MASARYK UNIVERSITY Faculty of Education

Department of English Language and Literature

Britain's and Their Unique Role in the Bachelor Thesis

Brno 2016

Supervisor: Author: Mgr. Zdeněk Janík, M.A., Ph.D. Dagmar Janíková

Declaration I declare that I worked on this thesis on my own and that all information gathered for its compilation are from the sources which are cited in the references.

Brno, March 15, 2016 Dagmar Janíková

Acknowledgements I would like to thank my supervisor Mgr. Zdeněk Janík, M.A., Ph.D. for his helpful advice and valuable comments. I am very grateful for his useful guidance.

Annotation

The bachelor thesis deals with the history of British castles in the Middle Ages. The research concerns with the role of castles, their construction, important historical events and key persons. The chapters are divided according to the main roles and events in the chronological order.

The first chapter analyses the purpose of the initial castles. The second chapter analyses castles in wars, but also as residences in peace. In the final part of the thesis a detailed look is taken at the strategy of taking control over the Welsh and Scottish people by means of the castles. It also examines Robert Bruce's policy of destroying the castles in Scotland.

The thesis focuses on the importance of building castles and analyses why they are an integral part of British history. The books by Christopher Gravett and Norman J.G. Pounds are used as the main sources of the historical facts.

Key words: Motte-and-bailey Castles, the , , Castles, Edward I,

Contents

Introduction………………………………………………………………………………….. 6

1. Norman Castles……………………………………………………………………….. ….. 8 1.1 Motte-and-bailey Castles……………………………………………………………... ….. 9 1.2 Stone Castles…………………………………………….………………………………. 10 1.2.1 Construction of Stone Castles…………………………………………………………. 11 1.3 Royal Control of -building………………………………………………………... 12

2. Early Plantagenet Fortifications 1154–1272…………………………………………… 14 2.1 The Development of a Castle……………………………………………………………. 16 2.2 Castles in War…………………………………………………………………………… 19 2.3 Castles in Peace………………………………………………………………………….. 22 2.4 Castles as Prisons………………………………………………………………………... 25 2.5 The Community of a Castle……………………………………………………………... 26

3. The Castles of Edward I………………………………………………………………… 28 3.1 The Conquest of Wales………………………………………………………………….. 29 3.2 The Conquest of Scotland……………………………………………………………….. 38

4. The Destruction of castles……………………………………………………………….. 41 4.1 The onset of Robert Bruce’s new policy………………………………………………… 41

Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………... 43

References…………………………………………………………………………………... 45

Appendices………………………………………………………………………………….. 48

Introduction

The medieval castles have become one of the most ultimate symbols of the Anglo- Norman world. But what were the castles? A castle is considered to be a fortress, building or a set of buildings the purpose of which was to defend against enemies. It is a usual idea of most people, but were castles built just for fighting or self-defence? From the 11th to the 14th century, the British landscape experienced its heyday of castle-building. Several thousand castles were built, but not necessarily as fortresses. A small minority of British castles ever experienced any fighting. Most castles were also stately homes which provided space for lots of people. It was a unique combination of the military and residential function what made a castle different from other types of fortifications. The residential role of the castle was as important as the military function. Nevertheless, castles were much more than defensive strongholds and grand residences for lords. Rather than judging from an exterior surface of the castle, one must think of the background in which they were built, who built them, when they were built and what was happening in Britain at that time. Castles were a reflection of the needs, expectations and peculiarity of the men who built and lived in them. The aim of this thesis is to compare the role of castles throughout the Middle Ages. It describes significant historical events and also the people who used the castles as their home, fortress, centre of administration or as an instrument of invasion. The thesis also analyses how the architectural features reflect a function of a castle. The first chapter provides a brief description of Norman people and William I. It deals with the pre-conquest castles, motte-and-bailey castles and analyses why William I started building them. It depicts what the early medieval castle looked like, its origin and what function it had. The chapter also describes the establishment of the feudal system in England. The part of the chapter fully explores the design and development of the Norman castle. It explains key features, materials and organization embraced in the first stone castles. The second chapter examines the development in the castle architecture during the reign of Plantagenet kings. It starts with the brief introduction of kings and their asset to the castle building. The chapter analyses military features of a castle and what function the castle had in the wartime. It illustrates how the castle began to adopt the classical form and examines castles as a centre for communities and the base for lords. It is also concerned with the residential function of the castle. The part of the chapter also deals with the development of prison in the castles. The most famous castles, including , , and Dover Castle are analysed. The last part of the chapter provides a description of the

6 people who worked, lived or struggled in castles and a connection between a castle and its surroundings. As Edward I was the greatest castle-building king, the whole of the third chapter is devoted to his life and his main castles and their function. This part of the thesis analysis Edward's influence on building castles in Wales. The chapter also focuses on his great cooperation with Master James of St George and their magnificent castles, including Harlech, Beaumaris and Caernarfon. The other part examines Edward’s attempt to conquer Scotland and it depicts of Caerlaverock Castle, Stirling Castle and Kildrummy Castle. The chapter ends with the death of Edward I and the reign of his son Edward II. The final part of the thesis accounts for destruction of the castles during Robert the Bruce's reign. The chapter provides an explanation for the reason why Bruce did not use castles which he had captured for occupation. The chapter clarifies the reasons why the castles suffered a decline in their military importance.

7

1. Norman Castles Who were the Medieval Normans? The similarities between the Normans and their Viking predecessors were obvious. They succeeded in battles due to their careful planning, speed of movement and decisiveness. They had good business sense and yet the Normans soon adopted Carolingian feudalism, cavalry warfare and Christianity that set them apart from the Vikings. (Gravett & Nicolle 2006, p. 8) The Normans established a power base in northern France that became the Duchy of . One of the most powerful dukes, who also later became the first Norman king of England, was William I. He was the illegitimate son of Duke of Normandy, Robert the Magnificent. William succeeded his father in 1035 when he was a little boy. He witnessed one siege after another. William participated in destroying the enemies’ castles and building new ones. His ongoing struggle for survival reinforced his resolution and William soon became respected and feared not just in Normandy. (Morris, 2003, pp. 21-22) Later on, he got married to Matilda, who had descent from the Anglo-Saxon House of Wessex. In addition, William was also second cousin of the childless Edward the Confessor. (Lepage, 2012, p. 118) When King Edward the Confessor died in 1066, Harold II. Godwinson seized the moment and succeeded to the throne. However, Duke William swore that he had been named as an heir to the English throne during Edward's previous exile in Normandy. During the summer in 1066 Harold won a victory against the Norwegians, but he did not enjoy it for a long time. (Morris, 2003, pp. 23-24) Messengers arrived from the south and brought the news that William the Normandy had landed with the army of not more than five thousand warriors near the Roman fort of Anderida. The first William’s act was to rebuild the fort into a castle. Then he moved along the coast to Hastings where he compelled Saxon labourers to build another castle, vividly illustrated in the Bayeux Tapestry (Figure 1). There he awaited the arrival of King Harold and his army. Harold was a capable leader, but he made several tactic mistakes in the Battle of Hastings and they cost him the battle and his life. Having achieved the victory over Harold, William was unwilling to advance into the interior of an unknown country. He moved along the coast to Dover. There was another Roman fort which offered William a strong base. He built there a castle from which he could advance and withdraw if necessary. William met Anglo-Saxon leaders on the way to London and they submitted and swore allegiance to him. On Christmas Day in 1066 the Duke of Normandy was crowned King of England in the Confessor's own abbey church of Westminster. (Pounds, 1994, p. 3) However, to occupy the

8 largest city did not mean to control the country. The people from the west and north refused to submit to the new king. In addition, King William was also Duke of Normandy hence he had to spend a great deal of time there. Pounds (1994) states that William's solution was to grant land to a class of men with a vested interest in the Norman settlement and simultaneously introduced a castle as a fortified home and military base. (p. 5) Norman castles played a central role in the implementation of feudalism. King William I granted parcels of land to individual lords as rewards for their military service and loyalty. The lords appointed vassals to manage the land or kept the largest parcels for themselves. In return for these grants of land, the vassals paid homage to the king, agreed to provide men for an army and allowed the lord to use a castle in time of need. This system bound everyone in allegiance to the king. According to Brown (1980), "castles were the physical embodiment of the lordship. They dominated the countryside in every way, militarily, socially, politically, administratively and economically, and all these potencies were integrated and combined in it, and given deliberate architectural expression by it." (p. 16) Over some time, the control of a lordship became hereditary. Heirs acquired great estates and the labourers (serfs) bound to the land. The lords built the castles as offensive strongholds which helped them to control their region. The presence of castles in the landscape clearly demonstrated the lord's supremacy within their new territory. (Hull p. 23)

1.1 Motte-and-bailey Castles The first Norman castles were not the large stone castles. The earliest castles belonged to a motte-and-bailey type. It is estimated that they developed during the 10th century, but no one is certain of its exact origin. Kaufmann and Kaufmann (2001) state:

These fortifications were widespread throughout the European lands north of the Alps in Western, Northern, Central and Easter Europe. It is possible that the Norsemen may have brought this design with them when they settled in Normandy. Although the origins of motte- and-bailey castles may be traced to other lands, the fact remains that this type of fortification seems to have first achieved prominence in the French lands of Normandy and Anjou from whence it was taken by the Normans to England. (p. 109)

The fact is that the Normans did not bring anything new to military architecture. Many features of motte-and-bailey had already been used in Celtic hill forts, Roman forts and

9

Anglo-Saxon burhs1. Motte-and-bailey castles were made of earthwork and wood. There was no traditional design because each castle was built by a different owner, but they basically consisted of two parts. The first one was the motte, place which was elevated and difficult to access. The motte was something more than a mound of earth. It composed of various materials such as stone, chalk rubber and peat. The top of the motte was flattened and encircled by a palisade in the middle of which was a building, usually a timber tower. The bailey was placed at the food of the motte. It was the largest part of the castle which embraced all buildings and facilities for maintaining a castle. There were food-stores, a mill, kitchen, gardens, stables, farm equipment, a carpenter’s and blacksmith’s workshop. It was a place of great activity the routine of which was punctuated only by death and birth. (Lepage, 2012, pp. 139-140) The bailey was enclosed by a ditch, earth wall and another palisade (Figure 2). The function of the motte-and-bailey castle was to deter aggression from the external foes. In addition, it was a base for a lord from which he could attack his enemies. The motte- and-bailey soon became a small political, administrative and tax collecting centre. Even though the castle was cheap and quickly built, it could not withstand a long siege. The motte- and-bailey was rather small to accommodate a larger garrison and palisades could be set on fire or chopped easily. Several thousand were built during and after the conquest in 1066 and they were spread over England, Wales and eastern Scotland. (Lepage, 2012, p. 122-129) The Normans recognized the strategic importance of controlling Welsh borders. England was administered from several urbanized centres, but Wales was more rustic and did not have a unified kingdom. The Normans built a few castles there so that they could display their presence. However, the Welsh did not seem to be as dangerous as the Scots, because in the border region were erected more than 500 timber castles. Northumberland had more castles than any part of England. These castles were used as offensive weapons to the Scots at bay. (Hull, 2006, p. 8)

1.2 Stone Castles After defeating the Saxon king, the conquest was not completed. William was apprehensive about the possible rebellions against his authority and, in fact, they occurred. As a result of assaults on the Normans, William ordered the reconstruction of Saxon fortifications

