Sussex Archaeological Collections/Volume 6/On Pevensey Castle, and the Recent Excavations there
Eastern view of the Roman wall - Pevensey Castle
On Pevensey Castle, and the recent excavations there.
By Mark Antony Lower, M.A., F.S.A.
(with a plan of the castle and discoveries,
by William Figg, F.S.A.)
Partly read at the quarterly meeting at Lewes, October 5, 1852.
Among the pleasurable modern uses of this venerable relic of other times, there is one event which has peculiar interest for the originators of the Sussex Archæological Society:—its inauguration, under the happiest auspices, within the walls of this, the oldest structure remaining in the county, on the 9th of July, 1846. It is by no means my object in the present paper to enter upon the history of Pevensey. I have already done so in an essay which was read on the occasion above referred to, and which has subsequently been printed as a brochure, under the title of 'Chronicles of Pevensey.'[1] Fortunately, too, it will not be necessary for me to advance any arguments in proof of the identity of this fortress with the Romano-British city of Anderida—a fact amply proved in a paper in this volume by the Rev. Arthur Hussey. This long and needlessly vexed question has, I think, received its determination; for of all the Roman forts on the line of south-eastern coast, called the Saxon Shore (Littus Saxonicum), only Anderida remained to seek, while at the same time the important and indubitably Roman structure known as Pevensey remained the only one on that coast that was unappropriated to any ancient name. Mr. Hussey has been successful in reuniting the designation and the locality, and no future divorcement of the two can reasonably be apprehended. It will be necessary, however, for the better understanding of the subjoined remarks, to adduce such historical facts as relate to the structure itself—its origin, dilapidations, repairs, and additions—and to give a concise description of its existing features and peculiarities.
The map which accompanies this paper has been carefully prepared from actual survey by Mr. Figg, and, for the first time, presents a trustworthy representation of the ground-plan. The walls coloured red show the Roman portions; while those given in grey represent the medieval additions. The members of our Society, and the subscribers to the Excavation Fund, will know how to appreciate Mr. Figg's gratuitous labour.
The congeries of walls and towers forming what is popularly, though inappropriately, called Pevensey Castle, occupies a slight elevation caused by one of those geological undulations not uncommon in flat and marshy districts. Before the draining of the marsh of Pevensey, and when what is still known as Pevensey Bay was a much deeper watery indent into the line of Sussex coast than at present, several eminences must have appeared above the surrounding waste of waters, forming a cluster of low rounded islands. These are still recognisable by their names, the termination being uniformly ey or eye, a softening of the Anglo-Saxon í or íg, island, morass. Here we find among many others, Hidney, Chilley, Mankseye, Horseye, Northeye, Langney, Rickney, Mountney. Foremost in importance in this little archipelago stood the insulated or peninsulated spot which was seized upon by the Romans as a site for the station which was afterwards known as the Civitas Anderida, and which, after its total destruction (excepting only the external walls) by the Saxons, assumed the name of Peofnesea—probably from some early proprietor called Peofn. A glance at the map will show that the builders of the wall which encloses the Roman station were influenced in their plan by the peculiar form of the ground chosen for a site, and that they followed the outline of the rising ground. In order to make the most of the site, they neglected the rectangular arrangement so usual in Roman castra, and hence the irregular oval and island-like form of the enclosure. At that time the southern and eastern sides doubtless occupied a sort of low cliff, washed at every tide by the waters of the ocean, or at least of a considerable arm of the sea. On the other sides the ground, though not so precipitous, rises more or less from the general level of the surrounding marsh.
The general thickness of the walls is about 12 feet; their height ranges between 24 and 30 feet, and, wherever they remain standing, which is the case throughout about two-thirds of the entire circuit, they retain their original altitude, and present in fact (ivy and occasional scars in the masonry excepted) very much the same appearance as they must have done in the days of Constantine.[2] They are supported and strengthened at irregular intervals by solid buttress towers of peculiar plan, approximating to a semi-circle attached to a square, and of equal height with the intervening walls. They differ somewhat in size, but taking the average of the eleven now standing, they measure (inclusive of the thickness of the wall), 30 feet in depth, by 20 feet in width. They everywhere stand singly, except at the principal entrance on the west, which is flanked by a pair, not only for additional dignity, but also for strength, which seems from the frequency of the occurrence of towers here to have been specially cared for in this part.
