THE CASTLE & THE CASTLE ROCK

At the western boundary of Nottingham a perpendicular rock, crowned with the ruins of Nottingham Castle, rises on the north bank of the Leen to a height of 133 feet above the level of the adjacent meadows. The huge eminence is indented to the southward with grottos cut in the stone, and with steps, likewise framed in the living rock, leading thither from the gardens below. The serried crag is swathed in shrubs and wild flowers; on its summit there is a small clump of trees to the eastward, and a more extensive plantations descends its western side. The southern base of the rock is bordered with gardens, while the Leen and the canal, twin streams, flow sluggishly past. Then the meadows, intersected by the railway, stretch away to the Trent in the direction of a broad expanse of country, from any point of which the castle and the castle rock form the finest feature of a noble landscape. Under the west wing of the massive mound reposes the park, one of the lungs of the lace metropolis; on the east side a dense cluster of small houses seek shelter in the shadow of the rock; while on its north side we emerge into a less crowded and more aristocratic section of the town, with airy open streets, which abound in genteel residences, gracing the declivity in the direction of Derby road. There is little to admire in the blank walls of the prematurely ruined castle, but both the rock and its associations are grandly imposing. The modern mansion may convey no idea of the stout old towers which once surmounted the "dolorous hill," yet the lodge so stately in decay and the old bastions which have been spared are the hoary monuments of far distant days. A thousand years look down from the summit of that rock upon the passing pilgrim.

The best historians are united in the opinion that "a strong tower" stood on this rock as early as the eighth century. The first recorded event concerning the castle took place during the wars between the Saxons and the Danes. In 868 the Pagan warriors planted their standard on the towers of Nottingham. In the reign of Edward the Elder we find in a list of the chief fortresses the castle of Nottingham named as one of the strongholds calculated to strengthen Mercia on the northern frontier. It has been conjectured that in 1016 Canute the Dane during his dreadful ravages in Mercia destroyed the castle of Nottingham, as future Saxon historians make no mention of the structure.

The origin of the second castle has been the source of many controversies. Some writers assert that it was built by William the Conqueror; others refer to the fact that Doomsday book makes no allusion to the castle, and thence argue that it was erected by PEVEREL.

CAMDEN says "William the Norman built the castle to bridle the English; and it was so strong by nature and art (according to William NEWBURGH), that if properly defended, it seemed as if nothing but famine could force it." M. Rapin de THOYRAS, in his History of England, states that, after the Conqueror had fortified the castle of Warwick, "he built a citadel at Nottingham." HOLLINSHED and STOW attribute its erection to the king. SMOLLETT asserts that, "as William advanced in his march, he built strong castles at Warwick and Nottingham." THOROTON remarks on the fact that no mention is made in Doomsday book of Nottingham Castle, and elsewhere observes: "When this castle was built I certainly find not, but doubtless it was by PEVEREL." He doubts very much, however, concerning the founder. RASTALL, in his History of the Antiquities of the Town and Church of Southwell, states that William PEVEREL, "who attended the Conqueror to England, built the old Castle of Nottingham. He had the dominion of Nottingham and the Forest of Sherwood, and was possessed of divers manors and princely estates in the neighbourhood thereof."

DEERING thinks that "soon after the Conquest, King William the Conqueror either repaired the ancient fastness, or else built quite a new castle on the same spot where the old tower stood; for history tells us that when Edwyn Earl of Chester, and MORCAR, his brother, Earl of Northumberland, had raised an army in the north and revolted, King William the First drew his forces together with the utmost expedition and marched against them; in his march he fortified the Castle of Warwick; this was A.D. 1068, in the second year of his reign. At this very time he also built the Castle of Nottingham, to secure a retreat in case of necessity and to keep the town in awe." THROSBY says "all writers agree that it was built about the time of the Conquest, or an old castle which stood on this bold rock was then much enlarged and repaired." GIBSON, the continuator of Camden, is of opinion that PEVEREL erected the building.

