« ForrigeFortsett »
river, which in early days touched the foot of the steep slope. This large court was doubtless well occupied with buildings, barracks, halls, and stables ; while south-west of the mount was a smaller court, still containing some fragments of walls and towers of stone.
Štone succeeded timber in later days, when the long succession of years had solidified the earth of artificial ramparts and mounts, or was used earlier when a natural hard foundation was near the surface, as in some parts of Wallingford Castle.
Even while all else was constructed of earth and timber, the Norman military architect usually inserted a gateway or gatehouse of masonry where he pierced the wall, and threw his drawbridge over the moat.
Such a well guarded entrance-way may have been on the west, but if so, it has been swept away by modern alterations. There is some trace of a passage-way to the water side at the south-east angle of the Castle, but all other entrances are modern.
Before concluding, something must be said as to the date of these Castle earthworks. It will have been gathered from my remarks that I look upon the works as appertaining to the Norman period, and I think that much of it was the work of Robert D'Oyley, completed in 1071, while other portions—extensions of the original—we may owe to Plantagenet days.
Domesday records the destruction of eight hagae (probably meaning houses, with their appurtenances) for the construction of the Castle
Pro castello sunt viii [hagae] destructae. If by this we understand that a new castle was builtas I think we may-we are faced by the difficulty that thirty acres (the area of the Castle precincts) is a space far beyond the requirements of eight hagae of the average size of those recorded as existing in Wallingford.
The entry in Domesday Book states that there were 276 hagae in the town, of which eight were destroyed.
As we know the space within the walls to have been 114 acres, a simple arithmetical calculation shows that eight average hagae would occupy about three acres,
which is the space covered by many of the early Norman castles, and probably D'Oyley's work was no larger, the remaining twenty-seven acres of the Castle works being added later.
Mrs. Armitage has ably championed the Norman origin of mount and court castles, including this ;' while our Associate, Mr. T. Davies Pryce—an earnest student of the earthworks of Wales and Ireland, as well as England -inclines to an earlier origin for many, and possibly for Wallingford.
Leaving the question of the exact date of the Castle's construction, I cannot but conclude by thanking the Misses Hedges for affording facilities for a quiet examination of the earthworks, and congratulating them on the possession of a place beautiful by nature and so full of archæological interest.
1 “Early Norman Castles of England,” English Historical Review, 1904.
2 “The Alleged Norman Origin of Castles in England.” Ibid, 1905
THE CHAPEL OF THE HOSPITAL OF ST.
JAMES, WIGGINTON, TAMWORTH.
BY CHARLES LYNAM, Esq., F.S.A.
“PHILIP DE MARMyon founded the hospital of St. James, close to Tamworth. In accordance with the directions of the king's writ, an Inquisition was taken in 1285, to ascertain the amount of damage which the Crown would sustain, if license should be given to Philip de Marmyon to assign certain properties to the master of the hospital, for the maintenance of five priests who should celebrate divine service there, and the issue was in his favour.”
“Two years afterwards, Philip de Marmyon granted this hospital, with its appurtenances, and pasture in Ashfield for four oxen and two horses, to William de Combrey Hall, for a time, there to celebrate services for his soul, until he should place in it either religious men of the Premonstratensian Order, or secular priests who should bear upon them signum clypei. This hospital remained to the time of Henry VIII; and in 1534, when Robert Perrott was chaplain, was endowed with lands valued at £3 6s. 8d. annually.”)
HE remains of this chapel are situate in
the parish of Wigginton, and about twothirds of a mile from the parish church of St. Editha, at Tamworth. The plan is of the earliest and simplest type, consisting of a nave, 21 ft. 3 ins. long and
14 ft. 8 ins. wide inside, and a chancel 14 ft. 9 ins. long and 10 ft. 10 ins. wide. Its last use was that of a dwelling-house, and its perversion to that purpose brought about much mischief to the original structure. Its west wall was taken down and substituted by one of bricks, with a fireplace and domestic windows therein. The south and east walls of the chancel were partly taken down and pierced for windows, and the south wall of the nave was broken into for the insertion of a window. The chancel-arch was removed, and the void in its wall made considerably wider. At the present time the chancel is roofless, and the roof of the nave is in bad condition. Notwithstanding all this destruction, there still remains a most interesting little building, bearing its own unerring testimony to its ancient origin and later alterations. Except the west wall, all the others remain very much as they were first built. There is detail sufficient remaining to make it apparent that it was in the Norman period that this little house of
1 The History of Tamworth. By Charles Ferrers Palmer.
prayer was raised. The masonry of its walls, the north doorway, the remaining impost on the line of the spring of the chancel-arch, and the base mould on the north flank, a all clearly indicative of the work of this date. The architectural feature of main interest is the south doorway, which is an insertion of an exquisite early example of the Early English period. The window south of the nave, with its head of two lights and its upper jambs of the right width for them, is also of architectural interest; and not less so is the fact that the wall beneath this window had been in early times converted into a doorway, the jambs and other features of which still remain. At the east end of the chancel the head and jambs and sill of a window of three lights are still preserved, corresponding with the window to the south of the nave; but these windows are later insertions into the early walls. It is probable that the little chapel originally depended for its window light on a few small single openings in each of its walls. The accompanying drawings roughly illustrate the architectural character of the building as it now appears. As an architectural relic of the far past the little building is worthy of appreciation by all who value historic memories.
NOTE. In view of the fact that this Association has made a small grant in aid of the restoration of this valuable relic, we insert the following additional information, kindly supplied by Mr. Lynam.
The ruins are on part of a site recently purchased for building on. The owner of the land and chapel entered upon his building arrangements with the intent of taking down the little ruin, but the interest