CAS
112
CAS
and the sacellum, or small temple, for depositing the ensigns.In the walls too are the traces of the four great gates; thedecuman, the praetorian, and the two posterns. The greatcourses of stone, with which the wall is formed, are separatedfrom each other by alternate layers, composed entirely of adouble course of bricks each; as in the walls of Verulam,Silchester , and other of our Roman towns.
The Roman remains at Portchester are not perhaps soclearly to be traced; since, having been constantly used as afortress in succeeding ages, it has received vast and extremelyvarious additions: and presents us with specimens of militaryarchitecture in almost every period, from the Normans to thetime of Queen Elizabeth.
Similar alterations to those first mentioned, have given sostrong a turn to the general character of Pevensey , that itsreal mra has been sometimes doubted ; though portions of theRoman wall, as well as the decuman gate, may be easily andaccurately traced.
Here too it may not be irrelevant to observe, that thecastle at Colchester, in Essex , has been sometimes taken fora Roman fortress. And this not only because it has many ofthe same sort of tiles which are. found in Roman walls, butbecause they are laid in the same manner, with bands.Though, if the building be examined with attention, theremay be traced, in almost every part, evident marks eitherof the later Saxon or Norman workmanship: and thoughmany of the tiles which are used in it may have been gatheredfrom the remains of Roman buildings, the greater partappears to have been made on purpose. See the Archceologia,vol. iv. p. 33.
That in the Roman times, however, there must have beenmany other such walled stations as those at Richborough,Portchester, and Pevensey , there can be little doubt. TheSaxons , in the course of their long wars with the Britons,may be fairly supposed to have destroyed many of the fortifi-cations which had been thus erected 1 ; and after their finalsettlement, they neglected to repair those which remained, orto build many of their own. By these means the countrybecame open and defenceless; which greatly facilitated theincursions of the Danes, who met with little obstruction fromfortified places. That there was, however, something like acastle at Bamborough, in Northumberland , we have the con-current testimony of historians, as Matthew of Westminster ,p. 193, sub ann. 547. Saxon Chronicle , p. 19. RogerIloved. p. 238, b. Bede , lib. iii. chap. vi. p. 12 : a castle at: Corf'e, in Dorsetshire , is said to have existed in the days of
| j Edgar. Gough’s Add. to Camden, vol. i. p. 49. King’s Muni-
menta * Antigua , vol. iii. p. 209. Portchester castle, during
this period, probably retained "its designation. And Mr.
I King, Munimenta Antigua , vol. iii. p. 211, has taken consi-derable pains to prove that the fortress at Castleton, in Derby-shire , is bf as high antiquity.
Alfred the Great , however, seems to have been the first ofour princes with whom the building of castles became anobject of national policy. Though, if Asser’s authority may
be received, they were not exactly what the reader, at the
first mention of their name, might take them for; since theywere composed not only of stone, but ol wood ; Asser de Reb.gestis Alfredi, p. 17, 18. Elfleda, too, his daughter, gover-ness of Mercia , who seems to have been the only person inthe kingdom who properly complied with the commands, andimitated the example, of her illustrious father, and who in-herited more of the wisdom and spirit ol Alfred than any ofhis children, not only followed his steps by fighting manybattles with the Danes, but built not less than eight castlesin the space of three years, to check their incursions. Hen .Hunt. Hist. p. 204. A still more remarkable instance of the
knowledge of castle-building at a short period subsequent tothis, may be found in William of Malmesbury , chap. vi. wh e ®he mentions the rebuilding of Exeter by Athelstan , who diein 941. “ TJrbem igitur illam," says the historian, “ quam con'taminatce gentis repurgio defcecaverat, turribus munivit, mU r0ex quadratis lapidibus cinxit.” And from the few remains othe fortifications of this period, we find, that the walls P re 'cisely answer Malmesbury’s description. They were facewith these four-square stones both within and without, a nthe intermediate space between the facings, was filled **Pwith rubble or rough flint-stones, mixed together with
strong and permanent cement. It is to this period too,
that
the most judicious of our writers have referred the castle *Colchester , which has been already mentioned. Its form 13four-square, flanked at the four corners with strong towe r9 >and it is about two hundred and twenty-four yards in circt*** 9ference on the outside, all projections and windings include >the four sides nearly facing the four cardinal points. S°**have even gone so far as to call this venerable ruin Britts**^others, as we have already said, have attributed it, withgreater share of plausibility, to the Romans; but Caffld®and our better writers ascribe it to Edward the Elder , ' v ^repaired the walls and rebuilt the town, in the beginning 0the 10th century. j
Still, however, the paucity of strong posts in the isl aaduring every period of the Anglo-Saxon history, mayconstantly observed. And it is more than probable that ^this defect we may attribute the defeat of Harold; sincebecame necessary that all should be risked upon the issue 0 ^a single battle. The Conqueror, himself, was evidently se ®sible that the want of fortified places in England had g r . Zfacilitated his conquest, and might, at any time, also faciW®his expulsion. He therefore made all possible hasteremedy the defect, by building magnificent and strong cast*in all the towns within the royal demesnes. “William, ”®?^,Matthew Paris , “ excelled all his predecessors in build* ®castles, and greatly harassed his subjects and vassals
and **
; of f
these works.” Matthew Paris , Hist. p. 8. col. 2.earls, barons, and even prelates, imitated his example;was the first care of every one who received the grant 1 . gestate from the crown, to build a castle upon it, f° r .defence and residence. The disputes about the success*in the following reigns, kept up this spirit for building gj^
cr tO
the**
col-
number. “William Rufus, ” says Henry Knyghton,2373, “was much addicted to building royal castlespalaces, as the castles of Dover, Windsor, Norwich, E xe ^ 9the palace of Westminster, and many others, testify; nor 'there any king of England before him that erected so *** aand such noble edifices.” Though of one or two of 111 ^William Rufus was only the improver. But the rag e () fbuilding castles never prevailed so much in any P erl °j ie n,the English history as in the turbulent reign of St e P 0 fbetween 1135 and 1154. In this reign, says the vvrite*> ,| tthe Saxon Chronicle , p. 238, every one, who was able, j|a castle; so that the poor people were worn out with ,j{hof these buildings, and the whole kingdom was covered 'castles. And this last expression will hardly app ear t j e sstrong, when we are informed, that, besides all the ca ^ re ibefore that time in England, no fewer than eleven hut* tand fifteen were raised from the foundation, in the 9 ”
space of nineteen years.—Rad. deJDiceto, col. 528. “ Step- 0says Ilolinshed, vol. iii. fol. 50, “ began to repent l**** 9 g0although too late, for that he had granted license ^many of his subjects to build castles within theirgrounds.”