Castles and Strongholds of Northumberland

Chapter I

Being Introductory

Northumberland has more castles, fortalices, towers, peles, bastles and barmkins than any other county in the British Isles. Castles of all periods were the private residences and fortresses of kings and noblemen. The fact that they were private residences was the principal difference between them and their predecessors, the Anglo-Saxon burghs, which were fortified towns, etc., such as were at Heddon, Yeavering and Bamburgh. Their private nature is again the distinguishing factor between them and forts erected at a later date by kings and governments for national defence. The towers, peles, bastles and barmkins were also private residences fortified by small, not so powerful lords, or by rich farmers and landowners as a means of defending themselves from raiding parties and securing their cattle in times of such raids.

Motte-and-Bailey Castles

Many castle sites are either not known or can only be traced as names on a map or a few green mounds in a field. Indeed, many of these green mounds never had fortifications of stone erected on them and only existed as the motte-and-bailey castles of the Norman invaders, our first castle builders. Whatever the precise plan of a motte-and-bailey castle, the earthworks in themselves were a formidable defence crowned with timber stockades. The outer fringes of these castles, the counter-scarp, on the outside of the ditches of both motte and bailey, also had their bristling defences of pointed stakes set at angles and interwoven brambles.

Motte-and-Bailey Castles with Map References (see Figure 1, p.12)

D.35

Alnwick

B.18

Bamburgh

B.1

Berwick

E.38

Bellingham

G.23

Bellister

F.40

Bolam

F.19

Bothal

H.6

Bywell

D.42

Callaly

A.12

Carham

E.18

Elsdon

B.2

Fenham

D.4

Fowberry

E.50

Gunnerton

G.13

Haltwhistle

C.15

Harbottle

D.15

Ilderton

F.21

Mitford

F.20

Morpeth

H.12

Newcastle

A.2

Norham

H.8

Prudhoe

D.56

Rothbury

E.55

Simonburn

D.13

South Middleton

H.19

Styford

?

Tiefort1

D.32

Titlington

A.1

Tweedmouth

H.14

Tynemouth

G.53

Warden

A.16

Wark on Tweed

E.53

Wark on Tyne

D.46

Warkworth

C.5

Wooler

Four images showing the development of motte-and-bailey castles with the motte at Dinan, the motte-and-bailey at Elsdon, a reconstruction of a motte-and-bailey castle and Warkworth Castle with the later stonework following the original earthworks.

The sketch of the motte at Dinan is based on the Bayeux Tapestry and shows a timber keep surmounting an earthen mound with a moat. Elsdon Castle is shown in this old drawing with a bold motte and a larger but lower bailey with no trace of the timber castle that must have capped them. A complete motte-and-bailey castle with moated motte-and-bailey is shown with a shell keep on the motte and great hall and other offices in the bailey, all of timber construction.

Figure 1: Map of Northumberland showing the distribution of motte-and-bailey castles in the county.

Castles of Northumberland

Upon the summit of the motte or mound, within the stockade, usually rose a wooden tower, which was the residence of the lord and the ultimate stronghold and vantage point of the castle by reason of its superior height.

The exact time and place or origin of this type of fortification is unknown. A castle of this type was mentioned for the first time in ad 1010 and stood on the banks of the Loire in France. It was built by a man skilled in military affairs whose name was Fulk Nerra. He was also the first man to employ mercenary soldiers. It cannot be denied that a motte is a fortress for a man who wishes to defend his family and close friends from all would-be enemies, whether other lords or his own rebellious retainers. Whatever its origin, the motte was in wide use in Normandy before William conquered England.

The tower on the motte was not always a crude and uncomfortable lodging on stilts as stood at Durham in the castle of Prior Laurence: 'Four posts are plain, on which it rests, one post at each strong corner.' Many were comfortable tower houses, as described by Lambert of Ardres in 1117:

Arnold, Lord of Ardres, built on the motte of Ardres a wooden house, excelling all the houses of Flanders of that period both in material and in carpenters' work. The first storey was on the surface of the ground, where were cellars and granaries, and great boxes, tubs, casks and other domestic utensils. In the storey above were the dwelling and common living rooms of the residents, in which were the larders, the rooms of the bakers and butlers, and the great chamber in which the lord and his wife slept.

Adjoining this was the private room, the dormitory of the waiting maids and children. In the inner part of the great chamber was a certain private room, where at early dawn, or in the evening, or during sickness, or at time of bloodletting, or for warming the maids and weaned children, they used to have a fire . In the upper storey of the house were garret rooms, in which on the one side the sons (when they wished it) and on the other side, the daughters (because they were obliged) of the lord of the house used to sleep. In this storey the watchmen and servants appointed to keep the house also took their sleep at some time or other. High up on the east side of the house in a convenient place was the chapel, which was designed to resemble the tabernacle of Solomon in its ceiling and painting. There were stairs and passages from storey to storey, from the house into the kitchen, from room to room and again from the house into the loggia, where they used to sit in conversation for recreation, and again from the loggia into the oratory.

It may be noted that neither the Bayeux Tapestry, nor indeed many of the contemporary accounts, mention or show the bailey. It should not be deduced from these facts that in most castles the bailey did not exist, but it should be taken as an implication of the immense importance of the motte both militarily and socially. The bailey must have been essential for stables, barns, smithies and affording shelter for the garrison and its supplies in most, if not all, of the early Norman strongholds.

As mentioned above, the Bayeux Tapestry shows several of these castles with their towers on the motte and bridges in position. The pictures of the siege of the castle at Dinan shows just how vulnerable they were when fire was used. There can be little doubt that the walls were hung with wet hides to prevent them catching fire. One of the many tragedies that must have overtaken these houses and their besieged occupants happened in 1190 when the Jews of York were attacked by a mob and had taken refuge in the motte, and many of them perished when it was fired.

Motte-and-bailey castles were cheap and quick to build but a castle of importance required more permanent defences, and as timber in contact with damp soil rots quickly, the second build of such a castle would at least be on stone sleeper walls if not entirely rebuilt in stone when circumstances allowed. It was at this time that many sites were abandoned in favour of stronger and healthier sites. Elsdon Castle, the best motte-and-bailey in Northumberland, never had stonework built on it as the occupants moved out when the timber decayed. The remaining mounds, known as the Moat Hills, are worthy of inspection.

The next step in castle building came about by a change of materials rather than tactics, and the keep-and-bailey castle came into being. The keep, normally, was a large square stone structure taking the place of the motte, or incorporating it in its own defences, as at Warkworth. The plans of these castles were the same as those of timber, though as the first urgency of the conquest declined and the lords began to seek the comfort and safety of stone, quite a number...