1 Some historians characterizes Burhs as the large defensive works raised by Alfred the Great and his successors to protect themselves against the Vikings, others apply the term only to the fortified communal settlements occupied by the Saxons. While some burhs served a military purpose, lots of them were population and administrative centres. (Hull, 2006, p. 20) 10 in the highly populated parts of England. The Normans recognized the limited defensive capabilities of motte-and-bailey castles and thus they began to build stone towers. The choice between a motte-and-bailey castle and the one of stone depended on a particular place and time. When speed was vital, timber castles would be erected. When place and time allowed, a stone keep2 would be built from the start. Huge Norman such as Colchester, Rochester (figure 3), Canterbury, London, Dover, and Pevensey were erected in the southeast. One of the very first was the Tower of London. The site in London became William's capital. Not only for tactical and strategical reason did William chose London for his base, but it was also very convenient site for building a new fortress. There was an old Roman wall and a motte built by the Romans and Anglo-Saxons. (Hull, 2006, p. 8) Some of the stone keeps were also concentrated in the north (e.g., Newcastle, Bamburgh and Richmond). Although many wooden castles were later rebuilt in stone, the process was slow. The building of stone castles began soon after the conquest, but many of them actually belong to the 12th century and later. A motte-and-bailey castle was much cheaper and it was built effortlessly. In addition, the more resilient stone keeps fulfilled the same function as motte- and bailey castles. They represented the residence of a lord, his warriors and servants. However, the keep could be seen for miles around. It was very unusual for a local population that was used to low wooden buildings. It was a formidable fortress, which reflected the dominating power and the authority of the lord. (Lepage, 2012, pp. 134-137)

1.2.1 Construction of Stone Castles The construction of a large keep cost a great deal of money, involved lots of people and much better building materials. Solid rock was chosen for its foundations so as to withstand the immense weight of the future fortress. It also prevented the attackers from undermining it in time of war. The walls were usually made with neatly trimmed blocks of smooth stone which were bound together with . The Normans had quality building stone, white stone of Caen, which was imported from Normandy. However, it was only used for important buildings. Flint or hard granite from England was used for the castles of less significance. The works involved both master craftsmen and unskilled labourers. Norman carpenters and masons were often very experienced, but they were also needed in Normandy. The Normans had to use local Saxon labour. However, the local workers were semi-skilled and

2 The new stone towers were not known as "keeps", since the word was used in the late medieval period. The more usual word in France was donjon which is still used in the French language today. (Gravett and Hook, 2003, p. 5) 11 therefore their buildings were very rough in finish. After some time their degree of technical ability was reached. (Lepage, 2012, p. 138) Norman keeps offered great comfort in the peasants’ life. The great hall functioned as an all-purpose room. Its walls were decorated. The fire was placed in the centre and its smoke escaped through a louvre in the roof. As window glass was unknown, there were few openings in the walls, placed usually high in case of a siege. People usually slept on benches and tables at night and they used them at mealtimes during the day. Privacy was a luxury enjoyed only by persons of high status. Kings, dukes, counts, lords usually owned their own sleeping room.

1.3 Royal Control of Castle-building Castles were requisite for holding the conquered land and simultaneously protecting it from invasion. King William had to give lords a full responsibility for the castles which he had himself built. It was difficult for any ruler to keep control over their castles. There is no evidence that William ever granted authority for the building of baronial castles. When a baron had enough money to build, equip and man his own castle, he always faced the possibility that the castle could pass into the possession of the crown. William II (the reign 1087-1100), the oldest son of William I, often took possession of a strategically important baronial castes. He also managed to regain Cumbria (northwest England) from the Scots when he besieged Bamburgh Castle in 1095. (Hull, 2006, p. 14) After the death of William II, his younger Henry I (the reign 1100-1135) seized an opportunity and had himself crowned as King of England. (Pounds, 1994, p. 51) Henry I saw the great castles as a threat to the security of the realm. He thus introduced the law which forbade building a castle without royal authority. After the death of Henry I in 1135, Stephen and both claimed the throne as their rightful inheritance. The Norman realm went through prolonged warfare. This period, known as , was full of sieges. Stephen let everyone build a castle. A number of unlicensed castles increased during the reign of Stephen and it was a feature of Anarchy. When Stephen died his nephew, Henry of Anjou, ascended to the throne. The Plantagenet or Angevin dynasty originated from the French county of Anjou. From the 10th century, the Angevins followed a policy of expansion, leading to the conquest of neighbouring regions including Saumur, Maine, Touraine and Normandy in 1145. The name Plantagenet is the nickname given to the father of Henry II, because he wore a yellow broom flower on his helmet. (Lepage, 2012, p. 161)

12

Lepage (2012) states that the Plantagenet period stretched over the whole Middle Ages, and obviously British castle design gradually evolved from the 12th to the 15th century, in order to meet administrative, cultural and, of course, military requirements. (p. 161) When Henry II ascended to the throne, the majority of castles were possessed by barons. The castles were both the symbol and the reality of power and Henry of Anjou showed soon how well he had learned the lesson of the Anarchy. (Pounds, 1994, p. 53)

13

2. Early Plantagenet Fortifications 1154–1272 After succeeding to the throne in 1154, King Henry II could see England in a state of chaos and confusion. He thus restored the royal power and deprived the earls who had been created by Stephen and Matilda of their titles. (Lepage, 2012, p. 161) Henry II obtained possession of some fifty castles at the beginning of his reign. About half of them had been built by the first two Norman kings and other castles were temporary acquired by barons. Most castles seemed to be of little value to Henry II. The castles were thus granted to men on whom the king could rely. However, throughout Henry II’s reign it was clearly understood that all castles were under royal control. From the start of Henry II’s reign, data on royal expenditure were recorded on the Pipe Rolls3. Searching through these documents, one can learn about rough costs for royal castles, and also how long it took to build them. Even though keeping a castle in defensive condition required considerable expenditure, a large number of castles which were strategically placed received an immense investment. One of the most extravagant outlays was on Dover Castle where the great keep, which still dominates the site, was built (Figure 4). Dover has been always considered to be the key access from the Continent to Britain. This clearly proves the fact that Dover started to be fortified over 2,000 years ago. Other heavy expenditure was on building a curtain wall4 which surrounded the Tower of London and on building a tower-keep at Scarborough, which was a part of defence of Northern England. (Brown, 2003, p. 155) Elsewhere expenditure was primarily on replacing timber palisades and wooden towers with masonry. Royal castle-building was not evenly spread through the reign of Henry II. The periods of highest expenditure coincided with those of political tensions. The first began in 1170 when the king let his supporters murder archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Becket. Another problem emerged between years 1172 and 1173 when leading barons rebelled against Henry II. For this reason, the king strengthened several significant castles, such as Orford Castle,

3 The Pipe Rolls are the earliest financial records. They survived from the start of Henry II’s reign in an almost unbroken series. The Pipe Rolls recorded the annual accounting and occasionally the name of the architect or mason working on a particular building. The clerks wrote the records on huge parchment rolls and one can calculate how much a king spent on particular castles. (Morris, 2003, p. 40)

4 The curtain walls surrounded the castle buildings and protected the interior of the castle. It was a defensive wall generally constructed in stone. There were few doors in the wall thus limiting access to the castle. ("Castle defences," n.d.).

14

Nottingham, Windsor, Winchester and garrisoned a number of minor castles so that they were in a state of readiness. (Pounds, 1994, pp. 75-78) Henry II proved to be one of the most powerful kings in Europe. He ruled all the wide realms on the continent which had had either inherited or obtained by his marriage with Eleanor, heiress of the dukes of Aquitaine. Henry II was ruling all the lands between Scotland and Spain. Having an empire greater than any English king before him, he was a figure of great stature. Although he spent the major part of his reign across the Channel, he still found time to triumph over the nobility. Nevertheless, his reign was embittered by the prolonged conflicts with the Church. (Lepage, 2012, p. 166) Henry II was succeeded by his son Richard I. He was also a castle builder, but his most significant castle, Château Gaillard was built in Normandy. Even though he made additions to the Tower of London, his realm was rather in the hands of his deputies and his brother John. (Lepage, 2012, pp. 168) John was the youngest son of Henry II. He was unpleasant, cruel and treacherous man. Inevitably, he met several upheavals and assaults. During his 17-year reign he worked tirelessly on the business of government. Although king seemed to be a good administrator (English subjects were constantly imposed by greater taxes), he was a bad political leader. In 1204 John suffered a major military and political failure when he lost Normandy, Anjou and Poitou to the king of France. While he was trying to gain the areas back, both clerical and lay society united against John. (Morris, 2003, p. 46) As the majority of barons were dissatisfied with John’s rule, they forced him to sign a list of privileges – Magna Carta which limited the power of the king. (Lepage, 2012, pp. 169- 170) However, the rebellions that John had to face were not entirely his own fault. Both his father and brother Richard I governed England in the same way, abusing their power at the power of their barons. Morris (2003) states that:

One can measure the success of the royals by looking at castles of Plantagenet kings. At the start of Henry II’s reign about 20 per cent of all castles in England were royal. Two decades before Henry’s accession there was a proliferation of private castles which could be built without the king’s consent. One of Henry’s first reforms was to order the destruction of those castles. Moreover, Henry and his sons built new, bigger and more impressive stone castles. When John died, the ratio of royal castles to private ones altered considerably. Half the castles in England were royal. This illustrates the king’s power over his barons. (p. 46)

15

John was succeeded by his son Henry in 1216. He is considered to be a great patron of medieval architecture. Henry III converted the Tower of London into a principal royal residence. During his reign, he rebuilt several castles, but not always for the purpose of defence. Henry III managed to transform them into grand residences with the elegant Gothic style5. (Lepage, 2012 pp. 170-173) All the Angevin kings were zealous builders and they left a legacy of castles which proved to be indestructible. A castle turned from a keep and bailey to a magnificent stone castle. This evolution regarding siege warfare and castle design will be analysed in the following chapters.

