Part 2 (2/2)
It is not until the Edwardian period of our history that we find castles used as places for the secure detention of captives In the earlier Nor one of ruthless extermination, or of mutilation, in order to strike terror into rebellious populations[21] Only persons of the most exalted rank, such as Duke Robert of Normandy, Bishops Odo, of Bayeux, and Ralph Flaer, the son of Williauished Saxon captives, underwent a prolonged imprisonment
The Tower of London as it exists to-day has, by a slow process of gradual accretion round the keep as a nucleus, become what is known as a ”concentric” castle, or one upon the concentric plan, from the way in which one ward encloses another; and its architectural history falls, roughly speaking, into three chief periods covered by the reigns of William Rufus, Richard I, and Henry III, all theapproximately within these periods, as will be seen later on
Coreat keep (now called the White Tower), and the small inner or palace ward to the south of it, by William the Conqueror, this at first was probably only enclosed by a stout ti a ditch at its base The first recorded _stone_ wall round the Toas that of William Rufus, already mentioned, and it is not improbable that the wallthe erection of the new guard house) may have formed part of his work
But little is known to have been added by Henry I The sole ren only records a payment of 17 0s 6d ”in operatione Turris Lundoniae,” without any further mention of what these works were, and as the ae, it is not probable that they included anything of much importance That the smaller inner or palace ward to the south of the keep was already completed, is shown by a charter of the Eranted to Geoffrey de Mandeville (then Constable of the Tower, and third of his family to hold that important office) the custody of the Toorded as follows: ”Concedo illi, et heredibus suis, Turris Lundoniae cueri”;[22] and this ”little castle” is the before h hohere this was originally entered fro now remains to tell us--most probably at or near the point subsequently occupied by the Cold Harbour Gate ”u,” at the south-west angle of the ”turris,” or White Tower ”r,” for it is but seldoates of castle baileys or courtyards are ree thereby rendered necessary
Owing to the state of anarchy that prevailed during the troubled reign of Stephen, and the destruction of all the Pipe Rolls and other records that resulted, it is i that period
Although the Pipe Rolls of Henry II record a total amount expended upon works at the Tower of 248 6s 8d, but little appears to have been added as to which we can speak with any certainty, unless it be the forebuilding of the keep ”y” (long since destroyed), the gatehouse of the inner ward ”u,” and perhaps the basement of the hall or Wakefield tower ”l”
As at first constructed, the White Tower (like its fellow at Colchester) had no forebuilding covering the original entrance, which was at the western extremity of its south front, upon the first floor, then soround level The sht of stairs in the south hich ascends to St
John's Chapel, by which visitors now enter the keep, is not, and is far too sinal entrance
On the Pipe Rolls there are frequent entries of su's houses in the Tower,” probably the great hall ”x,” with its kitchen and other appendant buildings; ”of the chapel” (obviously that of St Peter, as that of St John in the keep would hardly be in need of any structural repairs at so early a date); and ”of the gaol”
These last doubtless stood in an outer ward added by Henry I, and at first probably only enclosed by the usual ditch and earthen rampart, furnished with stout wooden palisades
[Illustration: ST JOHN'S CHAPEL, TOWER OF LONDON]
It is son any precise date for the first foundation of the ”Chapel of St Peter ad Vincula apud turrim” It is not probable that it was contemporary with the Chapel of St John, but was doubtless erected by Henry I when he enlarged the area of the outer ward of the Tower; as this necessitated a considerable increase to the perer suffice for their accommodation, and a new chapel would become necessary If St Peter's Chapel had only been parochial (which at its first erection it was not), it ht have been possible to ascertain the precise date of its foundation
In 20 Henry II (or 1174), Alnod, the engineer, received the sum of 11 13s 4d for works at the Tower Other payments occur for sheet-lead for the repairs of the chapel, the carriage of planks, and tiaol (probably Cold Harbour Gate ”u”), various repairs to the ”King's houses within the bailey of the Tower,”
and occasionally for the repairs to the ”turris” or great keep itself
This, when first built, was of rough rag-stone, rudely coursed, with very open joints in thick , doubtless, of patching and pointing) occur with more or less frequency
Not until 1663 did the keep receive its final disfigurement, at the hands of Sir Christopher Wren, who cased part of the exterior in Portland stone, rebuilt two of the angle turrets, and ”Italianised” all theopenings, thereby obliterating many valuable mediaeval details
All these outlays are certified by the view and report of two inspecting officials, Edward Blund and Willia carried out by Alnod, while the writs authorising payned by one or other of the justiciars, Ranulph de Glanville and Richard de Lucy, or by the King hireat constructive activity at the Tower The new e; and e consider the valuable experience in the art of hich he had already gained, in the decade prior to his accession to the throne, in conducting (while Count of Poitiers and Duke of Aquitaine) various sieges of the castles of his rebellious barons in those provinces, it seems improbable that he would have been satisfied to leave the Tower in the condition it then ith a keep standing in a small inner ward, enclosed by a plain stone curtain wall, devoid of any projecting towers, unless perhaps the base of the Hall tower, and the Cold Harbour Gate (see plan), and a large outer ward, only enclosed by a wooden palisade and ditch
Richard must have been well aware of the enormous increase to the power of effective defence conferred by salient or boldly projecting towers flanking with their fire the curtain walls, which in England, at any rate, were then somewhat of a novelty At this tireat need being not for mere repairs, but for effectiveupon the hazardous enterprise of the third Crusade, Richard left his trusted Chancellor, Williachamp, to carry out an extensive series of neorks at the Tower, all of which were probably fron hiraph upon the Tower,[24] the late G T Clark, FSA, has fallen into a strange error as to the actual a the earlier years of the reign of Richard I, which he states ”do not show above one or two hundred pounds of outlay” When this rather dog docu inaccuracy is at once apparent; indeed, it ht fitly serve as an illustration of Pope's well-known lines:
”A little learning is a dangerous thing, Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring”
The Pipe Roll of 2 Richard I discloses an expenditure, ”ad operationes turris Lundoniae,” a to no less than 2,881 1s 10d, in itself a sufficiently large sum, but one which, whenit up to its present-day value,[25] is increased to 57,621 16s 8d of our modern champ to one of his dependents, William Puinctel, who seems to have acted as Constable and superintendent of the neorks, according to the Pipe Roll of 2 Richard I
It is well known that all the contributions levied in the King's name do not invariably appear set out in full in the records, and there were certainly other sources of revenue open to the Chancellor, of which he doubtless took the fullest advantage[26] The difficulty in this case is not soout these works (which he undoubtedly did), but to account for their rapid completion in so short a time
If, however, it was possible, only seven years later, for Richard himself to build, in a far more inaccessible situation, the _entire castle_ of Chateau Gaillard in the short space of a single year, it need not have been so difficult for Longchamp to carry out in two or three years the works we are about to describe, especially e consider that he had practically _unlimited_ funds at his disposal[27]