The material of the walls is flint, with sea-sand mortar of great strength. The facing is of small squared sand-stones running in regular courses, and ornamented and strengthened at intervals with bonding courses of red tiles; while the joints of the masonry are pointed with mortar, having for one of its ingredients pounded tile, which imparts to it that red tint so characteristic of Roman work. In some places the bonding-courses of tile are only two in number, in others three, while occasionally the deficiency is supplied by another material, a dark brown flag stone. At the tower marked G in the plan, and there only, the tile courses are four in number. The use of tile throughout the whole structure is much more sparingly introduced than at Dover, Richborough, Lymne, and other places. From some excavations carried on in the year 1710, for the purpose of supplying the town of Pevensey with water from the moat of the interior or medieval castle by a channel beneath the Roman walls, it was found that the latter, which were ten feet thick, had rested upon a foundation consisting of piles planked over with slabs of extraordinary substance. Notwithstanding the length of time they had lain in the earth, these timbers exhibited no symptoms of decay, and even the leaves of some brushwood which had been thrown in were found equally well preserved. The external facing stones at the bottom of the walls have everywhere been removed for building purposes. For ages Pevensey Castle served as a quarry for the neighbouring country; and it is only within the last eighteen or twenty years that this almost sacrilegious abuse has been discontinued. Massive but unsightly buttresses of brickwork have been applied for the purpose of remedying the danger which had accrued from this spoliation, and it is to be hoped that henceforward these venerable walls, associated as they are with so much that is grand and interesting in our history, will remain uninjured, at least by human agency. Nature in general deals kindly and tenderly with the works of man, but, alas! how few architectural remains can be said to have been
"Religione patrum multos servata per annos."
Certainly at Pevensey, the ravages of time have been slight compared with those wrought by the hands of man.
The great entrance, or Decuman gate, with its strong weather-worn flanking towers (B and C) is the first object that strikes the eye of the visitor on his approach to the ruins from the west. These towers expand outwardly, and have a south-westerly aspect; the view from within them, embracing the masonry of the entrance itself as a foreground, the venerable church and picturesque village of Westham embowered in trees a little in advance, and the bold background formed by Beachy Head, constitutes a picture which for its varied elements of beauty can hardly be surpassed. Our business, however, is not to dwell upon the picturesque, but to "mark well the bulwarks, and to tell the towers" of this wonderful structure. Leaving the gateway, therefore, and pursuing the external circuit of the walls iii a northerly direction we pass three other towers of similar character. Beyond the third tower the walls take a north-easterly direction and are here undefended for a considerable distance by any such addition. At a distance of about 560 feet from the gateway and 220 from the tower F, we meet with an hiatus almost 200 feet in length where the wall has fallen outwards and lies in massive fragments now overgrown with trees. Another 160 feet bring us to tower G, one of the most perfectly preserved, in the series. This originally measured about 32 feet in height, but an addition made to it in the Norman period raises it to the altitude of about 50 feet. From its position relatively to the medieval castle, and the extensive view which it commands to the north, east, and west, over the marshes and the weald of Sussex, there can be little doubt that it was made use of as a watch-tower. Only the western side of the superimposed work (which is as base in its masonry as the Roman portion is excellent) remains, and this is perforated by a very rude opening with a semi-circular arch turned upon imposts in the Norman fashion. Still following the circuit of the walls by the high road we pass tower H, and making a sudden curve to the south-east arrive at I, which presents some features worthy of observation. This tower was originally of similar workmanship to the rest, with its facing stones and brick bonding courses; but it must have been much dilapidated, apparently by the brunts of war, at an early period, and has undergone extensive patchings and repairs, strongly but not very neatly carried out. The inserted stones are mostly laid herring-bone fashion, and the joints are of ordinary gravel mortar, without any admixture of pounded tile. A few yards more bring us to a postern-gate communicating with a footpath crossing the inner area and with the high street of the town of Pevensey . Just southward of this is tower K, at 120 feet from which the Roman work forms a junction with the medieval castle.[3]