2.1. The Development of a Castle At the beginning of the 13th century several castles still remained to be bounded by a ditch, palisade and had a timber tower. King John was repairing wooden castles in Shropshire. However, even though Castle Corfe was rebuilt, some of its parts were still of timber. A keep was still the dominating feature of many castles during the 12th century. Nevertheless, they were placed on a man-made mound which often caused subsidence. It heralded the demise of the keeps. (Gravett & Hook 2009, p.10) What changed between 12th and 13th century particularly was the strength of defence. Lepage (2012) states that:

It was largely due to the experience gained in the Crusades6 by western military architects, who for the first time not only made close acquaintance with the mighty fortifications of the Byzantine Empire and the Muslim civilization, but also were confronted with sophisticated siege methods. (p.178)

As the condition of castle's fortification could have been fateful, the castle builders had to start experimenting with new tower shapes. Flat surfaces of towers were susceptible to be battered hence the round tower was chosen. This design became very popular throughout England, Wales and Scotland. According to Kenyon (1990), "It is the circular or D-shaped

5 Gothic style was an architectural type developed in northern France that is characterized by rich visual effects through decoration, the enlargement of windows to great proportions, upward curves and other decorative features. (Hull, 2006, p. 229)

6 The Crusades were military campaigns during the time of the Middle Ages. Muslims of the Middle East fought against the Christians. The Crusade started due to the Muslims who had captured Jerusalem 1076 which had been considered as the most holy place for Christians. However, Jerusalem was also fairly important for the Muslims. Thus both sides fought to keep Jerusalem. These wars took nearly 200 years. (Trueman, 2015) 16 tower which is the dominant form of the 13th century, although square, cylindrical, rectangular or polygonal forms were also used in later medieval castles" (p. 72). In contrast to a square keep, a round tower had several advantages. It limited the angles or grounds which could not be seen from the top of the castle and therefore the archers could shoot at the foes standing around the towers. The square or rectangular keeps were also very vulnerable to mining. Another advantage of building the round towers was that they were much more economical in masonry than the square ones. (Lepage, 2012, pp. 178-181) The 13th century observed the increase of round towers, including the Tower of London which was initiated by Henry III. He ordered the construction of the inner bailey with thirteen round towers and outer wall with six round towers. (Hall, 2014) Other remarkable sophisticated forms of towers can be also seen at Orford in Sussex (Figure 5). At the same time that the castle builders started building round and multi-angular keeps, they were spending more and more attention to the stronger curtain walls and flanking towers7. During 12th and 13th century the bailey was often enclosed by curtain walls, flanked by towers of the rectangular or more modern cylindrical pattern. These towers had the same function as normal towers, but they were less expensive to build. The bailey still encompassed a variety of domestic buildings. The great hall functioned as the centre of the action. As seen before, in the 11th century it was a large room in the Norman keep which functioned as an all-purpose room, but during 12th century it became a separate building in its own right and was placed in a bailey. Westminster Hall provides a remarkable example, it was built by King William II and remodelled by King Richard II. Another noble hall is that of Winchester Castle built by King Henry III. To sum up, the keep did not serve as a dwelling or military structure any more. The bailey and its buildings became essentially the castle. The keep sometimes served as the last defensive place if the castle was invaded or captured. In this case, the keep was normally sited on the most remoted spot from the entrance, which was usually the most vulnerable area in the defence and therefore the castle architects had to pay great attention to the strengthening of the entrance. It took the form of a powerful . (Lepage, 2012, pp. 182-193) At the beginning of the 13th century a gate usually consisted of a door through a curtain wall. Some castles had the entrance cut into the tower. (Gravett & Hook 2009, p. 24) Later on, castle builders took the next logical step in the gateway construction and started building

7 Flanking towers were built as part of the curtain wall. Castles with curtain walls and flanking towers were much more difficult to capture. They had variety of shapes. ("Castle defences," n.d.). 17 twin-towered gate passages. A chamber over the gate passage was the ’s residence or a room with the winding mechanism which was used to raise and lower and portcullises8. One of the most impressive is the massive one which was added by Henry III to Dover Castle. It consists of five massive towers around, a passageway with a and a set of double-leaved doors. Whoever controlled the entrance controlled the castle hence much of the gate passage and towers was equipped with the most effective features such as grooves known as arrowloops, which allowed to archers to safely shoot at their foes. Besides the portcullis, the walls often had an openings in the ceiling of a gate passage, called "murder holes," allowing soldiers to drop heavy items down on the heads of unsuspecting enemies. Another defensive mechanism of the gatehouse was the machicolation (Figure 6). It has the same function as murder holes. It was a series of openings or crenelated parapets which enabled soldiers to toss missiles or other projectiles onto their enemies. (Hull, 2006, p. 57-59) When gatehouses were reinforced, their outer side was often provided with a defensive, additional fortification, the . It was a simple palisade which could have different forms, such as a round tower or rectangular building or an oval shape. D-shaped open were built at the Tower of London and (Figure 7). (Gravett & Hook, 2009, p. 29) Some castles includes secondary entrances which provided the lord and garrison with exterior passageways through the wall. They could be quickly opened and closed without jeopardizing the security provided at the main entrance. These entrances known as the postern gates enabled a besieged garrison received new troops and supplies. Many poster gates were built near the water so that ships could easily move to and from a castle. Notable examples survive at the Tower of London, where the secondary gate, known as "Traitor's Gate" opened alongside the River Thames to receive essential supplies. The postern gates were usually simple structures, but some of them were unusually complex. They consisted of a narrow curving stair, passage with a portcullis or timber door and they sometimes had murder holes. (Hull, 2006, pp. 60-61) One of the most significant defensive features was also the drawbridge. Nearly all of them were made of wood. The very first were removable. In case of danger, the

8 Even though the portcullis was invented by the Romans in 200 B.C., it was not incorporated into the gatehouse until the 12th century. It was a heavy door that dropped vertically down through slots or guides. Their purpose was to protect the main entrance of the castle. The portcullis was usually made of oak, covered and linked together with iron. It was operated by using weights, pulleys and ropes. In the case of an attack, a guard took a sledgehammer and hit the release latch so that the portcullis dropped quickly. ("Castles of Britain," n.d.)

18 defenders could move the platform into the castle. (Hull, 2006, p. 62) Some drawbridges were operated with ropes, chains or pulleys. These bridges had several advantages. Not only was it impossible for attackers to cross the ditch but the drawbridge also created an additional barrier to the interior of the castle. (Toy, 1985, p. 236) The military function of the castle influenced undoubtedly the design and construction of the castle. The curtain walls with flanking towers, great hall, gatehouses with the portcullis and other defensive mechanisms typify a presence of frequent assaults, rebellion and primarily sieges.

2.2. Castles in War At the beginning of the 12th century assaults were launched on towns and cities rather than castles. Later on, sieges became more frequent and they became the main part of any campaign in the Middle Ages. (McNeill, 1992, p. 91) The main purpose of the sieges was to deprive the enemy of his stronghold. In civil wars the focus on castles was more important because there was more emphasis on taking control of a castle and new territory. However, overcoming a castle was a time-consuming, difficult and expensive task. In addition, armies were very slow to move, it usually took months even a year to mobilize them. The outcome of a siege depended on the skills of specialists in siegecraft and the endurance of mercenaries and defenders. The soldiers had to be prepared to sit out a long siege. They had to be patient, brave and courageous, regardless of the state of the campaign. The weather conditions were also a prominent factor. If it rained, the soldiers could not shoot with arrows, camps and roads became quagmire and morale of soldiers could suffer and therefore the medieval wars only took place from spring to autumn. (Lepage, 2012, pp. 173-174) Even though the defenders seemed to be in an advantageous position, strong stone-walls and towers were not always sufficient to stop enemies. The besiegers had several methods for capturing of a castle. Attackers could compel defenders to surrender by showing their strength. They often plundered, fired the inner buildings and raped and massacred inhabitants of the castle. The attackers also sometimes used guile and disguised themselves as merchants or pilgrims to get inside of the castle. Once they got inside of a castle they could intrigue internal quarrels among the defenders and pay the traitors for doing the same. Sometimes even the Church inverted in wartime. Lepage (2012) provides us with the example when the knights defending Bedford in 1224 were excommunicated by the archbishop of Canterbury on behalf of the king and the same spiritual weapon was used at the siege of Kenilworth in 1266. (p. 175) Owing to

19 intimidation, negotiation, treachery, corruption and often a great deal of luck the operation could be quickly concluded. If these methods failed, the attackers had to come up with new ways of forcing the defenders to surrender. One of the effective methods was by using of attrition. The attackers would cut all supply lines until the inhabitants of the castle were exhausted by hunger or sickness and therefore it was essential for the garrison to have enough supplies. As supplies became smaller, the attackers would catapult carcasses into a castle or poisoned the water supply with dead bodies or sulphur. (Hull, 2006, p. 43) The attrition siege enquired lots of patience, logistics, time and it was demanding for both sides. A besieging army often lived in a bad camp conditions where there was always the danger of a food shortage and poor sanitation which could result in an outbreak of life-threatening diseases. Even more effective way of defeating the enemies was by using siege engines. (Lepage, 2012, p. 175) There were three main types of the siege engine. The first one was the mangonel, sometimes called a "catapult," which could effectively break stone walls or knock down a castle's battlements. Another effective siege engine was the ballista. It was a giant crossbow which shot a missile in the form of a dart or spear. The most powerful stone-throwing machine was the trebuchet which began to dominate sieges. It was invented during the Crusade which were used for breaking curtain walls, towers and destroying houses and huts (Brown, 2004, p. 126) Most of the siege engines managed to throw a stone of one hundred and fifty kilograms to a distance of at least one hundred and fifty metres. However, it also caused a considerable disadvantage. The stones of such weight could not have been brought with the machines which threw them. Stones must have been acquired locally, which of course was impossible in some areas. (Pounds, 1994, p. 112) Other projectiles thrown by siege engines were pots of tar, quicklime, powdered sulphur and Greek fire which was a mix of oil, pitch, quicklime and sulphur and caused significant damage to wooden buildings. The siege engines were very powerful, they simultaneously managed to kill men, crush or weaken the walls and towers and destroy the huts and houses. (Lepage, 2012, p. 176) The most efficient method, however, was destroying a section of the defensive wall by mining (Figure 8). The miners, usually well-paid professionals, would dig beneath the foundations of their target area and hollow up a space by removing masonry. The excavated mine chamber was supported with wooden timbers to prevent the roof from crashing down. After achieving the required length of tunnel, the chamber was filled with brushwood and other combustible material and then the miners set the material alight and withdrew to safety. The wooden timbers would burn away and the wall above would collapse. However, the

20 environment in which miners worked was damp, dark and primarily dangerous. Digging a mine was very difficult, and even getting close enough to start digging was extremely risky and therefore miners often used shields or moved on wheels which were covered in damp animal hides to prevent it being set on fire. (Morris, 2003, p. 53) To determine if the miners were digging a tunnel, defenders would place bowls of water on the curtain walls and watch for ripples. If the defenders knew that the wall was being mined, they still could flood their enemies. The mining was not always possible. Only the castles built on solid rock or surrounded by water were proof from this form of attack. One of the well-known examples of the use of mining appeared at the siege of Rochester Castle directed by King John in 1215. (Brown, 2004, p. 30) Even though Rochester was suitable for mining, it was far from being an easy task. It was set to take weeks. In addition, the mining was hindered by solid stone foundations, the old Roman walls of Rochester. The miners had to mine in a different area. By 25 November, John’s miners managed it. Tons of masonry were supported only by wooden pit props. On the same day, John ordered forty pigs. The pigs were not, however, food for the diligent miners, but fuel. It is believed that the pigs were slaughtered and their fat was melted, then it was poured into barrels and rolled into the mine. The keep of Rochester Castle came crashing to the ground. For the rebellious barons, the defeat at Rochester was a massive shock and it left them feeling totally discouraged. The keep was rebuild by Henry III, but it was not a square tower as before, but it was a round one (Figure 9). Rochester had been previously a very nice building, but this rebuilding had nothing to do with aesthetics. The function was clear, the round tower made Rochester Castle stronger and resistant to mining. (Morris, 2003, pp. 54- 56) All the tactics discussed above are not complete, but they are the ones which were primary used or combined to capture the castle. How the assault was made depended on the size, condition and complexity of the castle's fortifications. Since the sieges involved lots of money, time, mental and physical stamina, the defenders often surrender under less convenient terms. The terms primarily included the movement of castle's inhabitants, payments and other punishments. Defeated leaders were often imprisoned and just rarely executed. Political killing was rather a controversial matter. (Hull, 2006, pp. 39-43) According to Morris (2003) showing mercy towards a defeated opponent was perfectly normal behaviour in the early thirteenth century. Ever since 1066, warfare in England had been regulated by the code of chivalry. Naturally, this did not apply to the non-noble members of society. (p. 55)