BLACKNER thinks "it is highly probable that this castle was not built till the latter end of William's reign. And, to free himself from the care of the undertaking, he might commission his son, PEVEREL, to see the work done at his own discretion. He being a military man, and therefore fit for such an undertaking, and also from his possessing fifty-five lordships in the county and being lord of the borough of Nottingham, he would have a particular, as well as a general, interest in keeping the neighbourhood in subjection. And the object not being completed or, possibly, the building not being begun at the time this country was surveyed, may be assigned as the cause why the castle is not mentioned in Doomsday book. These propositions being admitted, the jarring ideas of our historians are at once reconciled; for though William ordered the re-building of the fortress PEVEREL was the ostensible character in the work."

HICKLIN says that, "having established his authority in this part of the kingdom by the erection of a powerful castle, William committed the custody of this important station to the care of William PEVEREL, his natural son." The fact of the castle not being mentioned in Doomsday book has led others erroneously to suppose that is was not built till the reign of Henry I.

 Whether built by the king himself or by his son, we may well believe it was with mingled despair and rage that the Saxon saw the Norman fortalice arise on the summit of that lofty ridge which at once commanded a view of the approaching foe and provided an impregnable asylum for the fortress in days when artillery was unknown. When the Conqueror departed for Lincoln he left a strong garrison under the newly created governor, who doubtless discovered before long the difficulty of subduing the people.

The peerage of England places PEVEREL the elder as the first Earl of Nottingham. CAMDEN says he was appointed "governor of this county, with the title, not of Earl, but Lord of Nottingham." During the reigns of William RUFUS and Henry I., the custodiers of the castle were the first governor and his son, who succeeded to his title and estates. William PEVEREL the elder was an illegitimate son of the Norman monarch by the daughter of INGELRIC, the founder of the church of St. Martin's-le-grand, London. He simply writes himself "William PEVEREL, of Nottingham," a distinction implying his particular connexion with the town and his consequence in it; but he is never called Comes, or even Dominus de Nottingham.

DEERING says that INGELRIC'S anonymous daughter, the mistress of the Conqueror, was given in marriage, by her royal paramour, to one Ranulph PEVEREL, who attended him into England, with the consent of her husband that this son whom she had previously presented to the king should bear the name of PEVEREL also. The more general account is that the wife of Ranulph was the mistress of the king, whose issue by her took the name she then bore. Sir William POLE, in his collection for Devonshire, speaking of the branch which settled in that county, says the name was "PEVERELL or PIPERELL." This does not, however, illustrate its derivation; and Mr. J.R. PLANCHE, of whose paper on "The PEVERELS" we have availed ourselves in this chapter, thinks that like MERCHINUS and similar appellations it had a personal signification, and that it was a corruption of PUERULUS, which is almost identical with PUERULLUS as we find it written in the Anglo-Norman Pipe and Pea Rolls.

William PEVEREL, the first governor of Nottingham Castle, married a lady whom he calls Adelina; and he had issue by her, a son named also William, and other children whom he does not name. Two of these children, were daughters, Matilda and Adeliza. He founded the great monasteries of Lenton and Northampton, which he endowed with a liberal hand, as he well might, being the fortunate holder of 162 lordships in England. He established a court of pleas, and displayed superior ability in all his actions. Finally, full of years and honors, according to the register of St. James's, Northampton, he died the fifth kalends of February, 1113, the thirteenth of Henry I.; Adelina, his widow, surviving him, according to the same authority, only six years. But this is not reconcileable with the fact that in the fifth of King Stephen "Adelina, mother of William PEVEREL, of Nottingham," was pardoned by the king 18s., as appears by the sheriff's account to the Danegeld for the year 1140. The register of St. James's also certifies that Sir William, son of the elder PEVEREL, died in his father's life-time, the date given being the sixteenth kalends of May, 1100, "which," says THOROTON, "cannot be true unless he had another son named William, for I find that William PEVEREL, at the entreaty of his faithful wife Adelina, gave to the monastery of Lenton (at or nigh the foundation) the churches of Hecham and Randon. William PEVEREL, his son, by ill advice, took them away for a long time; but repenting, he, for the love of the worship of God and for the safety of the souls of his said father and mother, by the consent of his heir, William the younger, restored them again." It is by no means improbable that the first William PEVEREL might have had two sons named William. From the Pipe Roll of the fifth of King Stephen, it appears that in that year a William PEVEREL of Nottingham, the son or grandson of the first William, gave account of £23 6s. 8d., of the pleas of the forest, and in the early part of the same king's reign we find in the sovereign's charter to the monks of Lenton mention of William PEVEREL, junior, his wife Oddonda, and his son Henry. In 1141 was fought the battle of Lincoln in which King Stephen was taken prisoner, and with him his firm friend and champion William PEVEREL, who had been one of the leaders at the battle of Northallerton.