I apply the epithet medieval to this structure in preference to Norman, because, although there is no doubt of a Norman fortress having existed upon the spot, a considerable portion of the existing remains points to a date considerably subsequent to what is recognised as the Norman period — probably to the days of the earlier Edwards. This medieval work is curiously engrafted upon the Roman, as will be seen on reference to the plan. The area is 1 acre, 1 rood, 35 perches. In addition to one Roman tower remaining in the eastern wall, there are five of the subsequent era. The connecting walls, will, I believe, be found to be Norman, and the towers themselves not earlier than the close of the thirteenth century. The great gateway (3) is flanked by two ruinated towers, has an aspect nearly due west, and looks towards the principal entrance of the Roman work from which it is distant nearly 550 feet. Mr. Wright, in the article previously alluded to (Gent. Mag., Aug., 1852), remarks that "in this gateway, and more especially in the external forms of the towers round the castle, the medieval architect imitated the Roman models before him." The arrangements for the portcullis and drawbridge remain very distinct, and the addition of what I will call the Edwardian work to the Norman gate, as originally constructed, is sufficiently distinguishable. The towers, which are in some instances of two, in others of three stories, and the walls 9 feet thick, are constructed of what is locally called Eastbourne stone[4] with immense loop-holes. The lower stories have been vaulted, and the arches of the north-western tower (2) are still almost complete in the circumference of the wall. This is considered with some probability to have been the residence of the governor.
The Roman tower marked M has fallen from its original position and lies or stands (for I do not know which is the better expression), at a considerably inclined angle — the "leaning tower" of Pevensey! Curiously enough, the top of this tower has been made to form, in a way very difficult to describe, the "landing-place" or platform of a sally-port obliquely cut through the Norman work.
It is difficult to contradistinguish by proper terms the Roman fortifications at Pevensey from those of medieval date, although the disparity between the two is obvious to the most incurious observer. It has been customary to call the vast Roman enclosure — in other words the city walls of Anderida — the Base-court; and the Norman and post-Norman work, the Keep. Now in truth the latter is an independent castle complete in all its parts — the enceinte, moat, and other usual accessories of a castle of the middle ages, albeit upon a small scale. The remains of its keep (and a keep within a keep would be an utter absurdity) are still recognisable, upon the elevated though irregular and ill-defined mound on the eastern side of the enclosure (5).
The interval (going west) between the medieval castle and the Roman gateway, at which our topographical survey commenced, is precipitous ground, faces the sea (at the distance of about a mile), and retains upon the surface few traces of ancient masonry of any kind. Until our recent excavations it was always doubted whether any continuous wall had ever existed here, as the natural declivity, defended as it is by water at the base, seemed a sufficient natural fortification. The Roman tower A is in ruins.
To this survey of the existing remains, a few words on the architectural history of Pevensey may be added.
It would be useless to conjecture at what period of the Roman dominion in Britain the station of Anderida rose into importance and was surrounded with walls. From a misconception of a passage in Gildas it has been imagined that Pevensey was one of the forts on the sea-coast which the Romans, on withdrawing their forces, hastily erected for the Britons as a defence against the irruptions of continental barbarians. But whoever but for one moment contemplates this structure with its solid towers and walls twelve feet thick, thirty feet high, and enclosing an area half a mile in circumference, will perceive that it could neither have been a work of haste, nor the undertaking of a people about to abandon a long-possessed province. It has far more the air of having been constructed at a time when the Conquerors of the World were extending and consolidating their dominion in Britain. It bears no marks of haste, but everywhere evinces a well-matured plan and a leisurely execution.
