Barnwell Castle - Part 2 Journal 2020-21REV4... · 2020. 11. 29. · ¹⁰ J Harvey, Henry Yevele. The Life of an. THE CASTLE STUDIES GROUP 286 JOURNAL NO. 34 land from Ramsey Abbey.⁶

285THE CASTLE STUDIES GROUP JOURNAL NO. 34

Barnwell Castle - Part 2Brian Giggins

The first part of this article in volume 32 ofthe Castle Studies Group Journal, mainlycovered the first decade of the castle’shistory when it was owned by Berenger leMoyne. This article looks at the castle’slater history and its relationship to the fourstructures that make up the present mano-rial complex: The Manor or LordshipHouse, the stables, barn and well (fig. 1).History from 1276The sale of Berenger’s estates to RamseyAbbey (Benedictine) in 1276¹ saw the role ofthis small castle change to monastic owner-ship. Berenger had obtained consent to holda market in the adjoining village of BarnwellSt Andrew, which was also acquired by the

abbot. When the Abbot renewed the Barn-well Market Charter in 1278, he lost the rightto hold one of the two weekly markets butretained the right to hold a six-day fair.² Inthe following year, the Abbot of Peterbor-ough disputed the right to hold the marketwhich resulted in it being discontinued and aloss of revenue to Ramsey Abbey.³Ramsey Abbey appears to have let part ofBerenger’s Barnwell holdings to William LeMoyne, as he acted as a guarantor in a 1287court case.⁴ In 1294, William, along withThomas Warwick, undertook the Abbey’srequired service in the King’s Gascony cam-paign in respect of the lands formerly heldby Berenger. Both men were described asesquires rather than knights.⁵ William mayhave been the son of William le Moyne ofGreat Raveley, Huntingdon, who also held

Fig. 1. Aerial photograph from the east taken in 2019 showing the road and brook to the left, theManor House bottom left and the courtyard with the stable block and medieval barn to the bottomright. The well is situated between the stable block and medieval barn on the far side of the singlestorey later stable block. The approach to the castle gatehouse is on a similar alignment to thatshown on the 1718 estate map. © T Howard.

Barnwell Castle - Part 2

¹⁰ J Harvey, Henry Yevele. The Life of an


land from Ramsey Abbey.⁶ What relation-ship there was between Berenger and theGreat Raveley branches of the le Moynefamily has not been established but Ber-enger and William le Moyne were two ofthree witnesses to a document betweenRichard le Porter and Ramsey Abbey, inwhich they are both described as knights.⁷Two years after that there was anotherWilliam Le Moyne who was rector of theparish church.⁸

During the following two centuries there areno direct references to the castle, but theAbbey’s wardens in Barnwell are recorded;these were brother John Tychesmarch, 1404,⁹Thomas Sutton, 1499-1500,¹⁰ John Alcumbury1519,¹¹ and brother William Holywell, 1533.¹²The lands in and around Barnwell acquiredfrom Berenger le Moyne are likely to haveformed one of the abbey’s agrarian granges.The Abbey had another grange at Cranfield inBedfordshire which is recorded as having ahall, chapel, hospice, kitchen and larder plusgranaries, barns, store houses, dairy, cattlesheds and a dovecote, arranged around agated courtyard.¹³ It is probable that theground-floor chambers in the castle’s turretswere converted to some of these roles. Onewas certainly used for worship in the 14thcentury as it still retains fragments of medievalreligious wall paintings.

Central to the role of monastic granges wasthe medieval barn, where the crops producedon the grange and any collected tithes fromthe Abbey’s tenants could be stored. A shortdistance to the east of Barnwell castle’snorth-east turret is a stone barn with a Colly-weston stone-slated roof, which is a partial17th-century rebuilding of a 13th- or early14th-century aisled-barn. This would havelain to the east of the putative castle ditch.There is the possibility that the barn wasconstructed for Berenger le Moyne, but it is

more likely to have been constructed forRamsey Abbey as it would have been aliability for the defence of the castle.

Edward Montagu is recorded as the Abbey’ssteward of Barnwell in 1520.¹⁴ EdwardMontagu was a London lawyer whose fatherlived in Hemington which is the next villageto Barnwell. He qualified as a barrister,subsequently coming Serjeant-at-Law in1531, was knighted in 1537 and became ChiefJustice of the King’s Bench in 1539.¹⁵ Hisinfluence at court placed him in a goodposition to acquire monastic estates follow-ing their dissolution. Ramsey Abbey wasdissolved in November 1539 and he acquiredthe Barnwell estate, including Barnwellcastle, from Henry VIII in 1540.¹⁶ Montaguhad inherited Hemington in 1516 and pur-chased a manor at Boughton in 1528, whichhe used as his principal residence.¹⁷ Theantiquarian, John Leland, gives us a descrip-tion of the castle of this time:

‘At this village remaine yet 4 strong towers,part of Berengarius Moyne’s castel, afterlongging to Ramesey Abbey, and now toMonteacute. Withyn the ruins of this castelis a meane house of a fermar’.¹⁸

In 1548, Sir Edward increased his land hold-ings in the area by acquiring the adjacentmanor of Barnwell All Saints. He died in 1557.William Camden’s account of Barnwell whichwas written sometime between 1577 and1586, states that near adjoining Oundlestands Barnwell,

‘a little castle which now of late Sir EdwardMont-acute (of the ancient family of Monta-cute’s as appears by their coats of armsthereon) hath of late repaired and beautifiedwith new buildings’.¹⁹

This was written whilst the second Sir EdwardMontagu (1532-1602) owned the land.Camden wrote ‘Britannia’ in Latin and the



transcription appears to be uncertain in statingwhether the new buildings were constructedby the second Sir Edward Montagu or his father.