The capture of GLOCESTER at Winchester, and the liberation of Stephen from confinement, place PEVEREL once more in possession of his Nottingham honors. When he saw the star of Stephen in the ascendant he at once resolved to regain his lost inheritance; with a band of chosen adherents he entered one of those subterranean passages, all of which had been familiar to him from his boyhood; the garrison was vanquished, and the banner of Ralph PAYNELL, or PAGANEL, to whom this important military station had meanwhile been committed, speedily gave place to that of the proud PEVEREL.

Prince Henry, who came from France to dispute the pretensions of Stephen, besieged and took the castle, which was one of the earliest of his victories, and which was reckoned one of moment , as the building had been frequently selected as the residence of royalty during these contests for the crown. And when the prince became Henry II., he continued to hold Nottingham as a royal station, while many of the finest fortresses in England were destroyed on the ground that they only served as a refuge for those who troubled the state. One of his earliest acts was to disinherit William PEVEREL, the staunch supporter of his old rival Stephen, upon the opportune charge of his having conspired with Maud, Countess of Chester, to poison her husband, Earl Ranulph, surnamed GERNONS.

The death of the Earl of Chester in consequence is recorded to have occurred in 1155. How are we to reconcile this with the fact that Henry, before he ascended the throne, gave to the man whom PEVEREL is accused of poisoning the castle and town of Nottingham, and the whole fee of William PEVEREL, unless that individual could clear himself of his wickedness and treason? This document is published at length by Sir Peter LEYCESTER in his Prolegomena. Should we not be justified in believing that PEVEREL was dispossessed of his estates, not for assisting to poison the Earl of Chester - for to that very earl the estates were given - but for "wickedness and treason" generally; in plain words, for supporting Stephen manfully and faithfully against Henry and his mother? "This happened," says DEERING, "the first of Henry II.," and he goes on to state, from CAMDEN and THOROTON (the original of both being Gervase of Dover), "that this William PEVEREL, fearing the rigour of the king, betook himself first to the monastery at Lenton, founded by the elder PEVEREL, and not thinking himself safe there, as Henry was on his journey to York, he quitted the habit he had newly taken upon him and fled. The king seized the major part of his possessions, and amongst others of his castles that of Nottingham, which he first granted to Ranulph, Earl of Chester (the dead man!), but soon afterwards had that and the rest of PEVEREL's lands in his own possession again, and kept them in his hands for a considerable number of years."

One of the obnoxious chieftains whose estates were given to the Earl of Chester, by Henry, at the same time with those of PEVEREL, was Robert Fitz OOTH - the presumed historical original of the popular legendary hero, Robin HOOD. CAMDEN makes the supposed murderer of Ranulph the grandson of the first William PEVEREL. DEERING makes the first PEVEREL fight at the battle of Lincoln, an interval of seventy-three years having elapsed between his appointment to the custody of the castle and that event; so that, were this true, he must have been a hundred years old when he fought in the royalist ranks. It is remarkable that DEERING's blunder should have led many succeeding writers astray. We incline to the opinion that it was a grandson of the first PEVEREL who rendered such signal service to Stephen.