The capture of Anderida by Ælla, the founder of the South Saxon kingdom, is the next historical epoch ; but that the structure itself suffered any considerable damage when its unfortunate occupants fell beneath the seaxes of the invaders seems improbable, considering the simplicity of their military operations. Such buildings as they found suitable for strongholds the Saxon people occupied during war; but they built no castles, — at least none of sufficient strength to have survived till our times. We look therefore in vain amongst the walls of Pevensey for any trace of Saxon building.[5]
At the Norman Conquest Pevensey became the property of the Conqueror's half-brother Robert, Earl of Mortain, and as it was the head of a great barony, there can be no doubt that that potent noble soon fortified the ruinated works by extensive repairs and by the addition of a new castle at the south-eastern corner of the Roman area. To him and to his successors in the barony we may then reasonably assign the medieval fortress. That a castle of considerable strength existed here in those times is evident from the following historical data:
a. d. 1088. The Earl of Mortain and Odo, bishop of Bayeux, held the castle of Pevensey on behalf of Duke Robert. Odo surrendered after a six weeks' siege to William Rufus.
a. d. 1144. Pevensey was held by Henry Fitz-Empress afterwards King Henry II. It was entrusted to Gilbert de Clare, and besieged by Stephen in person, who finding it too strong to he taken by storm, left a body of men before it to reduce it by famine.
a. d. 1216. William 6th Earl of Warenne held Pevensey, but taking part with Louis, Dauphin of France, against King John, the latter ordered him to surrender his castle of Pevensey to Matthew Fitz-Herbert, who was commanded to demolish it. What steps Fitz-Herbert took on the occasion is not recorded.
a. d. 1264. John Earl of Warenne and other barons, basely deserting the standard of King Henry III at the battle of Lewes, took temporary shelter in Pevensey Castle.
a. d. 1265. The castle was held for Henry III by the troops of Peter de Savoy, and besieged by Simon, son of Simon de Montfort, the baronial leader.
After the final seizure of Pevensey Castle by the crown in the thirteenth century, it seems to have been less exposed to the injuries of war. It had, however, already undergone enough; and in 2 Edw. II (a. d. 1309) was reported to be in a very ruinous state. At that date an inquisition was taken at Horsham before John de Foxlee and William Merrè, on the oath of certain jurors of the rape of Pevensey and the hundred of Loxfield, who deposed that the king held in the said rape the castle of Pevensey, — ^that the said castle was dilapidated and badly kept (confractum et male custoditum), and that they did not know how much it could be repaired for. Being asked by whose default the said castle was so overthrown and broken (ita dirutum et confractum), they declared that it was by the default of King Edward, father of our Lord now king, who declined to take any measures for the necessary reparations, although often advised and desired to do so by the sheriff, and the keepers of the said castle.[6]
Out of that Inquisition doubtless arose those repairs so distinguishable in various parts of the castle, and the addition of the great towers 1, 2, 3, 4, which retain many features of this precise period.
a. d. 1399. That ever-to-be-remembered lady, the wife of Sir John Pelham, sustained a siege here, in support of the Lancastrian cause, against the Posse Comitatus of Sussex, Surrey, and Kent. The touching letter written on the occasion by this heroine to her absent lord has been printed by Collins and Hallam, and in my 'Chronicles of Pevensey.' Then and subsequently it must have been a place of great strength, as it was often used as a prison for captives of distinction, among whom may be enumerated King James I of Scotland, circ. 1414; Edward, Duke of York, 1405; and Joan of Navarre, the last queen of Henry IV, 1419. The appointment of Constable of Pevensey Castle with a salary of £22. 16s. 3d. existed so lately as 1553.
a. d. 1587. A survey of the Sussex coast was made with a view to its defence against the threatened Spanish invasion. Against the "Castle of Pevensey" there is a suggestion that it be either "re-edified or utterlye rased;" but, as we know, neither alternative was resorted to.
The subsequent history of Pevensey Castle involves little beyond that which the tooth of time and the pick-axe of the spoiler have inscribed upon its venerable towers.[7]
My friend and colleague, Mr. Charles Roach Smith, F.S.A., M.R.S.L., &c., whose knowledge of Roman antiquities has earned for him a European celebrity, and whose successful researches at Richborough, Reculver, Lymne, and other stations on the "Saxon shore" have qualified him præ ceteris for the undertaking, had long entertained the wish to make excavations at Pevensey.[8] At his instance, therefore, I was induced in the month of July 1852, to apply to the Earl of Burlington, the owner of the castle, for permission to make the desired explorations, and his lordship with his usual urbanity cheerfully acceded to the request. A subscription list was opened, and we soon succeeded in raising funds for the commencement of the work. The Brighton Railway Company also seconded our views by granting to Mr. Smith and myself free conveyance to the scene of operations.
