July 27, 2011
Norman Castles in England:
Built for Intimidation, Not Defense
William the Conqueror, the
bastard Duke of Normandy, stormed onto English soil with every intention of
creating a dynasty for himself and his heirs. He was a man who believed that he
had every right to enjoy the kingship of the British monarchy, but did not
receive the crown as he expected. The Anglo-Saxon nobles of England did not
intend for a bastard from the continent to rule their country. King Edward I
left his crown to another, a man who had been born to British soil. The future
William I of England did not believe that his deceased distant relative, King
Edward I, would have forsaken him at death.
So William I set out to make sure that the English, both noble as well
as peasant, understood that he was indeed their true king. This would be
understood almost immediately not only by the brutality of the Norman knights
that followed William, but by other intimidating factors as well. One of the
most enduring of these factors of intimidation and brutality were the numerous
castles that the Normans built in their wake.
William I, and his forces
forced the locals to build forts throughout England, all while the Normans
supervised production. The politics of the area were meted out inside the new,
fortified walls, and those that defied Norman authority found that they did not
have to go far when they were imprisoned. There were only a few steps to the
new jail inside the main tower where the Normans kept the guilty, and innocent
alike, from creating havoc for their conquerors. Troops were stationed at the
castles to make sure that anyone in the outlying area would find that even if
they may have thoughts about treason, their homes would have been destroyed
immediately. Revenge for William, the Conqueror, Bastard King of England was
brutal and immediate. There was no need for defensive building. These castles
were built to make an intimidating statement that William I was now the King of
England.
William, the Bastard
inherited the Dukedom of Normandy from his biological father just as if he were
a legitimate son. He sat upon his chair as if he were the king sitting upon a
throne. Nobles from other areas of France, as well as England, visited and paid
tribute to him for his protection. One such visitor was his distant cousin
Edward I of England who was in exile due to warring factions in his
homeland. Duke William showed himself
to be such a great leader, both militarily as well as diplomatically, that
Edward decided to show his gratitude to William by making him the heir
presumptive to the English Crown. [1] In 1064 Edward made oaths[2]
upon the sacred bones of two English saints[3]
vowing that William would be the next King of England. Another British visitor was Earl Harold
Godwineson who was ”England’s most powerful and wealthy noble,”[4]
who though not having Anglo-Saxon heritage, had been born and raised, and who
also thrived greatly in that kingdom. While this powerful nobleman visited the
Norman Dukedom, he pledged his support to William’s claim to his nation’s
throne, creating what would become his most powerful enemy as well as his own
doom.
The Earl, Harold
Godwineson, was crowned King of England after the death of Edward the Confessor
without the permission of the nobleman across the channel. King Harold was
chosen by the Witan, who were the official “assembly of wealthy and powerful
men.”[5]
They had one basic requirement of the man who they would appoint as their new
sovereign: the chosen must be worthy of sitting on the throne. This meant to
these noblemen that the elected monarch must be of noble family and “he had to
be English.”[6] Harold was the son-in-law of Edward I and he
was British by birth and also by deed. The rumor that the now deceased king had
given the Crown to the powerful and wealthy Earl was supported, and even
promoted, by the Witan. None of these men regarded the fact that the
now-deceased Confessor had already promised the sovereignty to another. They
also chose to forget or ignore the fact that Harold had pledged his allegiance
to that legally inheritable person.
Duke William considered
himself the rightful King of England because of the promise sworn on sacred
artifacts by his cousin, Edward I as well as the covenanted fealty of Harold
Godwineson. To William’s mind there was no way that Edward would have committed
any type of deceitfulness. Edward was an old friend and family member who was
considered one of the most pious men of his day. He was called the Confessor
because he was like a priest to his men. Additionally, the oath that was sworn
by the pious Edward was charged by the use of holy relics. This was a cover-up
committed by the Witan and started by the two-faced Harold. The breaking of
Harold’s oath to William gave “ the latter a just cause for war against a
perjurer.”[7]
The Normans set foot on
British soil and immediately began claiming property by building castle forts.
To do this the fierce troops rounded up
all of the local citizenry and forced them to work. Everyone in the vicinity
was forced into the building process while the Normans supervised. The British
lords, if they were around, would not be spared the indecency of menial labor.
They were, however, still given the benefit of their rank in that they were not
forced into the lowliest of jobs. It was the lower classes that did most of the
work, especially that which was most difficult. The yeoman farmers were all
categorically moved in to work, while the peasants and slaves found that they
were now working for new masters. Some found themselves in a worse environment,
some were now in a better one. Because of this forced labor, the upper classes
and upper peasantry fell into a lower class status. Strangely, the “British
slave improved their lot significantly”[8]
because they were now working along side others that were previously of a
higher social status. The low classes were used to work, but working like a
slave was new to most.