21

The modern-day people have usually an image of a medieval castle as a target of siege engines and knights. However, the fact is that only the minority of castles subjected to sieges. The castles often existed from relative peace, and its inhabitants followed daily routines. (Hull, 2006, p. 83)

2.3. Castles in Peace A castle had to be militarily strong so that it could face all the possible attacks, but by the 13th century, attention started to be also paid to its appearance. Kings and barons stressed that castles had to be not only strong and impressive, but also beautiful. The structures such as walls, gatehouses served rather a protective function, but halls and towers offered more opportunities for more elaborate refinements. The castle builders built magnificent staircases, tall and finely carved chimneys. The interior walls were painted decoratively. At the end of the 12th century glass for windows became available which allowed more light inside the buildings in contrast to gloomy Norman keeps. The interior of a castle was designed to emphasize the prestige and power of the lord in order to impress visitors. (Lepage, 2012, p. 199) Especially Henry III had discriminating taste for the ornate decorations of his buildings. Comfort and colour could have been suddenly seen in royal accommodation. At Winchester the queen’s chamber was painted green and at Windsor the chamber was decorated with gold stars. In the great halls of Northampton and Guildford castles the legend of Dives and Lazarus was represented and the legend of King Arthur was used in the decorations at Dover castle. (Pounds, 1994, p. 83) The walls, ceilings were whitewashed and the doors, windows and furniture were decorated with pictures (Figure 10). As it was discussed earlier, the hall of a castle was the most important building. It usually contained a fireplace and the walls were decorated with trophies, tapestries and wall hangings. The hall was lavishly furnished with fine carvings and lighted by huge windows which were made of decorative glass. It was a room which was used as a place for feasts, celebrations, entertainment, but also for more serious purposes such as meetings of a council or a court of justice. Even though the hall is often described as the hub of a castle, for much of the day it stood empty. It was the bailey that was full of people and activity. However, when time for dinner or sleep came, all castle's inhabitants headed to the hall. (Hull, 2006, p. 86) Logically, the hall did not stand alone, it was often linked closely with the kitchen and private chambers of the lords. (Pounds, 1994, p. 189)

22

At first a kitchen was situated in the bailey, but later on it stood adjacent to the hall which was much more convenient. By the 13th century it was common practice that the buttery9 and were also positioned between the kitchen and the hall so that all the preparations could be made inside of a castle. In the early kitchens open fires were set on the floor in the centre of the room and smoke vented through openings in the ceilings. Later on, the open fires were replaced by fireplaces which were built into walls. As there was still a serious fire hazard, the oven was sometimes built separate from other buildings. (Hull, 2006, p. 89) Since there was the need to feed lots of people, a castle had to held bigger supplies in its store. Castles usually obtained bakehouses, mills for grinding the grain and brewhouses. All of those facilities were usually positioned in the bailey, separate from the kitchen. Some castles possessed a water-driven corn mill, but it caused a perennial problem. Since the mills were made of wood, they were susceptible to rot or be damaged by floods. (Pounds, 1994, p. 193) During the 13th century there was an increase in using private chambers by the lords and his family. The constable had usually a chamber near the gate since he controlled a castle in lord's absence. The rest of the households and staff had to sleep in the hall or their workspaces. At Winchester Henry III built chambers for his knights, the chaplain and priests. The chamber comprised a fireplace, bed and wardrobe. The wardrobe was often built en suite and functioned as a storage room for everything valuable (i.e., clothes, plates, jewellery, expensive spices and sugar). Even though the private chambers were generally built behind the walls of the hall, practice varied according to the space available. Consequently, the castle builders started building chambers on upper stories of towers or expanded the castle's perimeter to create an additional living space. (Gravett & Hook, 2009, p. 39) Another important facility was the latrine which offered personal relief. Latrines enabled privacy which in many castles lacked. They were usually positioned at the end of a narrow passage near the hall. However, some of them were strategically situated at places along the curtain wall so the human waste could drop through the shafts down on the heads of enemies. The drawback of this system was, that occasionally an enemy sent his men to climb up through the shafts in order to get into the castle. It was much more convenient when castles were sited next to a river and waste fell directly into the running water. (Hull, 2006, p. 94) Arguably one of the most important buildings in a bailey was the chapel. Whereas the Normans had a room arranged as an oratory in the keeps, in the 13th century the church was

9 Buttery was a room where wine or other alcohol was stored in barrels or bottles. It was primary a service room from which drink was carried into the hall. (Hull, 2006, p. 89) 23 built independently and placed in the bailey. (Gravett & Hook, 2009, p. 42) Most castles had even a private chapel for the lord's or king's use. There were lots of reasons for establishing a private chapel within the walls of a castle. When altars were proliferating and were full of worshippers, the lord wanted his own chapel which could offered him much more privacy. In addition, the lord had control over the local church. (Pounds, 1994, pp. 224) Nevertheless, it cost lots of money to build a chapel. It was decorated with outstanding features such as the marble altar, cross flanked by figures of saints. The interiors were painted, the windows were glazed and the floor tiled. Sacramental materials and mass books were also other expenses. The chapel often was en suite with the lord's or priest's chamber. Henry III actually had the chapel beside his bed thus he could lie in his bed and simultaneously hear the mass. Castles undoubtedly required workshops and pens which enabled them to function. However, it were stables that had great importance amongst the buildings located in the bailey. The main reason was that the horses were essential to the lord and his garrison. (Pounds, 1994, p. 195) Stables were usually timber built and their necessity proved the fact that Henry III provided a chamber with three beds by the stables at Winchester. In the bailey there were also different storages which held food for the animals and inhabitants of a castle. The most consumed animals were chickens, oxen, pigs and sheep which were usually held in pens. Dogs were used for supervising during hunts and they were held in kennels. (Gravett & Hook, 2009, p. 43) As far as animals are concerned, the Tower of London could offer their visitors a unique spectacle. Henry III established a royal menagerie inside the castle and visitors could see exotic animals such as an elephant, bears, lions and other animals. However, it was really an exception amongst the castles of 13th century. (Hull, 2006, p. 28) A castle often had a garden. At Windsor was the great garden even with the vineyard. The garden was used for producing vegetables, fruit and herbs for the lord's table. Since a garden needed enough space for being planted, only a very large castle could have it within its walls. If a castle had not space for growing vegetables and fruit, the garden was usually in the neighbourhood. A castle frequently checked the areas of meadows, parkland, woods and fish ponds. The fish ponds were regularly replenished with fish to contribute to the food supplies of the castle. The meadows were also very highly regarded since they provided the winder feed for animals. Parks meadows and woods were of great importance to the economy of the castle. They supplied the castle with building timber, fuel and fresh meat. However, meadows and woods also served as the recreation for kings and nobles. These areas of lands were also home for animals such as the hare and deer which were bred and hunted there. (Pounds, 1994, pp. 198-201)

24

2.4 Castles as Prisons A castle was a defensive stronghold in wartime and, as it was discussed in the previous chapters, it was primarily home. However sometimes it was home from which a person could not leave. Since it was not common practice to imprison someone in a confined space, not many castles contained a dungeon10 and functioned as prison. More usual punishment was that a lord would kidnap the noble opponent or his children and they were imprisoned in one of the castle chambers. As regards children they were sometimes allowed to move free within a castle, but not leave it. Since these prisoners were valuable, the lord could make a significant profit in the form of a ransom. Later on, the concept of imprisoning people in the most secure places was much more common. Initially, the keeps served as prison as they were considered to be the strongest parts of the castle. The area around the keep was best-defended and a prisoner had a little chance to escape. (Morris, n.d.) Undoubtedly the best known medieval castle prison was in the Tower of London. Its White tower functioned as an accommodation for the king, but also it was a prison for many historic figures. (Hull, 2006, p. 35) The was also located near or inside the main gatehouse so that the foe could not get into the interior. This site was also convenient since the guards could keep a close watch over their captives. (Hull, 2006, p. 30) As the architecture of castles changed, the were located in the least desirable areas of the castle. These places were usually dark, wet and cold storerooms or basements. The dungeon gradually moved from the highest tower down into the lowest castle cellar. Sometimes the basement contained the dungeon known as an oubliette or the ''forgotten room'' from the French ''oublier'' meaning to forget. It was a shaft the width of which was large only for one person to stand up in it. A guardsman tied a prisoner to a rope and then lowered them into the shaft. Once the prisoner reached the bottom, the guardsman took up the rope and closed the trap-door. The shaft was so deep that the prisoner had no chance to reach up to the trap-door. (Morris, n.d.) The oubliette must have been an extremely brutal place for punishment, occasionally it was filled with water seeping from the ground which made that place even more unbearable. Nowadays this fearful kind of prison can be seen at Newark Castle in Nottinghamshire which was actually equipped with four oubliettes.

10 The dungeon comes from the French word donjon. It meant a great tower or a great keep. As the castle architecture developed, the nobles began to live in more luxurious chambers and they often used great keeps as prison towers, for this reason the name "dungeon". Eventually, the term started being applied to any chamber that served as the castle's prison. (Hull, 2006, p. 30)

25

When the medieval role of fortified residences became old-fashioned and their owners moved to more comfortable castles, many British castles experienced rebirth as prisons. For example Lydford Castle in Devonshire served largely as prison. Another very important castle was which was strategically standing on a steeply sloping hill. By the 13th century this castle was primary used as a royal treasure storehouse and prison.

2.5 The Community of a Castle Castles never stood in isolation. They were part of the community. According to Pounds (1994) the castle served three purposes:

It was home to its lord, or his constable. There were often guests, welcome or more often not, who had to be accommodate and entertained, and there were servants who formed the least visible part of the castle community. The castle, secondly, was a protected place. It was capable of being defended, and for this purpose had, or could call on, soldiers of some kind. The third function which the castle fulfilled was administrative. (p. 184)

The functions varied greatly. In period of frequent sieges and rebellions the military function predominated. In royal castles in the heart of England the administrative function was the most important since the castles served as the centre of the county government. (Pounds, 1994, p. 184) However, the most castles were home for lords, royal family and servants. The most important person amongst the servants was a constable. He was appointed by the Crown, but in a few instances this office had become hereditary. The constable was responsible for keeping the castle in good condition, guarding prisoners, entertaining guests and managing the fields and mills. The constable did not check only all food supplies, but also weapons. The kings would also send somebody from their court on the constable to inspect him. (Pounds, 1994, p. 87) Besides the constable, castles usually housed a porter (the person that checked the doors), watchmen, men-at-arms (under routine peacetime conditions, there was always some kind of garrison, always at the ready) and a chaplain. The chaplain ministered to the lord and even other castle inhabitants and workers. However, the most occupations was seen in a bailey. Craftsmen would maintain weapons, carpenters focused on the structure of buildings, grooms were responsible for keeping the horses in good condition, blacksmiths were necessary for horses to be shod and other metal items which had to be made