We commenced our labours in the month of August by excavating within the great western gateway of the Roman work. By clearing the incumbent soil (the accumulation of many centuries) we found that the massive flanking towers of this entrance, twenty-eight feet apart, (a in the plan) had originally been connected by a wall, and that this had been pierced by an archway which formed the first porta or entrance. Within this we disclosed the solid foundations more than five feet in thickness, of an apartment of about eighteen feet, the eastern side of which had had an inner arch of entrance 9½ feet wide. The stones are of very large size and somewhat displaced. Fragments of Roman imbrices from the original roof of the gateway were found, together with a third brass coin of Constantine, one of the amulets of Kimmeridge coal so often occurring with Roman remains, and within a yard of it, though at a higher level, a penny of Canute. Two large bases of cylindrical columns of a whitish friable stone were also found. The earth was next removed from a portion of the inner facing of the walls, and the masonry was found to be in a fine state of preservation.
A singular feature presented itself here and in various other places in the course of the excavations. The original floor or area has been covered with a bed of stiff red clay to the depth of five, six, or even eight feet, and this with the debris of the masonry and a superincumbent mass of animal and vegetable matter has so elevated the surface, that the walls, which on the outside are upwards of twenty-five feet high, are at some places internally little more than a breastwork. This applies more particularly to the eastern part of the area, and the only way of accounting for it seems to be that the Normans, when they took possession of the ancient fortification and built their castle within it, found it expedient for some purpose not very obvious to us to elevate the soil. Part of the accumulation may be accounted for by the removal of the earth necessary for the formation of the deep wide moat surrounding the northern and western sides of their work; but there must have been some other and weightier motive for the procedure.
After having developed the interior of the great gateway, we proceeded to excavate the earth in the vicinity of the little postern-gate b. This gate was first noticed by Mr. Roach Smith about two years since. It does not pass at right angles through the wall, but by a singular winding course, obviously for better defence. Nothing of importance was discovered here. The wall from this point in a north-easterly direction for about 200 feet has fallen, whether from some defect in the foundation or from violence we could not form a conjecture. From the end of the fallen wall in the direction of tower G we caused a deep trench to be sunk, disclosing the inner facing of the wall in a good state of preservation, from a thick bed of clay having been laid against it.
The next point examined was the gate c, which fronts the main street of Pevensey, into which it leads by a flight of ten steps. The exterior of this entrance is shown in the accompanying view. From the modern air given to it by a brick archway, it had been doubted whether an ancient gate had existed at this point. Our excavations, coupled with certain appearances above ground, have, however, proved the fact beyond all doubt.
Our attention was next given to an examination of the ground within a short distance of the walls, where some traces of the foundations of houses or other buildings were anticipated. The dotted lines in the plan, represent the trenches made. The results were very inadequate to the labour bestowed, for with the exception of a few Roman coins, minute fragments of Samian and other pottery, tiles, and animal remains, nothing was brought to light. No regular foundations occurred, and it almost follows as a consequence of this, that notwithstanding the great strength of the external walls, the buildings within them must have been of slight and temporary character.