Castle building was a
Norman specialty, and they took what they learned on the continent, and used it
for the benefit of conquest on the British Isle. They had been building this
type of military fort since the 9th century [9]
and were absolute masters of the craft. Within a short time after the invasion
there were castles built throughout Southeastern England. William, who was
beginning to create the name “The Conqueror,” took no time for rest as he
forced his way up toward London. The castles that he was building were being
used as an intimidation propaganda tool. News of his building preceded his
army. Castles were now a symbol of his might, and coming conquest.
They were built on
enormous earthen hills created by digging out a circle, throwing it into the
center and tamping it down. These castles, even though they seem to have been
thrown up were absolutely enormous. The motte, which was the hill itself, was
“230 feet around the base, and 49 feet around the flattened summit.” [10]
The motte was extremely steep and covered in boards so that any attacker would
slide down if they tried to climb up.[11]
The ditch became a moat when it rained, creating another ominous barrier. At
the top of hill, a fence wall was built by using pointed logs for the enclosure
of the top bailey; another series would be around the bottom creating an
additional bailey. More pointed logs were stuck out of the ground so that if
anyone tried to make it to the top of the motte, they would have been impaled
instead. Inside the uppermost fence, a large keep was built to house the new
Baron who would govern the land, and troops that were to stay after the
majority of the forces left to continue the fight. This tower was three stories
high, certainly high enough to see anyone approaching. The strategy of these
castles was that they were meant to be mean and ugly, which was an intimidation
factor.
William of Normandy was a
brilliant strategist. He did not choose his castle locations randomly. He had
been fighting for his homeland since he was seven years old. His father was
called “The Devil”[12]
and he was the direct descendent of the Viking that had conquered Normandy.[13]
The Devil chose William as his lawful successor because of the same warrior
traits that were in him, were also in William,[14]
even though William was only seven at the time. William’s inherited brilliance
took him only so far. He repelled attack after attack, for many years and was
so great at his war skills that the King of France called him to help with the
King’s own troubles. Then because Duke William was such a strong military
leader, the French King tried to abolish his Dukedom twice, to no avail. The
victor was the man who would become England’s king.
Using those years of
brilliant military strategy, William went to work securing the country that he
believed was his by commanding the construction of castles with specific types
of locations in mind. These locations had to have had either a previous
military use, be within a short radius of another, usually within a days ride,[15]
or be in an area that will be able to “overawe and govern”[16]
the people, giving preference to river valleys and towns.[17]
The use of wood as a tool was easy to access, but to be sure of getting the
first one under construction quickly, the Normans brought a ready-to-build
castle kit with them.[18]
Their very first, after landing in England, was built attached to an old Roman
ruined fort at Pevensey near the coastline,[19]
and the next at Hastings.[20]
They then continued their conquest, and claiming the English land, by building
castles all the way to London.
One of those castles that
were built during that march of terror toward London was the castle of Windsor.
This location was ideal for a spectacular vision of Norman military might. It
was only twenty miles from another castle that was being built at the same time
that was the gate to the city of London, which was called The Tower of London.
The location was on a chalk hill overlooking the Themes River. The river led
directly into downtown London. The chosen hill was just two miles from the
forest where wood and game was in abundance.[21]
Another reason that this location was chosen was because of the implication
that Edward I had approved the authority of his distant cousin, Duke William.
The old Saxon Palace was located halfway between the chalk hill and the nearby
town.[22] It was here that Edward I held his court.[23]
In fact Windsor was built directly adjacent to the previous regime’s hunting
grounds.[24] He reminded the English that they should not
have rejected him as their King by forcing them to labor on his intimidating
Norman fortress that was taking the place of the old Saxon palace. They would
be reminded everyday because this castle would become the backdrop to their
everyday lives, never allowing them to forget.
It has been argued that
castles were built solely for the defense of William’s new territory, after all
there were eighty-nine castles listed in the Domesday Book.[25]
It is true that when the new castles were completed, the Normans stationed
forces inside the fortified walls. Normans were great fighters and they could
easily overthrow any force, especially local people that did not have any
experience in warfare. The local British did not take their new overlords into
their hearts just because they showed up. The people would constantly try to
break their new fealty bonds by skirmishing, or just wreaking havoc. The Norman
troops would ride out in full armor and destroy the outbreak, then quickly
retreat to the safety of the castle. It was a safe base for the troops to
regroup and continue to crush the rebelling locals.[26]
What is forgotten is that even though William I did defend his territory by the
use of the castle, the use of defense was just one of many applications, and
not the only, or major, one. So even in the employment of defense, his troops
continued to forcefully thrust his control into the minds of those around the
castle.