26 or repaired, armourers repaired armour, coopers made barrels, fullers cleaned and prepared cloth. The inner household was teeming with manservants that dressed and took care of the lord and his family. The day-to-day management was handled by key advisers and the steward. The butler was responsible for the activities in the kitchen, buttery, pantry and larder and the chamberlain was in charge of the lord's chamber. The occupations with less responsibility included cooks, bakers, brewers, chandlers, washerwomen, gong farmers that removed human excrements from pits and cleaned the latrine chutes. (Hull, 2006, pp. 84-85) The lady of the castle had her own servants. She would spend much of the day overseeing the work of ladies-in-waiting and chambermaids or she supervised the activities in the kitchen. The lady was also responsible for spinners, weavers and embroiderers that kept all residents of the castle clothed. She also kept an eye on the young pages who at early age came to the castle to learn religion, reading, writing and other subjects before entering knights' service as squires. The lady was also responsible for cultural life in the castle, she organized music and dancing performances. However, women occupied a greater role than might be expected in the Middle Ages. The lady that was strong and clever could be in charge of the castle in her husband's absence. She then acted instead of the constable and she would give commands to her garrison during a siege. (Stokstad, 2005, pp. 44) Most castles were also closely associated with the communities from their surroundings. Since a castle possessed land amid the villages, the land was cultivated by local inhabitants. It was essential to cultivate local land so that the castle could had its own supplies. It was difficult and dangerous to obtain food supplies across the country and therefore castles had to be largely self-sufficient. It is not known whether the farmers made a profit out of their undertaking, but it is slightly unlikely since the constable that was responsible for the castle’s land monitored the farmers’ incomes. The majority of castles relied on the local communities for labour and services. It was undoubtedly good for the citizens since they were paid for their work, but it meant even varied obligations which were unpaid. For example, they had to participate in defending the castle which dominated their lives. A castle seemed to be also the place of security for the local community. The castle served as a refuge in time of war. For example, in time of danger the inhabitants of Dover were ordered to withdraw into Dover Castle. Nevertheless, this kind of protection could be only offered by the castles which had enough space. (Pounds, 1994, pp. 201-206)

27

3. The Castles of Edward I The Romans, the Anglo-Saxons and Norman kings never managed to take control of Wales and Scotland. After the the language barrier raised between the people from a French Norman high class and people from a Saxon low class and also between a castle and village. However, both sides gradually leant to respect each other’s customs. The Plantagenet kings ruled over a vast empire in France but only a part of the British island. In the north there was the kingdom of Scotland which was independent and in the west lay Wales which was inhabited by native people. The Welsh were fairly patriotic and they always believed that they would reconquer the whole of England which they had actually possessed before the Angles, Saxons and Normans. (Lepage, 2012, p. 202) Nevertheless, their hopes faded with the accession of Edward I (the reign 1272-1307) who became the king of England after the death of his father Henry III in 1272. Edward I was known as "Longshanks" because of his length and also as "The Hammer of the Scots," for his long merciless wars against William Wallace and Robert the Bruce. Edward had many great qualities. He was a strong and determined warrior and before he came to the throne he had gained lots of experiences in sieges both at home and abroad. He was also a great legislator and faithful husband. On the other hand, Edward was able to punish his foes harshly and he never tolerated any attacks on the dignity of the Crown. (Morris, 2003, p. 57) Edward’s increased sensitivity was caused by the events that he had experienced as a young boy. Edward’s father always lacked good judgment and made some unwise decisions which made barons angry and they thus deprived the king of power. By this time, Edward witnessed the destruction of royal power and moreover he was powerless to help his father. A few years later Edward led the fight that restored Henry to power. Edward learnt from this lesson and was determined not to let it happen again. Edward I always defended his royal rights and accepted no challenges to his authority. (Morris, 2003, p. 58) After his accession to the throne, Edward I slowed the growth of the feudal hierarchy. He aimed to enforce English kings’ claims to primacy in the British Isles and unexpectedly he did not want to reconquer Normandy lost by John and Henry III. Nevertheless, Edward I had a strong desire for unifying Britain and he, as the only king in British history, managed to coerce first Wales and then Scotland into submission. His aims were achieved not only due to his great skills as a warrior and commander, but also due to the castles which served as headquarters for forces in time of war and administrative centres or residences in time of peace. (Lepage, 2012, p. 203)

28

3.1 The Conquest of Wales To understand why Edward’s conquest of Wales was so tremendous success, it is necessary to go back to the history of this area. Wales always seemed to be the most dangerous and menacing territory. Hence it was absolutely vital to build the most effective defences there. That the Welsh threat had been felt strongly proves the fact that in the 8th century Offa of Mercia built a dyke which was a defensible line rather than a permanent and visible boundary. According to Pounds (1994), "The root of the problem lies in the terrain. Wales, like Greece, was born divided. It is made up of a number of hilly or mountainous masses, separated by rivers most of which discharge eastwards towards the English plain" (p. 153). The population in the mountains of Snowdonia was small, the resources were scarce and therefore the territories of Wales held little attraction for invaders. However, the gaps between hills facilitated invasion and conquest. It was the lowlands that William the Conqueror used for building the first castles. As the key to success was to own a castle and maintain land, William I established a chain of earldoms on the Welsh frontier, including Chester, Shrewsbury and . (Pounds, 1994, pp. 153-154) Each of these castles was responsible for its administration and symbolized the power and authority of the lord himself. Since the lordships lay outside the realm of England, their relationships with the king was rather complicated. Lordships from the Marches11 frontiers differed from those of in England. The king asserted his authority and occasionally visited the Marches to receive the homage of the barons, but most of the time the lords were a law to themselves. They made wars and built castles as they chose. (Pounds, 1994, pp. 160-161) The widespread construction of castles was, of course, without permission of the local inhabitants and therefore the Welsh often rebelled against these invaders. (Gravett & Hook, 2007, pp.4) Wales had been always independent country and had several kingdoms which made it difficult to establish national unity. In the 13th century the situation started to change. Gwynedd, which is an area in the north of the country, became increasingly powerful in its own region and began to assert control over its neighbourhood. Consequently, the Welsh united under the new leadership of Llywelyn ap Gruffudd. (Morris, 2003, p. 58) When Llywelyn came to power in 1246, he ruled only his ancestral lands in Gwynedd and shared them with his brothers (it was because of the Welsh law of inheritance). However,

11 The were borderlands or a frontier between Wales and England. In 12th and 13th century hundreds of small castles were built there and the Plantagenet kings encouraged Bretons, Flemings and English settlers to move along the frontier. (Hull, 2006, p. 203) 29 it inevitably caused conflicts between them. As a result, Llywelyn defeated his brothers and imprisoned the eldest one in the tower of Dolbadarn Castle. (Hall, 2014) Llywelyn’s tactic was to coerce the English into moving from north Wales. His plans remained relatively unnoticed due to the contemporary turmoil in England where events gradually led to the Baron’s war. Since Henry III was not able to deal with the problems within England, he left the country which became essentially uncontrollable. After the war the power of the English Crown was limited. Henry III thus sought peace with the Welsh. Llywelyn immediately took advantage of this situation and persuaded Henry III to accept the Treaty of Montgomery. Owing to this agreement, Llywelyn was accepted as an overlord of the realms of Powys and Deheubarth and, moreover, he was recognised as Prince of Wales. (Pounds, 1994, p. 165) Llewelyn was the first and last native ruler of Wales that was given this title by an English king. However, the Treaty of Montgomery was the ambiguous document which provoked further conflicts. Even though Henry III acknowledged Llywelyn’s territorial gains, the English lords that had lived and built the castles there did not want to withdraw. (Morris, 2003, pp. 58-59) Consequently, there was a sudden flurry of activity along the Marches. Lords started to strengthen their castles and the fabric of castles, food supplies and munitions were checked in anticipation of Welsh attacks. The Earl of acted quickly and in 1268 he began building . According to Pounds (1994), "The building of Caerphilly was a turning point in the history of the castle in Britain. It was the first to be built on the concentric plan from the beginning" (p. 165). The difference between Caerphilly and previous castles was that there was no keep into which the defenders could retreat, but a series of enclosing walls punctuated by towers. (Lepage, 2012, p. 199) Owing to the new idea of building multiple lines of defence, the castle became an entirely safe place. As it was discussed, the weakest point of the castle was the entrance, but the gatehouse of Caerphilly was so spacious and strong that reached the same size as a twelfth-century keep. The great advantage of this castle was also that it was surrounded by water, which provided great protective benefits. The water defence prevented attackers from bringing the siege engines near the castle and mining under the walls was utterly impossible. (Morris, 2003, pp. 59-60) At the time when Caerphilly was built, it was the absolutely state-of-the-art castle. Inevitably, such great castle must have made Llywelyn enraged. After the death of Henry III Llywelyn lost considerable support, but he put all his hopes on the new English king, Edward I, who had just returned from the Crusade with large debts. Llywelyn owed him money in return for the recognition of his title and realms in Wales and it

30 was such a sum that he had to pay it off in instalments. As Edward needed Llywelyn’s money, he ignored the English lords’ problems in the Marches and stayed completely impartial. The English lords had persistent problems with Edward’s father hence they did not expect much help from Edward either, but the Welsh perceived the situation differently. Llywelyn had to pay a lot of money for the treaty which apparently did not work. According to the treaty the English lords should have moved away from Llywelyn’s territories and not built castles like Caerphilly. Since Edward did not seem to change his attitude towards this dispute, Llywelyn inevitably coerced him into dealing with the situation. Not only did he stop paying his instalments, he also withheld his homage, which was undoubtedly a major error. Edward I offered Llywelyn several opportunities so that he could pay homage, but he always made an excuse and therefore the king came to Chester to meet Prince of Wales. However, Llywelyn did not appear and it basically meant that he did not respect the king’s dignity. Subsequently, Edward wrote to the Pope, ‘In order to receive homage we so demeaned our royal dignity as to go to the confines of his land.’ (Morris, 2003, p. 61) The king also learnt that Llywelyn had intended to marry the daughter of Simon de Montfort that was the main enemy of Edward’s father. Edward I thus commanded his men to kidnap her. She ended being captured when the English seized her ship in the Bristol Channel. (Gravett & Hook, 2007, pp. 4) Edward I declared war in November 1276. Even though England had always the economic and military power in contrast to Wales, Llywelyn also had one great advantage. As Pounds emphasizes, it was the terrain. Edward I was aware of the fact that his ancestors had not been able to lead armies and fight in north, harsh land and he therefore opted for another way. Edward I led a three-pronged attack with the first army moving from the south, another one moving into the middle of Wales and the third unit (that was under the command of Edward himself and it was the largest one) headed directly into north Wales. Edward proposed to move slowly and established bases along the north coast as they went. As the king’s army advanced towards the north, a separate unit of diggers cut a new road through a dense forest. The aim of this operation was to isolate Llywelyn in his stronghold of Snowdonia and starve him into submission. Llywelyn’s popularity started to suffer and lots of Welshmen swore allegiance directly to Edward. In these unfavourable circumstances Llywelyn decided to surrender and he had to meet the members of Edward’s council. The peace was proclaimed and Llywelyn was left with some lands in Gwynedd. In addition, he could keep his title of Prince of Wales. His brother Owain was releases by Edward after 22 years of imprisonment. (Morris, 2003, pp. 60-62)