An opening was made at g, to the depth of several feet, through a bed of sand-stone chippings, apparently the refuse of the medieval work. Near the two cannons at h, some trenches were made, and one or two Roman coins were found.[9]
A foolish tradition connects Pevensey Castle with the ancient house in Westham called Priesthawes, by a subterraneous passage. As the two places are between two and three miles apart, so preposterous an idea could not for a moment be entertained; but since an elderly inhabitant of the neighbourhood vouched for the fact of his having in his youth accidentally discovered some kind of passage a few perches to the south-westward of the great gateway, we thought it worth while to examine the ground. The locus in quo is a small field 
belonging to the Rev, John Grace, vicar of Westham, who kindly permitted us to dig there. Openings were therefore made at the point marked i, where at the depth of two feet and a half, we succeeded in exposing a large drain, carefully constructed with large stones, as shown in the annexed woodcut. It runs about north-west and south-east, but of its purpose, or the period of its construction, I cannot hazard any conjecture. The opening was about 18 inches high.[10]
Our next point was to solve the problem, whether the south side of the area had been originally defended, like the other portions, with a Roman wall. Few traces of one remain upon the surface, and I confess that it had always been my own opinion, that the precipitous ground on this side, flanked as it was by the sea — -on at any rate by water and impassable bogs — formed a sufficient natural defence. The notion, however, after several laborious trenches had been sunk, was rendered untenable, for at the points marked e, e, e, e, walls exhibiting every characteristic feature of Roman masonry were discovered; and but for a land-slip (of which even a glance at Mr. Figg's map will furnish sufficient proof), at some unknown era, the continuity of the wall in this part would no doubt be still traceable. At f there were traces of a very narrow postern-gate.
The land-slip referred to must have taken place since the erection of the medieval castle, as it carried away one of its best defences, the southern branch of its moat — leaving the ground southward of the drawbridge dry, thus rendering the gateway which ought to have been the strongest, one of its most vulnerable points. By this convulsion the massive walls and towers must have been undermined, and hurled Into the morass below, to a depth which would probably render any search after them a perfectly thankless task.
Considering the number of Roman coins that have been found at various .time in Pevensey Castle, it is rather singular that our extensive excavations should have yielded so few. The following is Mr. Roach Smith's note of them:
"The coins found during the excavations are few, and without any particular interest. They are all in small brass, and do not exceed 20 in number. They range from Gallienus to the sons of Constantine, as follows:—
| No. | No. | ||
| Gallienus | 1 | Constantine | 2 |
| Posthumus | 1 | The Constantine Family | 8 |
| Maximianus | 1 | Magnentius | 2 |
"The penny of Canute [mentioned at page 275] is of the type Ruding, pl. xxiii, No. 17."[11]
In the month of November, we gave directions for uncovering the foundations of a building which had stood within the medieval castle. My attention was called during the summer of 1849 to the burnt appearance of the turf to the southward of tower No. 2, and I hazarded a conjecture that it indicated the site of the "free chapel within the castle of Pevensey," which is named in a grant of this fortress to John of Gaunt, by his father, King Edward III. Our excavations have shown the truth of this surmise. The site of the chapel is marked 7, in the plan.
It consisted of a nave, north aisle, and chancel. The general thickness of the foundation walls was 2 feet 5 inches. The interior dimensions of the edifice were as follows:—
| Length of Nave | 40 ft. | Length of Chancel | 12 ft. 8 in. |
| Breadth of ditto | 16 ft. 8 in. | Breadth of ditto | 11 ft. 6 in. |
Below the level of the floor of the chancel several skeletons were exhumed. This part of the edifice had been divided longitudinally into three cells or graves. In the northernmost of these was the skeleton of a man five feet below the surface. The fore-arms were crossed over the breast, perhaps indicating a priest. At the feet of this skeleton was another of a child. The middle compartment was occupied by a skeleton with the arm-bones parallel with the body; this interment was only two feet below the floor. In the southernmost compartment there were three skeletons at the depth of five feet — one adult and two children. To the right and left of the chancel step were two small irregular inclosures of stone which may have supported the pulpit and reading desk.
Opposite the south door, at the distance of 11 feet 6 inches from the west end of the building, erect, and in situ, but much fractured, we found the font. It consists of a plain
basin of rude workmanship raised upon a circular step 4 feet 10 inches in diameter, as shown in the above wood engraving; the material is a rough, friable, white stone resembling Caen, but of an inferior grain. Care has been taken to preserve this venerable relic from destruction. At the cast end of the nave a remarkable object was brought to light. This is a piscina adapted for a pillar perforated throughout its entire
height. With the exception of (the shaft of) one found some years since in the free chapel within the castle of Hastings, I am not acquainted with any examples of the pillar piscina in Sussex, and they are everywhere uncommon. They seem peculiar to Norman architecture. The workmanship of the present specimen is very rare, and the design resembles a capital of Early English, or rather transition-Norman date. Its rough and "Ruskin-ish" character is faithfully conveyed in the engraving given above.