When the locals did rebel,
the armed knights immediately controlled them by either completely destroying
their property, or by bringing them in to have the local Baron bring his
justice. The perpetrators could not win, and would find that they were to
become residents of the castle themselves when they were sentenced to jail on
the first floor. It did not matter if they were guilty or innocent, what
mattered was the continual authority of the new rulers. This was a statement of
power that the British witnessed numerous times.[27]
They were automatically guilty because of the fact that they did not accept the
Bastard as their lawful king when they should have. They had to pay the price
of their negation.
William used power politics from his very first step into
his new kingdom. He brought his most valuable military troops with him to
secure the kingdom of England into his own kingdom that would include his
Dukedom of Normandy. Even when there was no actual use of violence, the threat
was there. The tale of his coming would always precede his troops so that
people were afraid of him before he even got to the new location. Another use
of power politics was the fact that the castles used the locals to build them.
The Normans supervised as the English were forced into a lower society by
becoming slave labor. After the fortress was built, those people were reminded
of their servitude every day because there was one with a twenty-mile radius.
These Norman strongholds were visible for miles and were always in the
backdrop, implying the might of William was greater then that of the usurper
Harold, and even Edward I. Knights were also used for the actual physical
punishment of someone who would have revolted, and to round people up and bring
to the Baron within the local castle for justice. The Baron would accommodate
the wishes of William, not that of the citizenry by showing the people the
might of the new king. At the institution of William I’s reign, he did not show
as much mercy as he would later. He wanted everyone to pay for not choosing
him, and understand that he was there to stay. His use of forcing the populous,
and threat of force after they were built was the main reason that these
castles were built. Another less obvious use of power politics was the fact
that these castles were built on hills, then the motte was built upon that.
These buildings were meant to have the people literally look up to William’s
authority.
Norman castles were built to intimidate the local people
as the Normans continued their conquest of England to put the rightful heir,
William, The Bastard, on the throne of England. When the locals erred in their
ways, the Normans created havoc by using the castle as a base for their
attacks, and also by meeting out William’s justice. The locations of the Norman
Castles were chosen by design, to show that William would be called Majesty.
William absolutely believed that he deserved the crown. Because the British
gave their consent of kingship to someone who betrayed him, he felt that it was
his duty to put those people in their place. To capture the throne, he would
unleash his military might upon the English populace and force them to labor on
the very buildings that would inspire awe and reverence. Castles were not built
to hide behind and defend against an onslaught. This was nothing but power
politics at play. Castles were built to make sure that everyone knew that they
had better pledge their fealty to William I, King of England, or pay the
consequences.
Bibliography
The Bayeux Tapestry. Image 12. http://hastings1066.com/bayeux12.shtml
Belloc, Hilaire. William The Conqueror. Edinburgh:
University Press, 1933.
Bridgeford, Andrew. 1066: The Hidden History in the Bayeux Tapestry. New York:
Walker Publishing Co., 2004.
Carr, Raymond. “A tapestry’s Rich Life” review of The Bayeux Tapestry by Carola Hicks
Chatto, The Spectator. June 3, 2006. http://www.lexisnexis.com.ezproxy2.
apus.edu/hottopics/lnacademic/?verb=sr&csi=8406&sr=lni%284K43-0S50-0159-P274%29 (accessed July 1, 2011)
Gravett, Christopher. The History of Castles: Fortifications Around the World, 2nd ed. Guilford,
CT: Pequot Press, 2001.
Hamilton, Janice. The Norman Conquest of England. Minneapolis: Twenty-First Century
Books, 2008.
Hicks, Peter. How Castles Were Built. New York: The Rosen Publishing Group, Inc., 2008.
Hill, B.J.W. M.A., The History and Treasures of Windsor Castle. London: Pitkin Pictorials,
1970.
Hilliam, Paul. Leaders of the Middle Ages: William the Conqueror, First Norman King of
England. New York: The Rosen Publishing Group, Inc., 2005
Somerset Fry, Plantagenet. Best
Castles. Cincinnati, OH: David & Charles Books, 2006.
--- Castles: England+Scotland+Wales+Ireland, The Definitive Guide to the Most Impressive
Buildings and Intriguing Sites, (Cincinnati, OH: David & Charles Books, 2001
Thomas, Edward. Windsor Castle. Boston: Dana Estes & Co., 1910.