31

The king’s success enabled him to begin with a castle-building programme at Builth, Aberystwyth, Flint, Rhuddlan, and Ruthin (Figure 11). Some castles in the Marches were rebuilt and strengthened with small expenditure, such as Carmarthen, Montgomery and Cardigan whereas some existing castles were completely replaced. These new castles were permanent reminders of the defeat of Llywelyn. (Gravett & Hook, 2007, pp. 5) Edward was also determined to introduce English laws and governmental practices in Wales, which caused indignation amongst the Welsh population. In addition to this general displeasure, the Welshmen who had supported Edward in the war felt that their service had not been rewarded sufficiently. Edward granted them some lands in Wales, but the most important ones were given to English commanders and lords. One of the dissatisfied men was Llywelyn’s younger brother, Dafydd. He was given extensive areas of land between the Conwy and Clwyd rivers and was allowed to repair Hope Castle. Nevertheless, he discovered that his brother’s oppressive regime had been replaced by even more unsympathetic rule of foreigners. In 1282 Dafydd launched an attack on English castles. Llywelyn soon joined his brother in the assault on Edward’s castles at Flint and Rhuddlan. Edward’s reaction was swift and sharp. He immediately appointed commanders and three armies marched into Wales, in the north from Chester, in the centre from Shrewsbury and Montgomery and in the south from Carmarthen. Edward chose the same strategy as five years before, but now he was determined to punish Llywelyn more severely. In contrast to the first Welsh war, this operation was much more complicated. The southern army was defeated and a group of English knights were ambushed and driven into the sea. Nevertheless, the English armies remained large and enormously powerful. Llywelyn waited in Snowdonia and he soon realized that his only hope of survival was an escape. However, he and his companions were soon ambushed by a group of English knights and subsequently killed. The knights cut the prince’s head off and sent it to Edward. The king then sent Llywelyn’s head to London so that all his subjects could admire it. In addition, Edward confiscated all the symbols of Llywelyn’s regalia and sent them to Westminster. Two months later Dafydd ap Gruffudd was captured and hanged, disembowelled and quartered. Edward divided some of the conquered lands to his supporters and confiscated all the remaining land for himself. The cessation of the Second Welsh War was followed by another campaign of castle building the purpose of which was to isolate the mountainous core of the principality from the rest of the country. (Pounds, 1994, p. 172) Edward I started building three new castles, Harlech, Conwy and Caernarfon. Edward chose the sites for his new castles with great care. The fact that Edward intentionally ignored the earlier Plantagenet castle Deganwy, which had

32 been built few miles away from Conwy, proves this fact. The highest point at Deganwy provided views over the surrounding landscape, so this site offered an absolutely fantastic defensive location. Nevertheless, Deganwy had one major drawback. It was built a long way from the sea and therefore it was difficult to supply the castle with food and ammunition. Edward thus decided that it would be pointless to rebuild his father’s castle and opted for a location on the opposite bank of the river. Conwy was surrounded by the sea which allowed Edward to bring his cargo ships right up to the gate. The sitting of the castles in this manner was Edward’s key strategy. He could supply all his castles at all times. Conwy, Flint, Caernarfon and Harlech are typical examples. (Morris, 2003, pp. 62-67) As far as Rhuddlan Castle is concerned, pine rolls revealed one amazing fact. Edward straightened the River Clwyd. He recruited hundreds of diggers and ditchers from East Anglia so that an army of nine hundred and sixty-eight men could start working on what the records call "the great ditch". With using only picks and shovels, labourers made the three-mile stretch of river that connected the castle and the coast. Owing to the canal, the castle could be supplied even in times of war. (Morris, 2003, pp. 63) Both Caernarfon and Conwy had been Llywelyn’s popular destinations. At Conwy, for example, there was the last resting place of Llywelyn’s ancestors. Edward destroyed the previous buildings and built his new castles instead. Edward apparently wanted to demonstrate that the old days of Welsh independence were over. The work on Caernarfon and Conwy castles was begun in 1283 and the first task was cutting ditches around the perimeter. Such work required armies of labourers that were recruited from all over the country. Since the work was arduous and dangerous, lots of men had to be persuaded to accept this kind of job. One of the building accounts provides the evidence that large numbers of workers were forced into the service. According to an entry, mounted soldiers were paid for escorting diggers from Yorkshire in case they would flee while on the road. After digging the ditches, a palisade was put up around the castle and buildings, which served as the rooms for Edward and his household, were constructed. Building material was acquired as locally as possible. Lead for plumbing was brought from the mountains of Snowdonia, iron and steel from Staffordshire and ropes from Lincolnshire. Nevertheless, the expensive stone that was necessary for window frames and fireplaces had to be shipped from larger distances. (Morris, 2003, pp. 67-69) Owing to impeccable accounts, it is known a great deal information about the day-to- day process of building the royal fortresses. These surviving records encompass wages, the cost of material, and the names of the men who had built and designed the castles. Most of

33 the labour force was done by skilled craftsmen, including carpenters, plumbers, and glaziers. (Lepage, 2012, p. 209) Especially the stonemasons were a major part in the whole operation. Since masons were skilful workers they were highly paid. The surviving manuscripts involve also a wealth of information about the construction of castles. There are details on how scaffolding was erected, stone was carved and how building material was transported. For example, heavy blocks were dragged on sleds or two-wheeled carts. Carpenters then constructed windlass cranes which were used for lifting the weights off the ground. (Morris, 2003, pp. 69-70) Since Edward’s castles had to fulfil primarily a military function, he forced the labourers to work quickly. In spite of the size and cost of the castles, they were actually built with extreme rapidity. For example Harlech was built in seven and a half years (1283-1290) and Conwy in five years (1283-1287). (Lepage, 2012, p. 212) Caernarfon was begun in the summer of 1283 and was sufficiently advanced the following year for Edward of Caernarfon, the first English Prince of Wales, to be born there. The castle was probably finished after eight years and it was the most expensive one to construct. (Pounds, 2004, p.174) The person who was responsible for the whole of project was the master mason, he had to be uniquely skilled and talented and was often responsible for all kinds of jobs. He was in charge of sourcing the stone and devising the different machines. Moreover, he had to possess the knowledge of geometry and mechanics. Edward I’s master mason was James of St Georges. His name was mentioned in the records from 1278, when Flint and Rhuddlan castles were begun to build. No historian could exactly say where James of St Georges had come from until just sixty years ago when a historian Arnold Taylor discovered James’s background. He found out that in all James’ castles were "putlog holes" (which served as supports for the wooden scaffolding) placed around the towers rather than the walls (it was standard practice at that time). Another unusual feature was an archway, this architectural element had not been seen elsewhere in England and Wales before. Also the windows were exceedingly larger and handsome. James also engineered new toilets by projecting the funnel-shaped design. Owing to these unique architectural features, Arnold Taylor found James’ work in the tiny alpine providence of Savoy12 in Switzerland. (Morris, 2003, pp. 70-72) Edward probably

12 Today, it is a region shared between Italy, Switzerland and France, but in the 13th century it was an independent state, ruled by a dynasty of counts. Even though it was small in size, its position was very important. The counts of Savoy controlled traffic and communication of the kings, the Emperor and the Pope. (Morris, 2003, p. 71)

34 met James on his return from the Crusades in 1273 when he visited his cousin, Count Philip of Savoy. Edward’s stay was at the count’s new castle of St George-d’Espéranche, located near the French city of Lyon. This castle had concentric defences, like Harlech and octagonal towers like Caernarfon. (Williams & Kenyon, 2009, p. 11) The counts of Savoy kept detailed records of their building projects, which enabled Taylor to find information about the master mason. The records confirmed that Peter of Savoy’s castles had been built by two men, a father and son, John and James. There is no official record on the meeting between Edward I and the master mason, but it is known that James along with other Savoyard craftsmen followed Edward to England where they were employed from 1278 on the king’s castles in Wales. (Pounds, 1994, p. 178) Master James of St George was one of the world’s prominent architects. When Edward saw James’ magnificent castles in Savoy, he put him in charge of the entire operation in Wales. The king was so satisfied with the James’ results that he appointed him as a constable of Harlech castle, which was undoubtedly a great privilege. Even though Harlech is one of the most stunning castles, it served rather as headquarters for garrisons and a residence for James whereas Conway and Caernarfon castles were built as palaces. Master James designed spectacular rooms for the king and his family. There were separate chambers for Queen Eleanor and beautiful gardens were designed for her enjoyment. Besides, the turf was being shipped into these lovely gardens. The fireplaces were much larger and most of the chambers had en suite toilets and chapels. The biggest advance, however, was in terms of windows. The windows on the outside of the castle were still few and small, but the windows on the inner courtyards were large and stately. They were fitted throughout with stained glass of many beautiful colours. Master James’s castles had also lots of new military features, for example loopholes were even in the passageways. At the main entrance, called King’s Gate (Figure 12), was strengthen with two drawbridges, five sets of sturdy oak doors with and in the ceiling were murder- holes for boiling oil so that no attacker could get into the castle. The function of the King’s Gate was not only to deter the attackers, but also to impress the visitors. Another new architectural feature in the 13th century was a carved statue of a king above the doors of the King’s gate. Caernarfon was the first castle in Wales with the ornamented gatehouse. (Jones, 2005, p. 47) It was one of the most prominent castles. Not only was Caernarfon indestructible, but it was also built in the original, fashionable way. As it was discussed, in the 13th century the towers were round in shape rather than square, and towers at Caerphilly, Rhuddlan, Harlech and Conwy typifies this design. However, Caernarfon’s towers are neither round nor square, but polygonal. Another difference is that the castle’s walls were left bare so that the

35 different coloured bands of stone in the masonry could be seen. This new design was not in fact of Master James’ idea, but the king’s. When Edward intended to build a castle, he would write a letter to Master James informing him precisely for what kind of design he desired. At Conwy and Caernarfon Edward wanted Master James to erect new indestructible castles and also to build sets of town walls (Figure 13) which surrounded new large settlements. (Morris, 2003, pp. 75-77) According to Williams & Kenyon (2009):

Edward must have seen this architectural feature from his crusading expedition when he embarked for North Africa from Aigues Mortes, St Louis’ new crusading port. This was surely important, for there are obvious parallels to the castle-building operation in Wales. Here was a new walled town, carefully planned with a regular grid patterns of streets. It was connected to the sea by a newly excavated channel and in the Tour de Constance it possessed a remarkable keep, independent from the town walls, yet positioned so as to guard them effectively (p. 11)

Edward liked this new design for several reasons. Firstly, with a prosperous town built near a castle, all the residents of the castle could be self-sufficient and a garrison could be kept supplied throughout the year. Secondly, the new boroughs were inhabited by Englishmen, whereas the Welsh would come into the towns only to buy or sell goods (they were actually forced into plying their trade by laws which made it illegal to trade anywhere else). Inevitably, the Welsh started to hate these towns and in 1294 the Welsh rose again, however, this time as a nation. Madog ap Llywelyn, a distant cousin of Llywelyn ap Gruffudd (calling himself as Prince of Wales), co-ordinated attacks on the new English settlements. All the new Edward’s castles like Harlech, Conwy and Caernarfon were put to the ultimate test. Because the walls of Caernarfon had not been finished, the attackers managed to overrun the castle and massacre royal officials. Edward had been involved in a fight with the king of France at that time, but when he heard about a revolt, he sent thirty-five thousand men to Wales. As in the conquest campaign of 1282, Edward was the head of a northern army and he was determined to get his castles back. When the king reached Conwy, the Welsh attacked the town and also the castle. Edward and his army was trapped in the castle and the Welsh waited them to surrender. Food supplies were running out and, unfortunately for Edward, it was starting to turn bitterly cold. Edward had to spend weeks at Conwy, watching how English troops were freezing and starving. They were surrounded by hostile forces on all the sides, but they eventually did not have to surrender. The king and his army survived for one main reason. Edward acquired