In 1174 the Earl of FERRES and Derby, with other powerful lords, came to Nottingham on behalf of a young Henry, son of Henry II., and took the castle from Richard de LUCY, whom the king had appointed guardian of the realm during his absence in Normandy. This un-natural state of things, fortunately, did not exist long, and three years afterwards we find Henry II., holding a great council at Nottingham, which no doubt assembled in the castle. From the beginning of the reign of Henry II., according to THOROTON, Nottingham Castle "hath for the most part belonged to the crown, neither is there any place anything so far distant from London that I know of in all England, which hath so often given entertainment and residence to the kings and queens of this realm since the Norman conquest."

In 1194 Richard Coeur de LION personally besieged this fortress, which, with the whole estate of PEVEREL and six earldoms including that of Nottingham, he had, previous to his expedition to the Holy Land, bestowed on his ungrateful and perfidious brother John. Roger de HOVEDEN thus describes the siege: "Earl David, brother of the King of Scotland, and Ranulph, Earl of Chester, and Earl de FERRES besieged Nottingham Castle with a large army. The commanders who were in the castle did not send any person to the king, who, on that account being enraged, came to Nottingham on Friday, the day of the Annunciation, with such a great multitude of men, and so much noise of trumpets and horns, that those who were in the castle, hearing and seeing these things, were astonished, alarmed, and disturbed. Terror seized them, yet they could not believe that the king was present, but supposed that this was done by the commanders of the army to deceive them. The king took his station so near the castle, that the archers from it shot the men that were at his feet.

Upon this the king, in anger, armed himself, and with his forces commenced an attack upon the fortifications. A severe conflict took place, and many fell slain or wounded on both sides, the king himself killing a soldier with an arrow. Richard prevailed in the engagement, and, having forced the garrison back into the castle, took some of the out-works which had been erected, and burnt the exterior gates of the fortifications. Hubert, Archbishop of Canterbury, arrived the same day. On the 26^th of March the King of England ordered machines to be made for an assault upon the castle, and determined not to make any more attacks until they should be completed; he also ordered a gallows to be erected near the fortifications, on which some of the servants of Earl John, taken on the outside of the castle, were hanged.

On the 27^th of March Hugh, Bishop of Durham, and those who were with him at the siege of the Castle of Tickhill, came to the king at Nottingham, bringing with them the prisoners who were taken in that castle. The king went out to meet them: when the bishop perceived his approach, he descended from his horse; the king also dismounted, and on their meeting kissed him; they then got upon their horses and proceeded to the siege. On the same day, when the king was at dinner, Ralph MURDOC and William de WENDEVAL, the constables of the castle, sent two of their companions to see the king. On their return to the castle they informed them what they had seen of the king and his attendants. When William de WENDEVAL and Roger de MUNTBEGUM had heard their report they left the castle along with twelve others, and threw themselves on the king's mercy, not returning again. On the 28^th of March, through the mediation of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Ralph MURDOC, Philip de WORCESTER, and Ralph de WORCESTER, his brother, along with the rest of the garrison, surrendered the castle and delivered themselves up to the king's mercy, for their lives, members, and estates. On the 28^th of March the king went to see Clipston and the Forest of Sherwood for the first time, and was much pleased with them; he returned to Nottingham the same day.

On Wednesday, the 30^th of March, Richard, King of England, held his first day's council there; there were present at it, Eleanor, his mother, the Archbishop of Canterbury, who sat on his right hand; Geoffrey, Archbishop of York, the Bishop of Durham, William, Bishop of Ely (the king's chancellor), William, Bishop of Hereford, Henry, Bishop of Worcester, Henry, Bishop of Exeter, John, Bishop of Camdida Casa, in Scotland, Earl David, brother to the King of Scotland. The council sat three days."

Previous to the above siege the castle had been wrested from John by the king's regents, who were suspicious of the intentions of the prince; but the traitor unfortunately regained possession of the fortress. This was in 1193.