Toy, Sidney. Castles: Their construction & History. Mineola, NY: 1984.
Wood, Harriet. The Battle of Hastings: The Fall of Anglo-Saxon England. London:
Atlantic Books, 2008.
King William I of England, The Domesday Book. (1085) http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/
domesday/
Williams Lewin, Alison. “The Norman
Conquest: England after William the Conqueror” review
of The Norman Conquest: England
after William the Conqueror by Hugh M. Thomas, Saint Joseph’s University online article (2008).
http://proquest.umi.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/pqdlink?
did=1489124541&Fmt=7&clientId=62546&RQT=309&VName=PQD
Originally written for class at American Military University.
[1] Harriet
Wood, The Battle of Hastings: The Fall of Anglo-Saxon England (London:
Atlantic Books, 2008), 39.
[2] The Bayeux
Tapestry, Image 12. http://hastings1066.com/bayeux12.shtml (accessed July 22,
2011)
[3] Paul
Hilliam, Leaders of the Middle Ages: William the Conqueror, First Norman
King of England (New York: The
Rosen Publishing Group, Inc., 2005), 34.
[4] Andrew
Bridgeford, 1066: The Hidden History
in the Bayeux Tapestry (New York:
Walker Publishing Co, 2004), 64.
[5] Janice
Hamilton, The Norman Conquest of England (Minneapolis: Twenty-First Century
Books, 2008), 8
[6] Ibid, 58
[7] Raymond Carr, “A tapestry’s Rich Life”
review of The Bayeux Tapestry by Carola Hicks Chatto, The Spectator.
(2006) http://www.lexisnexis.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/hottopics/lnacademic/?verb=
sr&csi=8406&sr=lni%284K43-0S50-0159-P274%29
(accessed July 1, 2011)
[8] Alison Williams Lewin, “The
Norman Conquest: England after William the Conqueror” review of The Norman
Conquest: England after William the Conqueror by Hugh M. Thomas, Saint
Joseph’s University online article (2008). http://proquest.umi.com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/pqdlink?did=1489124541&Fmt=7&clientId=62546&
RQT=309&VName=PQD
(accessed July 21, 2011)
[9] Plantagenet
Somerset Fry, Castles: England+Scotland+Wales+Ireland, The Definitive Guide
to the Most Impressive Buildings and Intriguing Sites, (Cincinnati, OH:
David & Charles Books, 2001), 11.
[10] Christopher
Gravett, The History of Castles: Fortifications Around the World, 2nd
ed., (Guilford, CT: Pequot Press, 2001), Chapter 2, p. 1.
[11] Peter
Hicks, How Castles Were Built. (New York: The Rosen Publishing Group,
Inc., 2008), 15.
[12] Hilaire
Belloc, William The Conqueror, (Edinburgh: University Press, 1933), 22.
[13] Ibid, 20.
[14] Ibid, 26.
[15] Plantagenet
Somerset Fry, Castles: England+Scotland+Wales+Ireland, The Definitive Guide
to the Most Impressive Buildings and Intriguing Sites, (Cincinnati, OH:
David & Charles Books, 2001), 11.
[16] Sidney Toy,
Castles: Their construction & History, (Mineola, NY: 1984), 54.
[17] Plantagenet
Somerset Fry, Castles: England+Scotland+Wales+Ireland, The Definitive Guide
to the Most Impressive Buildings and Intriguing Sites, (Cincinnati, OH:
David & Charles Books, 2001), 10.
[18] Christopher
Gravett, The History of Castles: Fortifications Around the World, 2nd
ed., (Guilford, CT: Pequot Press, 2001), Chapter 3, p. 1.
[19] Ibid.
[20] The Bayeux
Tapestry, Image 24. http://hastings1066.com/bayeux12.shtml (accessed July 22,
2011)
[21] B.J.W.
Hill, M.A., The History and Treasures of Windsor Castle. (London: Pitkin
Pictorials, 1970), 27.
[22] Edward
Thomas, Windsor Castle. (Boston: Dana Estes & Co., 1910), 20.
[23] Ibid.
[24] Plantagenet
Somerset Fry, Best Castles. (Cincinnati, OH: David & Charles Books,
2006), 97.
[25] King
William I of England, The Domesday Book. (1085)
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/domesday/ (accessed July 25, 2011)
[26] Peter
Hicks, How Castles Were Built. (New York: The Rosen Publishing Group,
Inc., 2008), 13.
[27] Christopher
Gravett, The History of Castles: Fortifications Around the World, 2nd
ed., (Guilford, CT: Pequot Press, 2001), Chapter 2, p. 2.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment