Mediæval Military Architecture in England, Volume 1 (of 2) — John Shaqi
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
places, but by the want of organisation for their defence.
But whatever may have been the character of the defences in use in
England before the arrival of the Normans, it is certain that from
that period they underwent a considerable and probably a rapid change,
though scarcely so rapid as has been supposed. The Normans, who had
so long, in common with the English (probably by reason of their
common ancestry), employed the moated and palisaded mound, proceeded
to carry out in England the important improvements they had already
commenced in Normandy. William’s chief object, having conquered, was
to secure his conquest; and his first care, on obtaining possession
of each division of the kingdom or each capital city or town, was to
regard it from a military point of view, and to order the construction
of such strong places as might be necessary for the holding of it.
How completely, in so doing, he trod in the footsteps of those who
had gone before, is shown by what he found and what he did towards
the covering of London and the maintaining of his communication
with the sea. Thus he found and reinforced castles at Chichester,
Arundel, Bramber, Lewes, Hastings, and Dover. On his road he found and
strengthened Canterbury, Tonbridge, Rochester, and Ryegate. In London
he founded the Tower, an entirely new work; but for the defence of the
basin of the Thames he trusted to the ancient sites of Guildford and
Farnham, possibly Reading, and certainly Wallingford and Berkhampstede.
And so all over the kingdom, such strongholds as were central, in
good military positions, or of unusual strength, or were placed in
the ancient demesne lands of the Crown, were taken possession of or
reconstructed for the sovereign; but every baron or great tenant in
chief was permitted,—and, indeed, at first expected, and was no doubt
sufficiently ready,—to construct castles for the security of the lands
allotted to him, which in the vast majority of instances meant to
remodel the defences of his English predecessors. This was under the
pressure of circumstances; for William seems always to have been awake
to the danger of uniting extensive hereditary jurisdictions, and even
from the first to have contemplated governing the counties through
the intervention of _vice-comites_, or sheriffs, who were appointed
and could be displaced at pleasure. But this policy was at first, in
certain districts, necessarily postponed; though even then William made
it to be understood that the chief castles of the realm, by whomsoever
built, were royal castles; and their actual acquisition was always an
important part of the policy of both him and his successors so long as
castles were of consequence. Thus Windsor, Cambridge, Exeter, Corfe,
Wareham, Winchester, Porchester, Southampton, Carisbrooke, Canterbury,
Dover, Lincoln, Rockingham, Nottingham, Stafford, Guildford, Warwick,
Marlborough, and York were royal castles from the commencement.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account