By 1588, Sir Edward Montagu was occasion-ally residing in Barnwell as well as his principalresidence at Boughton.²⁰ When he died in1602, he left his wife Elisabeth ‘all my house-hold stuff in my Castell of Barnewelle’.²¹ It ispossible that his wife had a life interest in theproperty until her death four years later.²²The third Edward Montagu, 1st BaronMontagu (1562-1644) was MP for Brackleyand had been captain of the Northampton-shire militia since 1587. In 1602 he was madeCommander of the Northamptonshire Musterand in 1608, Barnwell castle was used for thestorage of gunpowder and match broughtfrom London. In 1614 six barrels of gunpow-der, two cwt. of cavalier shot and two cwt ofmusket shot was taken to the castle.²³ Thisrole as a temporary arsenal for the militiacontinued until at least 1617. Letters showthat Sir Edward Montagu was at Barnwell in1615, 1618, 1628, and 1630. During 1618 SirEdward was building a terrace in the gardensof Barnwell which was probably part of a largelandscaping scheme²⁴ and building pro-gramme. His son, Edward, lived at Barnwellin the 1620s and moved to Hinchinbrook in1642.²⁵ During 1641, Frances, daughter of SirEdward, married John Manners, the futureEarl of Rutland, at the castle.²⁶

At the start of the Civil War, Edward, 1st BaronMontagu was an elderly man but still involvedin the country’s politics as a member of theHouse of Lords. Although considered to be amoderate puritan, he did support the King’srule and had considerable influence in North-amptonshire. His local influence and supportfor the King put him on a collision course withthe Long Parliament which had him impris-oned in the Tower of London in 1642.Because of his ill health he was permitted to

move to his house in the Savoy area ofLondon, where he died in June 1644 leavinghis wife, Ann, the castle at Barnwell.²⁷

It must have been in the following year thatthe Parliamentarian forces took the castle, asthere was an order by the 2nd Earl of Man-chester dated the 2ⁿd May 1645 telling sol-diers not to remove the goods of Ann, LadyMontagu,²⁸ who appears to have been inresidence at the time . In an undated letterfrom Ann to her stepson, William, 2nd BaronMontagu, she wrote:

‘Taking of Barnwell Castle has much troubledthem. Taken Monday, by Captain Candilor,soldiers unruly, Powder fired and killed one oftheir men. Blown out all the windows in thehall…. All the beds spoilt. Left regiments ofcattle behind. Captain said the tenants wererogues and knaves, which caused the soldiersto do as they did. It is God’s will, so let us notset our affections on earthly things but let usundergo with patience that which God layethupon us’.²⁹

It would be expected that some powder wasstored at the castle for hunting game and thecattle referred to may have been some ofthose taken from local farmers for use by thegarrison. The occupation by the Parliamen-tary forces must have been short as CharlesI was reported to have stayed at Barnwellwhilst on his way to Bedford in August 1645.³⁰

Edward’s son, Edward, who was MP forHuntingdon, took his father’s place at theHouse of Lords. During the Civil War he tookthe Parliamentarian side.³¹ In 1647 he wasamongst the party that received Charles Ifrom the Scots and conducted him to Hold-enby where the King was to be held.³² Theresidence that he had at Barnwell was ratedat 37 hearths in 1662,³³ indicating that hishouse was of considerable size. He died in1684 and his estate was inherited by hissecond son, Ralph Montagu (1638-1709), as



his first son, Edward (1635-1665) had died onthe Revenge in a sea battle with the Dutchnear Bergen, Norway.³⁴

Ralph Montagu’s career as an ambassador inthe second half of the 17th century broughthim into contact with, and take in an interestin, European architecture and gardens. In 1675he employed Robert Hook to design MontaguHouse, a grand town house in Bloomsbury andin 1685 concentrated his energies on BoughtonHouse, having spent three years in exile inFrance. Barnwell might have become his prin-cipal seat but Boughton offered the opportu-nity to create extensive gardens. Hiscommissioned buildings were notable exam-ples of baroque whereas Barnwell was a com-bination of the medieval, Elizabethan andJacobean.³⁵ In 1692, Montagu married Eliza-beth, widow of the Duke of Albemarle, whosehusband amassed a small fortune as Lieuten-ant Governor in Jamaica which passed toElizabeth in 1688.³⁶

Ralph’s decision to demolish the Elizabethanand Jacobean additions at Barnwell wasreferred to in 1748 when the Duke of Buc-cleuch told William Stukeley that he lamentedthat his father (Ralph Montagu) had pulledthe castle down. It is probable that some ofthe paintings, furniture, and early fireplacesnow at Boughton House came from thedemolished section of Barnwell castle. Clearlyit was not the expense of maintaining Barn-well which prompted the decision to do thisbut status. Ralph was made an earl in 1689and entertained William III at Boughton in1705.

Evidence of the destruction of the mansionwithin the castle and the development of thepresent Manor House, can be found in thesurviving Montagu Estate Books housed atNorthamptonshire Record Office, which com-mence in 1701. During October the old brew-house was demolished and a new one was in

the process of being built, with Francis Colesassisting the masons and demolishing wallsand carrying off stones for use on the high-ways. Improvements were also being carriedout in the gardens with the widening of thecanal. In 1704 the Collyweston slate roofswere being repaired at the Lordship House,castle, barn, and stables. The Lordship Housereferred to was probably the manor house atBarnwell All Saints, which the Montagu’s alsoowned.³⁷ The accounts for 1707 includedpayment for a sundial at the castle and a fishtrunk from Benjamin Staples at Oundle.³⁸ Thisitem may have been used temporarily to storefish netted in the canal that formed part of thegardens. These works indicate that RalphMontagu continued to see that the castle sitestill had a functioning role within his estate asa cadet manor for the use of members of thefamily or as a source of income. The distancebetween Barnwell castle and Boughton Houseis approximately 13 miles and so it was com-paratively easy to get to by horse or carriage.The old castle ruins and new manor house mayhave become an attractive destination forvisitors to Boughton House.

If the 1716 estate map is correct, it wouldindicate that demolition of the old mansion hadbeen completed by that date and that theputative entrance lodge had been extended tocreate the present frontage of the Manor Housewith its three gables (fig. 2). There can be littledoubt that the 2nd Duke of Montagu was keento preserve the castle ruins as in September1723 he ordered :

‘that the tops of the walls of the said castle berepaired and made even, and the same coveredwith thatch to prevent the rain getting in andspoiling the wall, and that such cracks as are inany part of the said wall be filled up with flintsand mortar’.³⁹

These works would have removed any evidencefor crenellations which is reflected in the print



of the ‘South View of Barnwell Castle’ that theBuck brothers published in 1729. This is actuallya west view and shows the castle little differentfrom today, being a roofless ruin.

The Montagu estate records show that in1728 the Castle Yard, House and stables werebeing rented out,⁴⁰ but In 1729 the Montaguestate was still undertaking repair works tothe house; these included making wainscotfor the Castle parlour.⁴¹ Between 1735 and1738 the estate was demolishing the LordshipHouse in the adjacent village of Barnwell AllSaints and possibly using the stone to buildan east range to the present Manor House.⁴²In 1741 the kitchen of the Castle House wasimproved by the installation of a smokejack.⁴³As the antiquarian, William Stukeley, wasdined at the castle by the 2nd Duke ofMontagu in 1748, it indicates how the family’sinterest in Barnwell was retained until thisdate. It was at this meal that the Duke stated

his regret that the castle had been pulleddown by his father.⁴⁴

In 1749, the Duke died, and his estates wereinherited by his daughter Mary, who hadmarried the 4th Earl of Cardigan, whoseestate was at Deene in Northamptonshire.On his death in 1790 the Barnwell estatepassed to his grandson, Lord Henry Scott andremained with this family until 1913, when itwas sold to Horace Czarnikow who extendedthe house to the north and laid out thegardens. In 1920 it was sold to Mrs Bain-bridge of Kirtlington Hall who marriedWilliam McGrath⁴⁵ and in about 1928 to ColinCooper, who added a swimming pool andkennels for a pack of harriers.⁴⁶ He died in1938 and the Barnwell estate was purchasedby the Duke of Gloucester, whose wife wasAlice Montagu Douglas Scott and a descend-ent the Montagu’s who formerly owned theproperty.

Fig. 2. Copied extract of a section of ‘A map of the Lordship of Barnwell near Oundle in the Countyof Northamptonshire belonging to his Grace John Duke of Montagu Surveyed by Jno Booth AnnoDom: 1716’, showing the castle and Castle House. Original at Boughton House, Northamptonshire’.



The castle structural evidence: RamseyAbbey ownership (1275 – 1540)

During 1982, occupational evidence for theRamsey Abbey period was discovered in thenorth guardroom of the gatehouse (fig. 3).Traces of a thin layer of plaster were foundadhering to the better-quality stonework andsome of these retained traces of medievalwall painting. All four walls of the chamberand some arrow slit embrasures werepainted with horizontal and vertical crimsonlines approximately 10 mm deep to give theimpression of ashlar-stonework in 15 to 17cm courses. At a height of approximately2.1m, was a frieze approximately 11 cm deepcomprising five or six rows of interlinkinglight red scrolls. A few patches of scrolls werealso seen on one of the ribs of the vaulting(fig. 4) and it is possible that all the vaultingin the east end of the chamber was treated

in this way. On the west-side of the north-east arrow slit, was a wall-painting of part ofa figure with a bearded head and nimbus(halo) which had a single finger of the figure’sright hand elevated to suggest admonition;⁴⁷this is defined as a gentle or friendly reproofor a warning against fault or oversight.⁴⁸ Thecolours used were crimson for the vestment,red lines on a yellow background for thebeard, light red for the outline of the mouthand nose and outer edge of the nimbus,blue-black for the interior of the nimbus andblack for the outline of the vestments andhand (fig. 5). The left hand of the figure helda nimbus that was 21 cm in diameter andoutlined in black. Unfortunately, the plastershowing what was contained within thenimbus was lost, graffiti showing that this losshappened before 1892.

Fig. 3. Gatehouse north turret in 1980. The ground floor of this turret was used in the 14th centuryas a chapel. The arrow-slit openings were glazed and fragments of plaster adhering to the wall showthat it was decorated with wall paintings that included religious figures.



Between the east and north-east arrow slitembrasures was a small portion of the rightside of a figure wearing a blue-black gownwith two folds revealing a ruddy-brown lining.Within the body of the figure were fainttraces of crimson paint. Immediately under-neath this figure and forming a base for it,was a small section of frieze 10 cm by 6 cmcomprising rows of crimson coils on a cream-coloured background. This may indicate thatthere were four figures painted on the inte-rior of the apsidal end of the chamber.

The late Clive Rouse MBE, FSA, FRSA, a special-ist in medieval wall paintings, considered thatthe masonry pattern formed by single linessuggested a late 13th or early 14th centurydate and that there was insufficient survivingto hazard a guess which religious figures wererepresented.⁴⁹ The decoration of this chambersuggests a religious use during the time thesite was controlled by Ramsey Abbey. Cut intothe capitals taking the central arch of thechambers vaulting, are two notches suggest-ing that a small beam spanned between themwhich could have been the top-rail of a screen

dividing off the apsidal end of the formerguardroom chamber. The lack of a piscina oraumbry built into the walls suggests that thechamber is unlikely to have been Berenger LeMoyne’s chapel⁵⁰ but it may have been anoratory for the use of the monks overseeingthe grange such as John Tychesmarch, ThomasSutton, John Alcumbury and William Holywell.The arrow slits to this chamber are the onlyones in the castle which have been modifiedto take glazing (fig. 6).

