THE CASTLE OF DOVER. BY T. BLASHILL, ESQ, F.R.I.B.A. (Read at the Dover Congress, August 1883.) THE materials furnished by ancient records for a history of this fortress are scanty; and it is unfortunate that modern attempts to make up the deficiency have rather tended to obscure the evidence derivable from the chief source of information,-the remains of the works themselves. I do not intend to give in this paper a detailed description of the several parts of the fortifications, for that has frequently been done; but rather to point out the order in which they were executed, and to correct some of the errors that have darkened their history. The existence of a British fortification on the Castle Hill has been inferred from the fact that a great dry moat or ditch surrounds the outer walls. While, however, it is possible that this hill may have been so occupied, I consider that trustworthy evidence of British military occupation is entirely wanting. It has also been thought that remains of a Roman earthwork can be traced; but here again we are without evidence sufficient to support such an opinion. And looking to the condition of Britain during the Roman occupation, and its relation to the province of Gaul on the opposite coast, it does not seem that any need existed for defensive works. The Pharos here, and its counterpart on the Western Heights, were the real requirements of that time, serving to guide the Roman vessels through the Straits when Rutupia and Portus Lemanis shared the Continental traffic, and the importance of Dover was not yet foreseen. We need not here enter into the question whether the church which stands by the Pharos is of Roman or Saxon foundation. The importance of this site, in a military sense, would increase, if it did not even begin, when the masters of the position looked across the narrow sea to a country that was in hostile hands, and when unfriendly vessels threatened the coast. We may, therefore, believe that the Castle Hill was occupied in a military sense throughout the Saxon period; the importance of the town and the fortification increasing, until the Norman conquest brought new sources of prosperity and power. William strengthened the Castle of Dover, and gave it in charge to John de Fenis as Constable, who appointed certain knights to keep guard with him, each having a proportionate number of manors granted to him to support the cost of his particular service. The names of the several knights, and the manors held by each, under the tenure of castle-guard, are given in a book now in the Record Office, called a Feodary of Kent, compiled by Cyriac Petit, an officer of the Exchequer in the reign of Henry VIII. No part of the works guarded by these knights now remains; nevertheless all the historians of the Castle either expressly state, or seem to allow, that the outer fortifications which now exist were built by these confederate knights, or at least occupy the sites of towers that had been built by them. Accordingly the outer towers are distinguished by the names of William de Abrinces, lord of Folkestone (who held twenty-one knights' fees, and furnished twenty-one men, who kept guard for twenty-eight weeks), Fulbert de Dover, Arsic, Peverel, Maminot, Port, Crêvecœur, and Fitzwilliam ; and by the names of other knights, the lieutenants or successors of the first. It is, however, clear, not merely from the architectural features of the several towers, but from the general scheme of the outer fortifications, that they belong to a period much later than that of the Norman knights, and to a system that had not been developed in their days. There is no reason to think that the main fortifications of the Norman kings extended over a greater area than that of the mounds now occupied by the church and Pharos, and by the buildings of the inner ward. Beyond the main line of defence were detached towers, which served the same purpose as the detached forts of modern military enginering, by enabling their occupiers to annoy an enemy who might be approaching the outer walls. Three such towers are known to have existed; and it is quite probable that they represent a larger number which were under the charge of the confederate knights. There is no evidence to show that Dover was provided with one of those massive keep-towers which were characteristic of the Norman system of fortification until the reign of Henry II, the first of the Plantagenet kings. The keep built by him is one of the finest structures of its class. As regards its design, the extreme plainness of all the parts which were intended for purely defensive purposes would permit us to think that it was founded in the beginning of his reign, or even (as has been said) in the last year of Stephen; but the design of the part which contains the chapel, which is distinguished by its beauty, is clearly of the latter part of the reign of Henry. It so closely resembles the work of the choir and eastern transepts of Canterbury Cathedral, which was being executed at that time, as to leave no doubt that it was done by the same hand, and that it belongs to the period from 1180 to 1187. It was an almost invariable rule that such a keep-tower should be either built close to the outer wall of the fortress, or even form part of the outer line of defence; but this keep stands detached in the open yard of the Castle. It is, however, certain that some buildings not now existing did once occupy the ground on the eastern side of the keep. It is highly probable that they were close to its eastern wall; and it is difficult to account for the narrowness of one side of the part which contains the chapel unless this irregularity was determined by the existence of an older building of importance close to that spot. The towers and walls which now enclose the inner ward have been so much altered at various periods that it is impossible to say that they contained any work of the date of the keep. Such small parts as have any architectural character belong to the next century; but it seems highly probable that the main body of the construction is of Norman date, or at least occupies the site of the Norman wall and towers. It was these walls and towers, and not those of the present outer line of defence, that had to resist the only siege of great political importance which the Castle has had to endure; and unless this is clearly seen it is impossible to understand the account of the attack by the Dauphin of France in the last year of King John. The siege was begun in the regular way, with weapons of the most modern and approved type, the great military engines then in use having been specially sent from France. The French were not able to closely invest the Castle on all sides, but directed their attack chiefly against its north-western angle; the part which, from the nature of the ground, could be most easily approached. They began by driving a trench or covered way, faint traces of which can still be seen immediately above the footway now called "Harold Passage", and which ran from that spot to the top of the hill, so as just to clear the towers and wall at the place where the outwork called "The Spur" now projects northwards from the inner ward. This trench is clearly indicated, through a considerable part of its length, upon a map dated 1756, and now in the possession of the military authorities at Dover; but it was almost entirely covered by one of the earthen bastions thrown up for the defence of the Castle about the end of the last century. The siege-works proceeded so far as to admit of an attack on the foundation of the wall, the earth being thrown out from it so as to raise a bank along its southern side, and thus to shelter the sappers from the missiles of the garrison. It was then that Sir Stephen de Pencester succeeded in introducing his four hundred men-at-arms into the Castle by approaching it on its eastern side, causing the Dauphin to raise the siege, and return to France for reinforcements. Thereupon Pencester, or the Constable, Hubert de Burgh, proceeded to make an outwork which would prevent any further attempt to follow up the attack at the same spot. It has, I believe, been assumed by every modern writer on the subject, that this work was executed to the northward of the existing outer wall and ditch, occupying part of the ground now covered by the great ravelin that extends towards the Deal road. This outer defence is, however, clearly of a date later than the time of this siege; and the position of the trench made by the Dauphin, if it has been correctly identified, is quite conclusive on this point. I am happy to be confirmed in this view by Major Plunkett, whose very lucid and interesting address on the development of these fortifications is printed in this volume (p. 152); and it is clear that no i |