Mediæval Military Architecture in England, Volume 1 (of 2)Clark, George Thomas
History
Mediæval Military Architecture in England, Volume 1 (of 2)
Clark, George Thomas
Architecture -- England; Architecture, Medieval; Military architecture
The keep is constructed of exceedingly rude rubble masonry. Upon
two parts of its face are nine narrow and shallow pilaster strips:
three towards the barbican, and six between the inner gate and the
forebuilding. The keep wall has a rude plinth, with no set-off or
string. It is evident that this, as at York, and in other shell-keeps,
was lined by lodgings, having an upper floor, placed all round against
the wall with an open court in the centre. These were probably of
timber. In the part of the keep towards the barbican is a breach
about 40 feet broad down to the level of the inner floor. It is said
that this part of the wall was partially broken down during General
Massey’s attack, and was afterwards enlarged to its present condition,
as at Kenilworth, rather as a matter of favour, to render the castle
untenable without injuring it as a dwelling. Had the keep been blown
up as was usual by gunpowder, it would have presented a very different
aspect.
If the masonry of Berkeley Castle were to be removed, as at Kilpeck or
Ewias Harold, its remains would show a mound of earth, and attached
to three sides of it a platform, the whole encircled with a ditch or
scarp. It would, in fact, be a moated mound with an appended platform,
of a character very common in England, in the Welsh Marches, and in
Normandy, and would resemble such works as Tamworth and Towcester, the
dates of which are given in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. The inference
is, therefore, that Berkeley was the seat of an English lord, probably
from the ninth century. Had the fortress been an original Norman work,
it is scarcely probable that a shell would have been the form of keep
selected, or that, having been so selected, its lower 22 feet would
have been filled up with earth. Evidently the Norman builder, finding a
moated mound of no great height, but of considerable breadth, built his
shell round it, as at Pontefract, as a revetment wall, and upon this,
when clear of the top of the mound, raised his curtain. At a lower
level, along the scarp of the existing ditch, he, or his immediate
successor, constructed the walls, which, then as now, contain the whole
castle.
All the main walls of the castle are either Norman, or rebuilt upon
Norman foundations, or very nearly so. Probably the keep was built
first and the court enclosed shortly afterwards. Much was done in the
Decorated period. The inner wall of the hall, at least, was rebuilt,
and it may have been enlarged. The porch was added, the chapel much
altered, and the domestic buildings possibly gutted and recast. Henry
VII., when in possession, seems to have made some inconsiderable
alterations, and others have been added since.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account