Left: Fig. 4. Vaulting in the north turret of the gatehouse in 1982 showing a small surviving sectionof medieval decoration. Right: Fig. 5. Best surviving section of the medieval wall paintings at theeast end of the north gatehouse chamber in 1982, showing a haloed bearded figure holdingsomething in the right hand that was also painted with a halo.

Fig. 6. Arrow slitof the northchamber of thegatehouse in1980 with holesfor the fixing ofthree horizontalglazing bars andrecess to housethe glazing.



Fig. 7. Medieval aisled barn in 2019 viewed from the south-west. The end gable is predominantly medieval,but the majority of the structure is early 17th century. Inset: Fig. 8. Plan of the medieval aisled barn.

Left: Fig. 9. Lower section of the aisle-post surviving in the north-east corner of the medieval aisledbarn, into which was pegged a short section of aisle tie-beam. A timber brace stiffened the join usingopen-notched lap joints, an early form of joint, known to have been in use from the 12th century.Right: Fig. 10. Detail of the open-notched lap joint used on the medieval aisle-post.



The stone barn that lies to the east of thecastle (fig. 7) which contains a small amountof in-situ medieval timber work, was muchmodified and shortened in the early 17thcentury (fig. 8). It still retains part of the westgable with long narrow air vents and a sectionof a medieval aisle-post left in situ in the eastgable (figs. 9, 10). The Barn must have beenat least 24m long and approximately 11mwide. (fig. 11) Without knowing the originallength of the barn, it is difficult to compare itwith other monastic grange barns such as atBredon, Worcestershire and Great Coxwell,Oxon.

The Montagu mansion period (1540 - circa1680)

Post 1275, the castle underwent a considera-ble alteration as the curtain walls werewidened by approximately one metre on theinternal face, which resulted in all the court-yard entrances to the towers being extended(fig. 12). This new work abutted the originaldoorways, which have two-centered arches,whereas the newly created doorways were ofdressed limestone with segmental semi-circu-lar heads and plain chamfer plus hood-mouldwith mask terminals, like those used on thegatehouses vaulting. These were also used forthe doorway in the wall erected to the rear ofthe gatehouse that reduced the width of theopening into the internal courtyard. Theentrance arch to the north-east turret hasbeen rebuilt without a hood mould. Round-headed openings without hood moulds wereused in the gatehouse for the entrance to theblocked-in stair, an internal wall of the upperfloor and the doorway linking the first floor ofthe gatehouse to the south-east turret. In thenorth-east and north-west turret, they wereused for the entrances to the garderobes onboth floors. There is no evidence to suggestthat the round-headed doorways withouthood-moulds are not contemporary with the

Fig. 11. Isometric reconstruction of the west endof medieval aisled barn.

Fig. 12. Entrance to the north gatehouse turretin 2019. In the foreground is the original 13th

century two-centred arched doorway with recessto secure the drawbar. Beyond that is thelengthened passage and round-headed entrancedoorway of circa 1580.



first phase of the castle.The evidence for thosewith hood-moulds is thatthey are not first phase,despite having mask finialssimilar to those used withthe vaulting.

The round-headed door-ways with hood moulds areassociated with limitingaccess to the courtyard andthe thickening of thecurtain walls. Although itcould be argued that thiswas undertaken tostrengthen the curtain wallsagainst attack by mangonelor cannon fire, this does not fit in with the knownhistory or the restricted access to the courtyard.It would also be an expensive way of wideningthe wall walk as this could have been achievedmuch easier with timber.

Three features suggest that the thickeningwas carried out for the construction of newcourtyard buildings abutting the internal faceof the curtain walls:

1. On the internal face of the east curtain wall,there is an arrangement of large rectangularashlar blocks set within the body of hammer-dressed rubble walls, which suggests the gableend of an internal building with east-west orien-tation abutted the curtain wall.

2. Up until restoration work in 1980, there wasa low recess on the north side of the posternwhich had a timber lintel supporting the wallabove. Supporting this lintel was the end of achamfered beam that would have supporteda floor. At some time, a stone arch had beenconstructed underneath the chamfered beamto stop the wall above collapsing. The writersaw the decayed chamfered beam before itsremoval and considered it to be 17th centuryin date (fig. 13).

3. Built into the wall above the doorway ofthe entrance to the north-west turret is achamfered stone corbel which possibly sup-ported the tie-beam of a roof-truss set diag-onally at the junction of a north and westrange of buildings. The 1728 view of thecastle by the Buck brothers, indicates adoorway above the entrance to the south-west turret which would have led to the firstfloor of a building abutting it.

It is possible that the major re-arrangementof the courtyard buildings implied by thicken-ing of the curtain walls, was undertaken byRamsey Abbey after they had obtained posses-sion of the castle. Unfortunately, the onlystructural evidence for this period are the wallpaintings previously described. The descriptionof the castle by John Leland written in the1540s, immediately after the dissolution of theAbbey, states that Barnwell castle, had fourstrong towers, was ruined and contained the‘mean house’ of a farmer. This suggests thatthe Abbey did not undertake any major build-ing at the castle whilst in their ownership andwere therefore not responsible for the thick-ening of the walls.

Fig. 13. Internal elevation of north end of west curtain wall, showingrear entrance of postern, recess with early beam and entrance tonorth-west turret. Based on RCHM (now Historic England)photogrammetric survey.



The limited evidence therefore suggests thatthe round-headed doorways with hood-moulds, belong to the period when the castleruins were converted into a subsidiary manorhouse for the Montagu family, who had theirprincipal manor at Boughton in Northampton-shire. The decision of the masons to use themedieval mask finials, may have been due toSir Edward Montagu wanting to emphasize hisfamily’s chivalric past, by repeating the use ofsome of the architectural features used in theoriginal castle.

The evidence that the medieval fabric of theformer castle was converted to create accom-modation for the Montagu residence, canbest be seen in the three-storey circularsouth-west tower (fig. 14). Although thebasement still retains its circular plan witharrow slits to provide enfilading fire along thebase of the south and west curtain walls, thisplan is not repeated on the two floors above.