The font, and an abacus with Norman ornaments, sufficiently attest the period to which the "free chapel of Pevensey" belongs. Of its destruction we have no record, but there is sufficient evidence that it was burnt down—whether by accident or design it would be idle to conjecture. The font bears evident marks of the action of fire, such as will be remarked by any curious visitor to Rye Church, where the evidences of conflagration are alike afforded by present appearances and by historical record. The roof was of slates, very thick, marked with broad red veins, and unlike any other slate I have ever seen. A large mass of the roof seems to have fallen in upon the font, which may account for its comparatively well-preserved state. It is a rather curious fact that many iron arrow-heads, from four to six inches in length were found among the debris.
It ought to be mentioned, that not long before our excavations, Mr. Gurr, the worthy tenant of the ground (who at this moment holds, in plurality, the offices of constable, port-reeve, over-seer, market-clerk, and custodian [of the castle] of Pevensey), accidently discovered the well of this redoubtable fortress. It lies within the enclosure, southward of the chapel, and near the foot of the mound of the ancient keep (6 in the plan). Lord Burlington having liberally contributed the funds, Mr. Gurr opened the well which is of very remarkable construction. It is seven feet in diameter, and steined with solid ashlar. After descending forty feet it gradually contracts and is continued to the depth of fifty, where it is further narrowed to a frame-work of solid oak of square form, and little more than two feet across. It is to be regretted that this well has been filled to within a few feet of the top by rain-water, so that the peculiar structure of the lower part of it cannot be more accurately noted without the laborious removal of this large body of water. I must not omit to state that among other objects brought up during the emptying of this well there were several of those large spherical masses of green sand-stone — generally supposed to be catapult balls[12] — which have so often been found in the castle, and some skulls which upon examination by competent persons have been pronounced to be those of wolves.
If our labours have yielded no results of very striking interest, I trust that they will still be deemed of a nature to repay the cost of time and money expended upon them. At all events we cannot be censured for not having brought to light objects which might reasonably have been expected to be met with on such a site. Sculptured marble, and votive altar, and polished column have been there, and have alike perished in the lapse of ages, as the natural result of continuous occupation; so that little now remains of the once renowned city of Anderida, except its time-honoured walls, — walls which have borne the storms of some sixteen hundred winters, besides the hostile attacks of the soldier and the pilferer, and which nothing but some convulsion of nature, or some intentional spoliation by human agency, can for ages yet to come destroy.
I ought to have mentioned a discovery made during the progress of our operations — namely, that the Roman walls have been in many parts heightened by a breastwork of subsequent date, probably Norman, so as to afford the defenders, while passing along the top of the wall a screen from the assailants without. This parapet is most observable between towers C and E, and upon tower L, out is everywhere almost concealed by that picturesque but destructive weed, the ivy.
In 4o King John, Hugh Dyve, lord of East Haddon, co. Northampton, claimed against Henry Dyve, his mesne tenant, the service of inclosing a certain hay upon the vallum of the king's castle of Pevensey in Sussex, being the alleged tenure pertaining to a knight's fee which he held of him in Brampton in the former county. What this hay or inclosure was I cannot conjecture. [Placit. 4 Joh.]
∵ The dotted line southward of tower G does not indicate a trench, but an inequality, probably resulting from a wall which anciently stood there.
Lewes, June 15, 1853.
- ↑ Lewes, 1846. 12mo, pp. 56.
- ↑ In a paper on Pevensey Castle, by Mr. Wright, in the Gentleman's Magazine for August, 1852, that accomplished antiquary remarks: "The Roman masonry is wonderfully perfect; although it has been exposed to the changes of the great part of two thousand years, the mark of the trowel is still visible on the mortar, and many of the facing stones look as fresh as if they had been cut yesterday."
- ↑ The object marked d is a mass of masonry which has detached itself from the Roman wall and rolled down the declivity to the position indicated.