When he became king, John spent much of his time in this castle. In the sixth year of his reign he commanded Reginald de CLIFTON to deliver the castle to Robert de VETERIPONTE. Here he held his court in all the pride of regal pomp; here, in the earlier days of his reign, he rested from the chace, to which he was passionately attached; here he murdered twenty-eight Welch hostages; to this stronghold he marched an army to overawe the barons, a design which he did not accomplish; here, towards the close of his reign, with Runneymede ringing in his ears, he shut himself up with a small band of foreign archers; and here, till the day of his wretched death, did his mistrustful eye seek an asylum when dangers lurked around his throne.

In the reign of Henry III., Ralph FITZ-NICHOLAS was warden of the castle, for which he received a yearly salary of fifty marks. In the battle of Lewes, which took place in 1263, between Henry III., and the barons, William BARDOLPH, governor of Nottingham Castle, fought in the ranks of the monarch and was taken captive. In 1265 Henry Hugh de DISPENSER was appointed custodier of the castle by the confederated barons. After the battle of Evesham Henry committed to his son Edward the castle of Nottingham along with four others "as hostages for five years." During the whole of Henry's lengthened reign the castle was regarded with great interest by the royalists. In 1272 a postern was erected in the town wall near the castle, by the king's command; and from this postern, which joined the outer wall of the castle, a bridge was thrown over the ditch, which ran northward by the side of the town wall to Chapel bar, on the tract of land formerly called Butt dyke, now Park row.

Edward I., on his way to and from Scotland during his protracted wars with the unconquerable people of that country, frequently sojourned for a while at Nottingham castle. In the sixth year of his reign Reginald de GREY was governor of the castle: he stood high in the royal favor, and assisted Prince Edward in governing the realm during the king's absence. From this governor descended the hapless and lovely Lady Jane GREY.

In the following reign, the royal banner waving from the turrets told the denizens of the district that the imbecile Edward II., kept court in the fortress favored by his father. On his accession he appointed John SEGRAVE, a rebellious baron in the time of Henry III., governor of Nottingham Castle and justice of all the forests north of the Trent; subsequently SEGRAVE became warden of all Scotland, and afterwards was taken prisoner at Bannockburn. In the fourth year of his reign the weak monarch conferred the office of constable of the castle upon Piers GAVESTON, the Gascon favorite, who was soon destined on the scaffold to pay the penalty of being pampered by a king.

At the termination of the Scottish wars Edward and his queen, according to FROISSART "one of the fairest ladies of the world," resided chiefly at Nottingham. The voluptuous and inconstant Isabella preserved a liking for the castle, even after the enterprising Roger de MORTIMER had supplanted the king in her favor. Here, after the deposition and murder of her wretched husband, she resided with her paramour till the termination of his inglorious career. The fortress was jealously protected by the guilty pair; a guard was kept, suited for safety as well as state; and every night the keys of the castle were delivered into the hands of MORTIMER, some historians say into the hands of the queen. The last appointment to the command of the castle, before the deposition of the king, was that of Richard de GREY, of Codnor, a nobleman who had rendered valuable services to his country.

The youthful Edward III., now in his eighteenth year, was justly indignant at the conduct of the queen-mother and her favorite, and, having assembled the court and parliament at Nottingham, he issued warrants on the 20^th October, 1330, for the apprehension of MORTIMER, now Earl of March, Sir Oliver de INGHAM, and Sir Simon de BEREFORD. The plot being nearly ripe, it was found that the inaccessible nature of the rock and the vigilance of the guards would prevent the accomplishment of the king's design, unless he gained over the deputy constable.