Here, the internal stonework has been cutback radically and re-faced to create a squarechamber lit by two-light stone casement-windows set within large rectangularrecesses (fig. 15). One window survives onthe north side of the upper chamber. This isof two-light construction with a central flat-splay mullion and holes for glazing barsshowing that they were weatherproof (fig.16). The earliest known dated example offlat-splay windows in the region is 1574.⁵¹

Regularly-spaced rectangular holes built intothe stonework between the cellar and the firstfloor indicate that the floor in-between thesechambers was supported on timber joists builtinto the walls. This form of floor constructionwas repeated between the first and secondfloors. The chambers on the first and secondfloors had fireplaces built into the west wall;the upper floor retaining the stone fireplacelintel which has a flat four-centred ‘Tudor

Fig. 14. View of south-west turret from the south-east in 2019, showing the location of the survivingstone-mullioned window, and a blocked windowbelow it. Inset: Upper floor plan (see fig. 23)

Fig. 15. 2019 internal view of the windows of thesouth-west turret shown in fig. 14, showing thedepth of the window recesses.



style’ arch that was fashionable for theperiod 1570-1650,⁵² (fig. 17).

Access to the altered upper floors of thesouth-west turret was from a circular stonestaircase, now very ruined, set at the junctionof the turret and the south curtain wall (fig.18). The staircase starts from the enlargedentrance passage and leads to lobbies oneach floor. This differs from the three othersurviving circular stairs, which are given archi-tectural distinctiveness by being set within‘lobes’ of the turrets. As the lobbies extendinto the width of the thickening of the curtainwalls, they are not original features but arecontemporary with both the wall thickeningand remodelling of the upper floors. Thissuggests that the remodelling of the mainchambers, the staircase and lobbies are con-temporary with the internal thickening of thecurtain walls and all formed part a majorredesign of the castle that occurred in thefourth quarter of the sixteenth century.

Both the upper lobbies have narrow linearchambers leading off them which are formedwithin the thickness of the west curtain wall(fig. 19). Each has a small opening on the outerface to provide light and were probably exca-vated to create close stool chambers. Closestools used by the gentry and aristocracy wereusually upholstered seats containing achamber pot, which are first recorded in the15th century and were replaced by commodesin the 18th century.⁵³ This turret does notcontain any garderobes and so the provisionof close stool closets for two of the mostsignificant chambers within the castle wouldhave been appropriate.

Alterations to the upper chambers of thenorth-west and north-east turrets were lessextensive than those of the south-west turret.Both chambers retained their medieval stairsand garderobe chambers and had a fireplaceand a window inserted to provide improvedlighting. The window in the north-west

Fig. 17. Interior of the south-west tower lookingwest showing fireplaces on the upper floors.


Fig. 16. Close-up of the south-west tower’sstone-mullioned window, circa 1580.


chamber appears to have been sited to get aview over the formal gardens whereas that inthe south-east chamber overlooks the medi-eval barn. It would be expected that theretained arrow-slits were glazed internally butaccess to these has not been obtained toconfirm this. In the north-west turret theconstruction of the fireplace blocked-in oneof the arrow-slit embrasures.

It is likely that the ground floor vaulting of boththese turrets were removed as part of thelate-16th-century works. Each have closely setjoist holes on the first floor and upper sec-tions of the lower chambers and where thevaults were removed are areas of survivingplaster. The close setting of the joists couldindicate that these chambers had plasterfloors. These can occasionally be found in thisarea of Northamptonshire and comprise alayer of laths, straw or reed being laid acrossthe joists which supported a 50 mm thick layerof plaster that formed a level floor surface.⁵⁴Another major alteration was the removal ofthe section of the stonework of the main drumof these tri-lobed turrets where it abutted theadjacent curtain walls and its replacement withangled sections of thinner wall. This createdan additional space to the upper chambers in

the form of a wide shallow recess that couldhave housed the head of a bed. These altera-tions did not make use of the wall thickeningwhich appears to have been retained as a wallwalk.

Parts of this walk can still be seen on the insideface of the east curtain wall (figs. 20, 21). Itgoes north from the gatehouse at first floorlevel for a distance of 3.5m and rises approxi-mately 2.5m, which appears to be the positionof a former stair. The walk then continues ata height of approximately 6.5m above thecourtyard to the rear of the north-east tower,along the north curtain wall and rises againapproximately 1m as it passes at the rear ofthe north-west tower, stopping somewhere


Fig. 18. South-west tower stairwell in 1983,looking south-west. Blocked stair window visible.

Fig 19. South-west tower upper floors lookingnorth-east showing demolished wall separatingthe main chambers from the lobbies and theentrances to the chambers constructed withinthe west curtain wall. Inset: plan - see fig. 23.



Above: Fig. 20. Internal view of the east curtain wall with the gatehouse on the immediate right.The slope marks the position of wall-walk stairs.Below: Fig. 21. North-west turret in 1980, during restoration work.


along the west curtain wall. This was part ofthe late-16th-century alterations and mayhave created a roof-top walk to view thegardens and the surrounding landscape.

Access to this walk was from the northchamber of the gatehouse which containedthe stone staircase from the floor below. Theupper floor level of the gatehouse is difficultto analyse as much of it is covered in vegeta-tion, part of the south chamber is filled witha large water tank that served the ManorHouse and much of the stonework has beenremoved (fig. 22). What does survive are thefront walls and sections of the walls separat-ing the gatehouse south turret from thesouth-east turret and the chamber above the

central passage, both of which retain roundheaded doorways without hood-moulds. Thethree chambers that formed the upper floorof the gatehouse were modernised during theMontagu period as they had wooden case-ment windows inserted (figs. 24, 25) and itcan be seen that a first floor arrow-slit embra-sure in the north chamber was blocked bynew walling. Like the other turrets, no struc-tural improvements appear to have beenundertaken on the ground floor chambers,which does indicate the desire of the familyto emphasise the fact that they were living inan old castle.

