centralise control of the whole of England and Wales. In 1772 Daniel Defoe described it as “the very perfection of decay”.

The people of the town looted it for useful materials and the main rooms in the castle were soon without roofs. In the 1760s the government were considering the demolition of the establishment, however the cost involved put them off, and was leased in 1771 to the Earl of Powis. Later on, another earl bought the castle in 1811.

The castle was now no more than a ruin, which began to attract many visitors. It was praised by writers, and painted by artists.

In 1772 walks were laid out round the castle, which was now a public amenity appropriate to Ludlow. It became as successful as a fashionable social centre then. As the time passed, so did the popularity of the castle. Over 50,000 visitors now visit the castle annually.

In the 19th century, the outer bailey was used for sports and other public occasions. The tradition of entertainment was revived at the castle, and since 1960 the inner bailey has been the setting for a Shakespeare play as the major item in the Ludlow festival. It continues to entertain right up to today.

The guidebook is very good at describing the events from the castles origin, to the present day. I believe it is a very informative guidebook.

Does the evidence at the site support what the guidebook tells us?

The guidebook can only tell you so much about Ludlow and its history. A more accurate way to explore Ludlow’s surroundings and atmosphere is to go there and experience everything first hand. The guidebook is very solid in explaining Ludlow’s history and features, and together with the guidebook, exploring the castle could be a memorable experience. The only things that can be backed up by visiting the site are the actual physical elements that the castle has. There is no real way of proving the historical facts, (such as the ownership of the castle over time) by examining the surroundings. These are told to us in the guidebook, and there is no reason to dispute this information, as its intent is to inform. It is possible to compare what we have seen, with the information in the guidebook. For example, the guidebook states that the original entrance to the keep had been moved, and this is evident by visiting the castle, and seeing a different type of stone that is in the window.

It is also not possible (without any prior knowledge) to determine whether the castle has primarily typical features. For this, other knowledge of castles, and their typical or untypical features is required. This can then be compared with that of Ludlow and a conclusion made. This may also lead to people having their own mental images of Ludlow castle as it was. Sometimes, with access only to text, readers make up their own mental images of some of the factors at Ludlow. This can prove unreliable, and inaccurate.

In conclusion, a historian (or any person wanting to study/explore Ludlow castle) needs a combination of text and images, as well as being able to study the castle by visiting, in order to create interpretations, and establish developing factors. This does not only apply to Ludlow, but all other castles in general.