This plan was at once tested, and one of the old chronicles has quaintly described the interview with that functionary: "And in hast ther came unto kyng Edw. Sir William MONTAGUE, that he was in his castell and pryvelyche told him, that he ne none of his companions shulde not take the MORTIMER without counsaile and helpe of William ELAND, constabill of the same castell. Now certis quod kyng Edward I love you full well, and therefor I counsaill you that ye goo unto the saide constabill, and commanunde him in my name that he be your friende and your helper for to take the MORTIMER, all things left uppon peyne of lyfe and lymmbe. Sir quod MONTAGUE my lorde graunte mercye. Tho went for the saide MONTAGUE and came to the constabill of the castell and told him the kyng's wille, and he answered, they kyng's wille shulde be done in all that he myght, and he wolde not spare for no manner of deth and so he swhore and made his othe. Tho saide Sir William MONTAGUE to the constabill in herynge of all them that were helpyng to the quarrel. Now certis dere ffrendes us behoveth for to worche and done by your Queyntyse to take the MORTIMER, sith ye be the keeper of the castell and have the kayes in your warde. Sir quod the constabill woll ye understand that the yats of the castell beth loken with lokys, and queen Isabell sent hidder by night for the kayes thereof, and they be layde under the chemsell of her beddis hede unto the morrow, and so I may not come into the castell by the yats no manner of wyse, but yet I know another weye by an aley that stretchith oute of the ward under the earthe into the castell that goeth into the west, which aley queen Isabell, ne none of her meayne, ne the MORTIMER ne none of his companye knowith it not, and so I shall lede you through the aley, and so ye shall come into the castell without spyes of any man that beth your enemies."

The castle was entered on the night of the Friday after the feast of St. Luke. The king proceeded at the dead hour of midnight through a subterranean passage in the rock, and came into his mother's apartment accompanied by Sir William MONTACUTE, subsequently Earl of Salisbury, Sir Humprey de BOHUN, Sir Edward and Sir William his brothers, Sir Ralph de SNAFFORD, Sir William de CLINTON, Sir John de NEVILL of Hornby, Sir William ELAND, the deputy constable, and others "all bent to loose their lives in his service."

In a chamber adjoining the queen's apartment they found her paramour in deep consultation with the Bishop of Lincoln and others of his party. He was instantly apprehended, notwithstanding the cries and entreaties of the queen, and unceremoniously hurried down the subterranean passage by which the party had entered. "Befitz, bel fitz, ayez pittie du gentile MORTIMER." "Now, fair sirs, I pray you that you do no harm to his body, for he is a worthy knight, our well-beloved friend and our dear cousin." Such were the intercessions of the guilty queen.

Two of the castle guards, Sir Hugh TURPLINGTON and Sir Richard (or John) MONMOUTH, having less respect for the king's presence than their companions, resisted, but they were at once killed. So admirably was the stratagem achieved that no murmur woke the guard pacing the ramparts of the tower, and the town slumbered in profound unconsciousness of the enterprise, of which the people only knew at the dawn of day, when the arrest of MORTIMER's sons and the profligate earl's adherents told that kingly authority had at length deprived the royal adultress of her paramour and the realm of a tyrant.

HOLLINSHED, in describing the event, affirms that "Sir Roger MORTIMER, the earle of March, was apprehended the seventeenth day of October within the castell of Nottingham, where the king with the two queens, his mother and his wife, and diveres others were as then lodged." The same chronicler observes: "But whosoever was glad or sorie for the trouble of the said earle, suerlie the queene mother took it most heaulie aboue all other, as she had loued him more (as the fame went) than stood well with her honour. For, as some write, she was found to be with child by him. They kept at it were house togither, for the earle to haue his prouision the better cheape, laid his penie with hirs, so that hir takers serued him as well as they did hir both of vittels & carriages. Of which misysage (all regard to honour and estimation neglected) euerie subject spake shame. For their manner of dealing, tending to such euill purposes as they continuallie thought vpon, could not be secret from the eies of the people. And their offence heerein was so much the more heinous, bicause they were persons of an extraordinarie degree, and were the more narrowlie marked of the multitude or common people, --- (the page at this point is damaged, but there is a three line Latin (I think) piece of poetry. I shall put down what I can see, putting … for the words I cannot read.)

BAKER, in his Chronicle, says that when the party came to the queen's chamber they left the king without, and entering "found the queen with MORTIMER, ready to go to bed." MORTIMER was executed at Tyburn on the 19^th of November, while the queen received an allowance of a thousand pounds a year, and was appointed to reside "in a certain place, and not to go elsewhere abroad; yet the king to comfort her would lightlie everie once come to visit hir."

Page Design © Sue Kay 1999