The Montagu family’s historic link to the castleappears to have influenced Ralph Montagu’sdecision to demolish only the Elizabethan andJacobean improvements within the castle walls.Within the courtyard these demolition workswere thorough, the only evidence being thethickened curtain walls, the recess adjacent tothe north-west turret previously mentioned andevidence for a building whose gable abutted theeast curtain wall. Whether the narrower sectionof the west curtain wall, rebuilt since the Buckbrothers print of 1729 was drawn, was demol-ished by the orders of Ralph is not known. Itcould be that this was the position of the hallthat had its windows blown out because of thegunpowder accident during the civil war previ-ously mentioned.

Post 1680Although the castle was roofless by 1729, theground-floor chambers either side of thegatehouse chambers retained their vaultedceilings. An embrasure on the ground floorof the north-west chamber was squared offat floor level for the insertion of a 19th-century stove which appears to have had acircular cast-iron flue cut through the arrowslit. The heat generated by the range wassufficient to leave burn marks on the adjacentstonework. A new access for this chamber

Fig. 22. Aerial view of east side of courtyardtaken in 2019, showing upper floor of thegatehouse and south-east turret © T Howard.



was cut through at the junction of thechamber and earlier stair turret so that itlinked through to the pleasure garden and theVictorian walled garden that lies to the north.It is likely to have been used as a workshop orkitchen for the gardeners and must have hadsome sort of roof that has been subsequentlyremoved.The south gatehouse chamber has had exten-sive alterations in the 19th century. A brick floorwas inserted, and the walls rendered approxi-mately two metres in height. This necessitatedthe blocking-in of the lower sections of thearrow-slit embrasures apart from the east one.The vaulted chamber would have kept thischamber cool making it suitable for storing someperishables, such as apples, or game. A 20thcentury modification was the tennis courtwithin the inner bailey, which was constructedfor Colin Cooper sometime after he purchasedthe property in 1923. This is currently used tostore large pieces of architectural salvage,which is part of the stock of the tenant of theManor House.

The Castle Studies Group 2019 conference visitto the castle, allowed the author to photographthe internal upper floors of the castle to comple-ment the photographs taken when researchingthe castle in the 1980s. Using these I haveattempted to create a first-floor plan of thecastle (fig. 23) and what is revealed is how themedieval layout was modified to create ‘apart-ments’ for the Montagu household in the south-west and two northern turrets. It is likely thatthere was also accommodation in the gatehousebut whether this was for a member of the familyor a staff member such as steward, cannot beascertained. How these apartments related tothe plan of the courtyard structures is similarlya problem. Although the tennis courts take upmuch of the eastern side of the courtyard (fig.1) there may be future opportunities for geo-physics to reveal information about the range

of buildings on the western side of the court-yard, the medieval castle ditch and the Eliza-bethan and Jacobean gardens. If this is evercarried out it is probable that much of thisreport will require revision.

Major structures associated with the castle:The Manor House

In 1890, ‘The Builder’ published a drawing of akitchen extension to the Manor House by theNorthamptonshire architects, Gotch and Saun-ders, which includes a small ground plan (fig.27). This shows the southern range compris-ing a corridor, stairs, drawing room and adining room that incorporated a large cantedbay window typical of the late 18th centuryand possibly indicates when this range wasadded.

The early section of the house had a centralporch leading to a hall with a fireplace whichwas not as deep as the rooms on either side.It is noticeable that the wall separating thehall from the north room was at an angle tothe front wall. An inspection of the front ofthe building shows vertical joints separatingthe hall from the other two rooms and thatsills of the stone mullioned windows are atdiffering levels. The likely explanation of thesefeatures is that these rooms were separatedetached buildings and were linked by theconstruction of the hall before 1716.

This suggests the present Manor House devel-oped from a two-storey single building alignedeast to west that now forms the north end ofthe projecting front three bays of the house.This section has ornate gables on the east, westand north sides, the latter being partially hiddenby a later addition (figs. 28, 29). The path east-wards from the castle gatehouse passes equi-distant between this building and the Jacobeanstable block; the 1716 estate plan shows thisalignment continuing eastwards as an avenueof trees. An archaeological watching brief of



Below left: Fig. 24. Upper floor of the gatehouse, north side, taken in in 1980, showing rectangularwindow openings inserted in the Montagu period. Below right: Fig. 25. Upper floor of the gatehouseabove the central passage, taken in in 1980, showing large window opening inserted in the Montaguperiod that would have looked down along the castle approach. Bottom left: Fig. 26. Inside face of eastcurtain wall showing projecting fragment of a wall, plaster and possible traces of a roof scar above.


Fig. 23. Plan of the first floor based on theground floor plan, the RCHMphotogrammetric survey and photographsof the first floor in the author’s possession.


cable trenches in 1984, found the remains of awell-constructed cobbled track on this alignment,just below the turf on the south side of the path(fig. 30). These features suggest that the mostlikely original function of the Manor House wasas an entrance lodge for the main house locatedwithin the castle. Clearly this is not the samebuilding which had 37 hearths in 1662.

The stable blockThis is an eight-bay two storey building withan east-west orientation that lies between theManor House and the Aisled Barn (see fig. 1).It was erected to a high standard with squaredlimestone masonry, fine mortar joints, mul-lioned windows with ovolo mouldings and aCollyweston slate roof. A gateway divides theground floor into a two-bay east end andfive-bay west end. This leads through to alarge yard on the north side which contains arange of late stabling and garages. On theyard side the gateway entrance is plain buton the principal south elevation (the houseside), it has a semi-circular hood mouldingspringing from capitals and at the apex of thearch is a dominant keystone. Pintles andsection of stonework removed from the key-stone shows that at one time inward openinggates were added to what had previously

been an open gateway, the section of thekeystone being removed to house the top ofthe gates.The south elevation was designed to impress(fig. 31). To the west of the archway on theground floor are two pairs of three light stonemullioned windows separated by king-mullionsand surmounted by single hood moulds. To theeast of archways is a single three-light stonemullioned window with hood mould above. Thestring course above these is set above thekeystone of the arch at a comparatively highlevel. Immediately above this string course arethree dormer windows projecting above theeaves that were designed to create an impres-sive façade, each having a pair of four-lightstone transomed and mullioned windows sep-arated by a king-mullion and spanned by asingle hood mould. Each dormer has copingsspringing from kneelers and terminate in ornatefinials. There are two single stack chimneysprojecting above the ridge at the east gable andabove the west side of the arch.