36 enormous resources owing to the ships which sailed from his empire into Conwy harbour. The ships did not come just from English ports, but also from the king’s colonies such as Ireland and Gascony. Because the town and castle of Conwy were located on the sea-shore, the ships could get right to the troops. Edward’s choice of site proved to be very wise one. In the spring, the revolt was practically over. While the king was trapped in Conwy, other commanders had done most of the fighting. Edward ordered the execution of the ringleaders and large fines were imposed on the local communities. The community from the island of Anglesey suffered most and it made sense. Firstly, it was the most prosperous native settlement in Wales and secondly it was one of the centres of the rebellion. (Morris, 2003, pp. 79-80) Edward learnt that Anglesey had been the weak link in his chain of defences and he thus decided to build there the last of his great castles, Beaumaris (Figure 14). The main purpose of was to establish the king’s control over the island and the coastal shipping routes. It was Master James of St Georges’ most perfectly conceived castle and it was undoubtedly because of the open and flat land. Master James was able to create perfectly symmetrical towers on each corner. However, its cost was immense, almost as great as that of Caernarvon. (Pounds, 1994, p.174) The castle’s location meant that most of the stone had to be delivered by water, also the works were made by three thousand men that had to be paid. In addition, the king was engaged in wars against the Scots and French. Consequently, Edward experienced the greatest difficulty in paying for his building programme. In 1296, Master James wrote the letter to the officials of Exchequer in Westminster with a plea for money. ‘We write to inform you that the work we are doing is very costly and we need a great deal of money. If our lord the king wants the work to be finished as quickly as it should be, we could not make do with less than £250 a week.’ He also wrote a list of labourers that were waited for their money. Then the mason add a postscript, ‘My lords, for God’s sake be quick with the money. Otherwise everything done up to now will have been to no avail!’ (Hall, 2014) Edward sent Master James the money he needed and building work could continue. Nevertheless, both Caernarfon and Beaumaris have never been finished, but Edward’s castles accomplished their purpose. The castles were supremely successful in conquering Wales and moreover, they were a way of reminding the Welsh that a new ruler was there. Edward I was a great castle-builder and he introduced new ideas of fortifications during his reign. The Edwardian castles provide a clear testimony to the determination of a great king and architectural skills of a great architect. (Lepage, 2012, p.230)

37

3.2 The Conquest of Scotland Edward succeeded in taking control of Wales, but the conquest of Scotland proved to be far more difficult than that of Wales. The English kings always claimed to be overlords of Scotland, because Henry III’s daughter married Alexander III of Scotland. When Alexander died, his granddaughter Margaret of Norway came to the throne. In March 1290 Edward I arranged a marriage between a young Queen Margaret and his eldest son, Edward of Caernarvon. It appeared that a union of the two crowns might be formed without difficulties. However, the young queen died in the autumn of 1290. She was the last representative of the old line of Scot rulers which meant that the Scottish succession was disputed. A large number of candidates for the crown appeared and the main ones were John Balliol, Robert Bruce and John Hastings. Since the Scottish noblemen wanted to avoid a civil war, they asked Edward I to decide who should be the next king. (Pounds, 1994, p. 181) Edward agreed on one condition, the one whom he would select should hold Scotland as a fief13 from the English king. Finally, this condition was accepted and John Balliol became the king of Scotland. Inevitably, the differences between two kingdoms continued. Edward kept making demands which led to the anger of Scots and renunciation of homage to Edward I. In addition, the Scots formed an alliance with Philip IV, the king of France that was one of the Edward’s chief enemies. Edward I, asserting his rights as "overlord", invaded Scotland. (Lepage, 2012, p. 203) In 1296 Edward and his army marched northwards to the town of Berwick-upon-Tweed where they massacred local inhabitants and captured the town. From Berwick-upon-Tweed Edward continued through Scotland and he besieged the castles including Roxburgh, Edinburgh and Stirling. All the lords and their garrisons eventually surrendered and Edward left them under a military occupation of his loyal commanders. John Balliol formally resigned and was imprisoned in England for three years, which subsequently caused great indignation amongst Scottish people. In 1297 a Scottish rising under William Wallace drove English officers and garrisons from the castles. In the following summer, Edward marched into Scotland with the army of spearmen and archers. The combination of archers and cavalry brought Edward victory. Wallace was taken to London, subjected to a public trial and finally tortured to death. His head was placed on London Bridge and his body was sent to Scotland. Even though Wallace

13 Fiefs were granted parcels of land, they were a main element of feudalism. For these grants of lands, vassals had to pay homage and fulfil military obligations, when required. (Hull, 2006, p. 23) 38 was defeated, he had shown his countrymen how to resist Edward and, what was more, he gave them sufficient evidence of the strength of Scotland. (Rait, 1901, pp. 31-34) Edward, meanwhile, started repairing some Scottish castles, small sums were spent at Edinburgh. Linlithgow was turned from a house into the splendid castle. Even James of St George was summoned from Wales. Castles such as Kirkintilloch, Dumbarton and Selkirk were strengthened and new castles were built. (Pounds, 1994, p. 182) Edward was advancing further into Scotland, besieging and capturing Scottish castles. When Edward and his army laid siege to Caerlaverock castle in 1300, there were only 17 people in the castle. This event proved the fact that a well-built castle managed to protect his inhabitants effectively. The defenders of Caerlaverock finally surrendered, but it is necessary to realize that in front of the castle were three thousand soldiers and lots of engine machines. In 1304 the Stirling Castle was the last major castle in the opponent’s hands and it was a key to the whole kingdom (Edward had managed to capture this castle in the first revolt, but William Wallace recovered it in 1298). It was the most strategically placed castle that was basically a gateway between the Highlands and Lowlands. It was exactly that type of a castle that Edward would have built himself. Stirling Castle was built on the rocky mountains and it was visible from the miles around. Who controlled Stirling castle controlled Scotland and therefore Edward planned the siege with care. Edward was trying to besiege Stirling by using different siege engines, but the castle seemed to be impregnable. Since Edward I was growing impatient, he ordered Master James of St.George to engineer a new siege engine. This weapon, called Warwolf, was the largest trebuchet that have been ever made. It could be loaded with rocks up to three hundred pounds and was capable of destroying every wall of any castle. The garrison of the castle, inevitably, surrendered. (Hall, 2014) Edward could finally treat Scotland as a conquered country, but his control was short-lived. Edward suppressed what he regarded as a rebellion, but despite of tremendous success in 1296 and 1298, Edward did not manage to assert his leadership and Scottish resistance continued under the reign of Robert Bruce. In 1306 Robert, Earl of Carrick crowned himself as King of the Scots. As the fighting escalated, Bruce sent his family to Kildrummy Castle. Consequently, Edward I ordered his son, Prince of Wales, to besiege it. (Rait, 1901, p. 37) On the other side of Kildrummy castles, the defenders were led by brother of Robert the Bruce, Neil Bruce. As it was discussed in the previous chapter, attackers always tried to find the weakest point of the castle (a gatehouse, supplies). Since Edward of Caernarfon was not able to destroy the walls of the castle, nor to intimidate his enemies, he eventually had to find the weakest point of the castle amongst the

39 defenders. Osbourne, a castle’s blacksmith, was promised gold to set fire to the castle14. He quickly succumbed to a generous offer and set a grain shed on fire. (Hull, 2014) Lots of members of Bruce’s family managed to escape, but his brother was captured and taken to Berwick, where he was drawn, hanged and quartered. Even the women prisoners were subjected to unusual and severe punishments. Mary Bruce, the king’s younger sister, was imprisoned in the specially constructed cage which was set high in Roxburgh Castle so that she could be exposed to the public view. (Morris, 2009, p. 276) Robert Bruce lost many of his family and best men in the castles, however, the siege of Kildrummy was understandably a painful and personal lesson for him. In the following year Edward I died when he was on his way north to suppress another rising under the command of Robert Bruce. Edward I died old and fatigued from constant fighting. Moreover, he left the task of dealing with the Scots to his son, Edward II (who succeeded his father and reigned 1307-1327). The new king possessed almost none of the great attributes that his father had. A great castles of Edward I were bought by barons and Edward II’ reign was hopelessly compromised by his relationship with Piers Gaveston. Their homosexual liaison was regarded by contemporaries as wholly inappropriate. Besides, Edward II lacked any military success. When in 1314 English army appeared in the north with the intention of saving Stirling, Robert Bruce managed to defeat Edward II in the great Battle of Bannockburn. (Morris, 2009, p. 289) The Edward of Caernarfon was lucky to escape, but discontent amongst the barons grew and the long-threatened civil war began in 1321. (Lepage, 2006, p. 230)

14 It is said that when the castle was later retaken by the Scots, Osbourne’s gold was melted and poured down his throat as a punishment for his betray. (Hull, 2004) 40

4. The Destruction of Castles When Robert Bruce defeated Edward II in the Battle of Bannockburn in 1314, he decided to set a new policy of destroying the castles in Scotland. The period in which the castles were considered to have the military value was drawing to a close. According to Cornell (2008), "Bruce understood the continued military and political value of the castle, but he was able to exploit its inherent vulnerabilities in order to gain victory in war" (p. 233).

4.1 The Onset of Robert Bruce's New Policy During the reign of Edward II the castles suffered a decrease in its military importance. The first-rate castles of Scotland were considered to be monuments of past campaigns and Bruce's decision about destroying castles would give weight to this argument. To comprehend this period of decline, it is necessary to understand to Bruce himself. Cornel (2008) clarifies Bruce’s difficult position:

The situation that confronted Bruce when he returned to his earldom of Carrick in 1307 was daunting. He discovered that his own castle of Turnberry was occupied by an English force commanded by Henry Percy, the garrison so substantial that many troops were quartered within the village. It was only after overcoming an initial bout of hesitancy that a ferocious attack was launched on those billeted in the village, forcing the English survivors, Percy among them, to take refuge within the castle until escorted to safety by an English relief force. (p. 235)

It is obvious that the attack on Turnberry marked the beginning of Bruce's campaigns for destroying the castles. After withdrawal of English soldiers, Robert the Bruce ordered the destruction of his own castle. He did not want the English to capture his castle again. The castles helped the English troops to be housed with their supplies and equipment in southern Scotland. In addition, the main fortifications were well protected by the walled towns of Berwick and Carlisle. The importance of the castles for the English was obvious. Robert the Bruce was aware of it and was determined to destroy all the castles which he besieged. The first castles which were destroyed were those in the north. Cornel's (2008) study suggests that the main reason for their destruction was the castles' position. Robert the Bruce needed to destroy the regional power centres which were essential for Scottish opponents. Bruce captured the castles and then levelled them to the ground so that they became indefensible and uninhabitable.

41

The castles in the south were strongly fortified and were strategically more important than the castles in the north. The English Crown held large wartime garrisons in them and they were able to operate and dominate the surrounding area. Bruce managed to capture Edinburgh, Roxburgh and Stirling in the campaign of 1311-1314. Cornell (2008) states that Bruce did not need to hold castles to win the wars, "It was the English who sought battle and required strongholds within Scotland in order to press for victory" (p.248). Bruce realised quickly that the English needed the castles for their protection, the castles were essential part of their defence strategy. However, Edinburgh, Roxburgh and Stirling castles were the chief royal castles of the Scottish kingdom. They became physical symbols of royal power. Yet Bruce decided to destroy them. Cornel's (2008) study illustrates that the of these castles was very conscious and calculated work which was supervised by Bruce himself. He wanted to be sure that all these castles would never get under control of the English Crown again. The castles figured prominently in every major campaign of Robert Bruce, but he never adopted the strategy of occupying them. Bruce's belief in the castles' military value was the reason for destroying them. The castles became a symbol of the political power of Scottish enemies. And therefore, Bruce was forced to use extreme measures to defend his kingdom. Bruce was able to recognize the role of the castle in warfare and conducted his campaigns accordingly. When Bruce died, Scotland was a kingdom cleared of castles.

