ror is known to have built are not noticed in the
survey. Among these is the White Tower of London. The site of Rochester
Castle is mentioned. These two buildings are associated by our old
antiquaries as being erected by the same architect. Stow says: "I find
in a fair register-book of the acts of the bishops of Rochester, set
down by Edmund of Hadenham, that William I, surnamed Conqueror, builded
the Tower of London, to wit, the great white and square tower there,
about the year of Christ 1078, appointing Gundulph, then Bishop of
Rochester, to be principal surveyor and overseer of that work, who was
for that time lodged in the house of Edmere, a burghess of London." The
chapel in the White Tower is a remarkable specimen of early Norman
architecture.
The keep of Rochester Castle, so picturesquely situated on the Medway,
was not a mere fortress without domestic convenience. Here we still look
upon the remains of sculptured columns and arches. We see where there
were spacious fireplaces in the walls, and how each of four floors was
served with water by a well. The third story contains the most
ornamental portions of the building. In the _Domesday_ enumeration of
castles, we have repeated mention of houses destroyed and lands wasted,
for their erection. At Cambridge twenty-seven houses are recorded to
have been thus demolished. This was the fortress to overawe the fen
districts. At Lincoln a hundred and sixty-six mansions were destroyed,
"on account of the castle."
In the ruins of all these castles we may trace their general plan. There
were an outer court, an inner court, and a keep. Round the whole area
was a wall, with parapets and loopholes. The entrance was defended by an
outwork or barbacan. The prodigious strength of the keep is the most
remarkable characteristic of these fortresses; and thus many of these
towers remain, stripped of every interior fitting by time, but as
untouched in their solid construction as the mounts upon which they
stand. We ascend the steep steps which lead to the ruined keep of
Carisbrook, with all our historical associations directed to the
confinement of Charles I in this castle. But this fortress was
registered in _Domesday Book_. Five centuries and a half had elapsed
between William I and James I. The Norman keep was out of harmony with
the principles of the seventeenth century, as much as the feudal
prerogatives to which Charles unhappily clung.
We have thus enumerated some of the
|