Internally, the gateway passage has ‘Tudor’arched doorways with plain chamfers, one nowpartially blocked and turned into a window, plusone which has a semi-circular head with a broadchamfer. This latter doorway may have been the


Fig. 27. Redrawn plan of ManorHouse published in ‘The Builder’ ofNovember 22 1890.



Fig 28. Drawing showing the west elevation of Manor House.

Left: Fig. 29. Roofscapes showing thedevelopment of the Manor House.Above right: Fig. 30. Part of the cobbled driveleading up to the castle entrance, revealed in 1984

Fig. 31. South elevation of the Stable Block in 1984.


original access to the first floor. No inspection ofthe interior has taken place to assess the roomlayout on either floor.

It would appear that the building has beencalled The Stables since before 1704 whenthere was a reference to the Lordship House,castle, barn and stables having the slatesrepaired. Two years later there was a paymentof £11 4s 7d for repairing the stable windows.⁵⁵It is very likely that the stables occupied theground floor to the west of the gateway pas-sage. What the upper rooms with their impres-sive windows were used for is difficult toestablish. It could be that they were just usedfor the storage of fodder, but they may havebeen rooms where the manorial courts orsimilar activities were held.

There are similarities between the Stable Blockand the putative entrance lodge. Notably con-struction of the of the stone gables facing ontothe main access to the castle, the high stringcourses, and the use of wide ‘king-mullions’ inthe stone mullioned windows. Both are likely tohave been built at the same period. It is likely thatimprovements to the aisled barn also took placeat this time as the west gable of the stable block,south gable of the barn and west gable of theputative entrance lodge have strong similarities.

Robert Taylor of the RCHM visited the site in1987 and noted the use of a triangularmason’s mark on stonework used for theimprovements to the barn which was foundon other high quality building work in North-amptonshire at Apethorpe dated 1622-4,Castle Ashby circa 1630 and Rushton Hallwhich would have been shortly after 1627.⁵⁶These suggest that the Stable Block, putativeentrance lodge and aisled barn improvementswere carried out by Sir Edward Montagu aspart of the works he was known to have carriedout around 1618.⁵⁷ This work included disguis-ing the barn as a ‘polite’ building by the addi-tion of an ornate dormer window and building

stables, so they looked like an impressive outerrange of buildings. These were theatricalembellishments to impress all those visitorsapproaching the castle gatehouse and thegreat hall. It is unfortunate there are no con-temporary illustrations to give an hint of theMontagu buildings that graced the inner court-yard but the quality of the Stable block andBarn improvements give a clue to the qualityof the works which would have been the equalto any of the great houses in the county.

The medieval barn The present building is a six-bay threshingbarn with limestone walls and Collywestontile roof. Both end-gables have parapets withornate stone finials with the west end-gablehaving a central two-light window with ovolomouldings. Its wagon-entrances and threshingfloor occupies the fifth bay from the westend-gable. Half-way along the south lateralwall is a stone gable with a four-light ovolomoulded window and ornate finials projectingabove the eaves (fig. 7). These windows givethe impression that the building is two-storeybut internally there is no evidence that thebuilding ever had an attic floor. There are twomain trusses with collars and tie-beams andthree intermediary trusses with ‘A’ framessupporting double rows of purlins.Apart from the medieval west gable and a thelower section of an aisle-post, the majority ofthe barn is early 17th century and is shown asbeing its present size on the 1716 estate mapbut with an addition abutting the east gable onthe north side which was narrower than thebarn. This addition has since been demolishedand replaced with stabling. Why the fragmentof medieval aisle-post was incorporated intothe gable wall is difficult to explain. It must beassumed that for some reason the builderrequired upright and braced horizontal timberin that location., which suggests an internaldoorway linking the two buildings (fig. 8).



The well-head has a coursed dry-stone-wall(fig. 32). and is capped with the removabletimber cover of some age. The shaft of thewell descends approximately 3 to 4 m whereit meets limestone bedrock. A triangularsump has been cut into this with groundwater flowing over the bedrock and into thesump. A timber at the edge of the sumpprobably marks the location of a pipe for aformer pump (fig. 33). It is impossible to saywhether this was dug in the medieval period,but I would expect it to have been built by, orduring, the Jacobean period.

Acknowledgements

My thanks go to:HRH The Duke of Gloucester and the latePrincess Alice for allowing me to record thecastle ruins.His grace the Duke of Buccleuch and Queens-bury KT for permitting the copying of asection of the 1716 Estate map which hangsin Boughton House. (Fig.2).Nicholas Warliker, the head gardener and PCRichard Cowley, security officer, nowdeceased.English Heritage for kindly providing me withthe drawings from a photogrammetric survey.Glenn Foard, Graham Cadman and MichelleAudoy formerly of Northamptonshire CountyCouncil.Tony Howard for use of his aerial photographsand also for proofreading this article.Crispin Powell, Archivist to the Buccleuch Estate.Neil Guy, CSG Journal editor for his usefulcomments and support.The author has drawn figs 2, 8, 10, 11, 13, 23,27, 28 and 29.

Please note that Barnwell Castle is notopen to the public and views of the castle

from the public highway are limited.