42

Conclusion The Norman invasion caused enormous changes not only in English monarchy, but also in the social system and architecture. After the conquest the Norman castles were the most powerful tool for exerting authority over new subjects. They were William’s key strategy to establish a feudal society. The first motte-and-bailey castles were very significant for the Normans, because they demonstrated their presence in the new kingdom. The speed in which the castles were built was enormous, usefulness of these castles was temporary nonetheless. The castles were thus reinforced and served as offensive strongholds which were used for keeping control over the areas in which the rebellions often occurred. The new stone keeps and reconstructions of previous Saxon homes had undoubtedly a psychological impact on a hostile population. Norman castles became an impressive symbol of dominating power. However, they also served primarily as an administrative centre the purpose of which was to protect the local seat of administrative authority. (Pounds, 1994, p. 295) During the Anarchy, castles proliferated and it was primarily due to the barons that could built and occupied castles without the permission of the crown. The castles were built anywhere and they partially served as headquarters for either Stephen’s or Matilda’s supporters. All the baronial castles became understandably a threat to the monarchy and therefore when Henry II succeeded to the throne, he forbade the barons to build other strongholds. Moreover, he confiscated all baronial castles. The period of Plantagenet kings is regarded to be one of the most important stages in the development of the castle architecture. Since the warfare became more focused on the sieges rather than fighting in the fields, the castles had to respond with the more sophisticated ways of defence. As a result, the earlier offensive fortresses changed into the castles which were able to withstand massive assaults. Only the castles with the best defence guaranteed their inhabitants an effective protection against foes. The castles of Plantagenet kings marked the transition from a simple stronghold to a grand, comfortable castle the function of which was to impress rivals and therefore the size of castles was fairly important. The ornamentation and complexity of the castle's layout often displayed the lord's status. Since to build such a castle required a lot of money, only the men of noble or royal birth could afford to build them. The most heavily fortified castles were built by Master James of Saint George during the reign of Edward I. Not only did Edward I rebuild the castles in England, he also erected magnificent castles in Wales. The castles like Caernarfon, Beaumaris, and Conwy had never

43 been seen in Britain before nor afterwards. The function of these castles was to dominate in their surrounding areas and demonstrate Edward I's supremacy over the Welsh. Edward’s castles, which were always strategically placed, acted primarily as havens for English armies or as the centres of administration. They were also home for new inhabitants, a whole population of English settlers. Nevertheless, Edward’s castles might have satisfied their garrisons, but the kings and queens often preferred more comfortable homes in southern England. Once Edward I captured Wales, the castles were redundant and became rather financial burdens for him. Caernarfon and Beaumaris have never been totally completed and lots of Edward’s castles subsequently fell into disrepair. Even though the Scottish Wars of Independence and baronial wars proved the effectiveness of castles, after the victory over the English in 1314, Robert Bruce destroyed the majority of castles so that no English king could use them again. In conclusion, the royal castles served several main functions. In the 11th century there were primarily built as offensive strongholds and administrative centres. They were a key element of establishing feudalism. By 12th century the castles were rather erected for defensive purposes, but also as grant residences for the nobles. In the late of the 12th century they were used as a tool for conquering Wales and Scotland and this caused also the rapid destruction of castles that followed after the death of Edward I. Even though this thesis deals with the most important castles that often experienced sieges and assaults, it is necessary to realize that only a small minority of all castles in Britain ever saw any fighting. A castle has always been perceived as a symbol of royal and military power, but it was principally home.

44

References

Brown, R. A. (2004). Allen Brown's English castles. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell Press.

Brown, R.A. (1980). Castles: A History and Guide. : Blandford Press.

Brown, R.A. (2003). Royal Castle-Building in England 1154–1216. In R. Liddiart (Ed.), Anglo-Norman Castles (pp. 133-178). Woodbridge: The Boydell Press.

Castle Defences - Facts about Castles. (n.d.). Retrieved January 19, 2016, from http://www.primaryhomeworkhelp.co.uk/castles/defence.htm

Castles of Britain. (n.d.). Retrieved January 21, 2016, from http://www.castles-of-britain.com/

Cornell, D. (2008). A Kingdom Cleared of Castles: the Role of the Castle in the Campaigns of Robert Bruce. Scottish Historical Review, 87(2), 233-257. doi: 10.3366/E0036924108000140.

Ellis, S. (2012). How the Normans Changed England. British Heritage, 33(4), 42-48.

Gravett, C., & Hook, A. (2009). English castles 1200-1300. Oxford: Osprey.

Gravett, C., & Hook, A. (2003). Norman stone castles. Oxford: Osprey.

Gravett, C., & Hook, A. (2007). The castles of Edward I in Wales, 1277-1307. Oxford: Osprey.

Gravett, C., & Nicolle, D. (2006). The Normans: Warrior knights and their castles. Oxford: Osprey.

Hall, A. (Writer and Director). (2014). Instruments of Invasion. [Television series episode]. In A. Hall (Producer), Castles: Britain's Fortified History. London: BBC two.

45

Hall, A. (Writer and Director). (2014). Kingdom of Conquest. [Television series episode]. In A. Hall (Producer), Castles: Britain's Fortified History. London: BBC two.

Hull, L. (2006). Britain's Medieval Castles. London: Praeger Publishers.

Jones, N. R. (2005). Architecture of England, Scotland, and Wales. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Kaufmann, J., & Kaufmann, H. (2001). The medieval fortress: Castles, forts, and walled cities of the Middle Ages. Conshohocken, PA: Combined Pub.

Kenyon, J. (1990). Medieval Fortifications. Leicester: Leicester University Press.

Kenyon, J. (2010). The Medieval Castles of Wales. Cardiff: University of Wales Press.

Lepage, J. (2012). British fortifications through the reign of Richard III. Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland & Company

McNeill, T. (1992). book of castles. London: B.T. Batsford.

Morris, E. (n.d.). The Castle Dungeon and the Oubliette: The Truth about These Medieval Prisons. Retrieved January 28, 2016, from http://www.exploring- castles.com/castle_dungeon.html Morris, M. (2009). A great and terrible king: Edward I and the forging of Britain. London: Windmill Books.

Morris, M. (2003). Castle: A History of the Buildings that Shaped Medieval Britain. London: Windmill Books.

Norman N.J.G. (1993). The Medieval Castle in England and Wales: A Political and Social History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.

Pounds, N. (1994). Medieval Castle in England and Wales: Political and Social History (New ed.). Cambridge University Press.

46

Rait, R. S. (1901). Outline of the relations between England and Scotland 500-1707. Blackie.

Stokstad, M. (2005). Medieval castles. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Toy, S. (1985). Castles: Their construction and history. New York: Dover Publications.

Trueman, C. N. (2015, May 05). The Crusades. Retrieved February 06, 2016, from http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/medieval-england/the-crusades/

Williams, D. M., & Kenyon, J. R. (2009). The impact of the Edwardian castles in Wales. Oxford: Oxbow.

47

Appendices

Figure 1. The building of the motte of Hastings Castle, after the Bayeux Tapestry. Retrieved from http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/domesday/world-of-domesday/king.htm.

Figure 2. The early medieval motte-and-bailey castle, in its simplest form (here based on Dinan motte-and- bailey castle as shown on the Bayeux Tapestry), consisted of a timber tower (1) on an earth mound or motte (2) with a palisade on top. The bailey (3) was a protected space featuring various service buildings. It was surrounded by a palisaded outer wall and a ditch (4). (Lepage, 2012, p. 126)

48

Figure 3. Rochester in Kent is a great example of the development of an earlier site by the Normans. The city had been surrounded by walls built by the Romans. Later on, the Normans built a motte-and bailey castle on Boley Hill. By 1089 a new stone castle replaced the timber work. The castle became one of the most magnificent English castles. (Lepage 2012, p.155)

Figure 4. The keep of Dover, strategically located in the Strait of Dover facing Calais in France. It was built between 1181 and 1188 at the time of Henry II’s reign (1154–1189) by the master-builder Maurice l’Ingénieur. The massive keep clearly shows the traditional Norman keep because it has a cube shape. The keep was hemmed with a curtain wall enclosing an inner bailey. (Lepage 2012, p.163)

49

Figure 5. Orford Castle located in Suffolk was built by order of King Henry II between 1165 and 1173. The design of the castle is between the Norman square keep and the Angevin round tower. The wings provided additional accommodation, a chapel and kitchen. One of the wings has a defensive entrance. The keep was built in the centre of bailey surrounded by walls and towers. (Lepage 2012, p.180)

Figure 6. Machicolation was an opening made in the floor on top of a wall, between supporting corbels, through which rocks or other items could be dropped down on attackers at the base of a defensive wall. (Lepage 2012, p.192)

50

Figure 7. This is how the Goodrich Castle looked like in its prime. The castle included the D-shaped barbican that defended the Gate. Official water color painting by Terry Ball. Retrieved from https://cocamidemea.wordpress.com/2013/07/06/one-castle-a-day-visit-to-goodrich-castle-part-1/

Figure 8. The methods of destroying walls. A. Ancient method of making a shallow covered ditch to reach base of wall. B. Mining under the foundation of the wall. C. Tunnelling into the castle. D. Mine being intercepted by defenders countermine. (Kaufmann & Kaufmann, 2001, p. 60)

51

Figure 9. The rebuilt corner of Rochester’s keep. In contrast to the other towers, it is round in shape. Retrieved from http://www.picturesofengland.com/England/Kent/Rochester/Rochester_Castle

Figure 10. The recreated king’s chamber on the second floor of the great tower, fitted out to evoke a late 12th- century royal palace. Retrieved from http://www.historyextra.com/feature/my-favourite-historical-places-dr- marc-morris

52

Figure 11. Main Castles in Wales: 1. Aberystwyth, 2. Harlech, 3. Caernarfon, 4. Beaumaris, 5. Bangor, 6. Conway, 7. Ruddlan, 8. Fling, 9. Chester, 10. Grosmont, 11. Skenfrith, 12. White Castle, 13. Chepstow, 14. Caerphilly, 15. Merthyr Tydfil, 16. Swansea, 17. Fishguard

Figure 12. The King’s Gate is the most striking demonstration of the medieval fortification. Retrieved from http://www.medart.pitt.edu/image/England/Caernarvon/Castle/maincaern.html

53

Figure 13. Caernarfon City and Castle. The work was begun around 1283 on the site of a Norman motte-and- bailey castle. Retrieved from http://www.snowdoniaheritage.info/en/location/337/caernarfon-castle/

Figure 14. This imaginative reconstruction gives an impression of how Beaumaris Castle might have looked had it been completed. The Illustration by Terry Ball, 1987. Retrieved from http://unsere-reisen-in- england.de/unsere-reisen/wales-vom-01082008---16082008/04tag---04082008-beaumaris-and-plas- newydd/index.html

54