The wellThe only early well known on the site is locatedto the east of the castle between the Jacobeanstable block and the medieval aisled barn. Itformerly must have served the yard that ismarked on the 1716 Estate Map between thesetwo buildings (see fig. 2). The well is too far fromboth the castle and Manor House to haveserved those structures, each of which wouldhave required additional water supplies. It isnow a garden feature having been separatedfrom the yard by a row of buildings shown onthe 1716 map.


Fig. 32. Drystone wall curb of the well.

Fig. 33. Interior of the well showing rock-cutsump and adjacent timber.


Barnwell Castle - Part 2Notes:

¹ W. D. Macray (ed.) Cronicon Abbatiae Rameseinsis(Roos series London,1886) p. 348 n 3.

² Victoria Country History (VCH), 1930, Northampton-shire Vol. 3 p. 74; Cal. Chart, 1257-1300, p. 207

³ VCH Vol. 3 p. 74; Chron Peterborough (Camden Soc.)31-33

⁴ Court Rolls of Ramsey, Hepmangrove, and Bury, 1268–1600

⁵ Frederic William Maitland. Select pleas in manorialand other seignorial courts: Volume I. Reigns ofHenry III and Edward I.

⁶ VCH, Huntingdon vol 2, p. 198⁷ The National Archive: TNA E 40/50⁸ Guide to St Andrew’s Church, Barnwell, 1973⁹ Northants Archive (or/henceforth N. A.): Calendar

of Buccleuch and Exeter Charter Photostats B8.5¹⁰ Northants Archive: Calendar of Buccleuch & Exeter

Charter Photostats C8.3¹¹ Northants. Archive: Calendar of Buccleuch & Exeter

Charter Photostats C6.1¹² Northants Archive: Calendar of Buccleuch & Exeter

Charter Photostats B6.3¹³ http://bedsarchives.bedford.gov.uk/CommunityArchives

/Cranfield/Cranfield-Manor-and-Grange.aspx¹⁴ VCH 3 p. 73; Valor Eccl. (Rec Com.), iv, p. 274;

Buccleuch deeds, c. 5¹⁵ Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (ODBC) https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/19006¹⁶ VCH 3 p. 73; Pat roll. 32 Henry VIII, pt 3, m. 39¹⁷ J. Heward & R. Taylor, 1996, The Country Houses

of Northamptonshire, RCHM, p. 94¹⁸ John Leland’s Itinerary 1543 (Lucy Toulmin-Smith)

(1906-10)¹⁹ C. Hussey, ‘Barnwell Manor, Northamptonshire II’

Country Life, September 17, 1959²⁰ J. J. Goring & J. Wake, 1975, ‘Northamptonshire

Lieutenancy Papers 1580-1614’, Northants RecordSociety Vol. 27

²¹ VCH 3 p. 73; P.C.C. 1 Mountague²² C. A. Markham, 1912, ‘Barnwell castle, Northampton-

shire’ Associated Architectural Societies Reports andPapers Vol 31 pp. 525-538

²³ J. Wake (ed.), 1926, Northants. Musters, Northants.Record. Soc. Vol. 3, p. 9

²⁴ Ralph Winward, 1926 RCHM report on the manu-scripts of Duke of Buccleugh and Queensbury vol. 3.

²⁵ Heward & Taylor, 1996, p. 81²⁶ A. Collins, 1768, The Peerage of England, v. II, p. 23

²⁷ Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (ODBC)https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/19007

²⁸ Northants. Archive: Montagu papers²⁹ Northants. Archive: Montagu, 191³⁰ C. Wise, 1888, The Montagus of Boughton and

their Northamptonshire Homes, p. 23.³¹ Heward & Taylor, 1996, p. 94³² Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (ODNB)

https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/19007³³ Heward & Taylor, 1996 p. 79³⁴ Recorded in Samuel Pepys’ Diary (1660-69)³⁵ Heward & Taylor, 1996 pp. 79-81, 94-109³⁶ https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/

159082436/elizabeth-montagu³⁷ Northants. Archive: Montagu 625³⁸ Northants. Archive: Montagu 628³⁹ Letter from Robert Taylor, RCHM, to the author

dated 25th January 1982 quoting from an orderbook at Boughton House.

⁴⁰ Northants Archive: Montagu Box X388⁴¹ Northants Archive: Montague account vols.

Barnwell estate 659-660⁴² N. A.: Montague account vols. Barnwell estate 670-680⁴³ N. A.: Montague account vols. Barnwell estate 682-683⁴⁴ VCH Northamptonshire, vol 3, 71⁴⁵ Northampton Mercury 16th July 1920⁴⁶ C. Hussey, ‘Barnwell Manor, Northamptonshire

II’, Country Life September 17, 1959⁴⁷ Suggestion by Clive Rouse.⁴⁸ Merriam-Webster dictionary.⁴⁹ Letter from Clive Rouse to Brian Giggins dated

11th Aug. 1982.⁵⁰ VCH 3 p. 71; Buccleuch MS no. 4⁵¹ R. B. Wood-Jones. 1963. Traditional domestic archi-

tecture in the Banbury region. Fig 73. (Wykham BooksReprint - 1986)

⁵² Ibid. pp. 265-274⁵³ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Close_stool⁵⁴ RCHM 1984 County of Northampton Vol VI, Architec-

tural monuments in north Northamptonshire, xlix⁵⁵ N.A.: Montagu account vols. Barnwell estate 625,

627⁵⁶ Letter from Robert Taylor dated 4 March 1987 to

author⁵⁷ Ralph Winward, 1926, RCHM Report on the manu-

scripts of Duke of Buccleuch and Queensbury, vol. 3

Documents

Barnwell Castle - Part 2 Journal 2020-21REV4... · 2020. 11. 29. · ¹⁰ J Harvey, Henry Yevele. The Life of an. THE CASTLE STUDIES GROUP 286 JOURNAL NO. 34 land from Ramsey Abbey.⁶