- ↑ The green sand of geology. The place at Eastbourne from whence the material for Pevensey Castle was quarried is still traditionally pointed out.
- ↑ It is true that some of the antiquaries of the eighteenth century imagined the small arch in the fragment standing upon the mound near the south-east comer of the medieval castle (8) to hare been Saxon — I believe, however, for no better reason than that it has a semicircular head.
- ↑ Add. MSS. 6166, Brit. Mus. transcribed by Mr. Blaauw. Mr. W. D. Cooper likewise sent me another transcript from Carlton Ho. Bide. The names of the jurors will be interesting to many Sussex readers : —
Will. de la Chaumbre.
Richard Hamond.
Ralph atte Broke.
Robert Partrich.
Roger Ballard.
Joce Urry.
Robert atte Stable.
Hen. de Shobrigge.
Ralph atte Doune.
Andrew Gobioun.
Gilbert de Okelinge.
Walter le Bat.
John de Horseye.
Ranulf Wodeland.
Philip atte Welle.
William Algar.
Richard le Frost.
Philip Lyteman.
Simon le Sem'.
Ralph le Potter.
Ralph at Nasshe.
Simon atte Chaumbre.
John le Palmer.
Geffry atte Welle.
Gilbert Erth.
Nicholas de Wonbourne.
John le Hemestede.
Adam de Courtehope.
John de Bochurst.
Roger le Bost.
- ↑ See fuller particulars of the history and descent in Chronicles of Pevensey.
- ↑ It may be as well to mention here, that this report is drawn up independently of Mr. S. for the information of our Society. The result of my friend's observations will be embodied in the future numbers of his Collectanea Antiqua, or probably in a separate report.
- ↑ These two pieces of ordnance are apparently of the sixteenth century. One has the initials W. P. (William Pelham ?), and the other the Tudor badge, the rose and crown, and E. R. for Elizabetha Regina. These are probably the two pieces mentioned in a Survey of the Sussex Coast made in May, 1587, in anticipation of the Spanish invasion: — "The Castle of Pemsey to be reedified or vtterlye rased: there is ij dimy-culverings of small value."
- ↑ Priesthawes is presumed to have been originally some kind of religious establishment — perhaps a monastic grange with its chapel and priest. Wherever, throughout East Sussex, a castle and a monastery or other religious foundation stand in moderate proximity to each other, an underground communication according to the popular notion always exists. Lewes Castle and Priory, Hastings Castle and Priory, Burlough Castle (near Alfriston) and Wilmington Priory, and Bodiam Castle and Robertsbridge Abbey, may be named aa sites connected with this whimsical "folk-lore." Considerable disappointment was felt by some of the rustic inhabitants of Pevensey at the non-realisation of the popular theory in the present instance. "Why, Sir," said one of them to me, "so this here subterreenous passage as we've so long heard an, turns out to be nothin' but gurt dreen!"
- ↑ In the 'Numismatic Chronicle,' iii, 66, Mr. Smith published an account of a discovery of Roman coins at Pevensey Castle. They range from Carausius to Gratian. The late Mr. Charles Brooker of Alfriston, had nearly 100 third brass coins. My friends, Messrs. Charles Ade, William Harvey, and John Macrae, possess others. Nearly all these are of the reigns of Constantius Chlorus, Constantine, and Constans. I will not include in this note the "find" in 1848, of 866 silver and brass coins boasted of by an individual to whose name I would gladly give a well-deserved "setting-down" were it not for the pain which I should thereby inflict upon his respectable relatives who reside in the county. Suffice it to say that I have documents to prove that a more shameful fraud was never attempted than that of digging up these hundreds of Roman (P first-brass Birminghcm) coins, from a tower built in the reign of Edward II (!) where they had been deposited by the digger himself not many hours previously! — See Suss. Arch. Coll. I, 5.
Mr. Harvey and Mr. E. Miller of Hailsham have in their cabinets several Bactrian coins found (as I have good evidence to show) among the rains of Pevensey. These coins are on all hands admitted to be genuine, but a doubt of their having been found here has been entertained. For my own part, I see nothing more wonderful in their discovery than in the indisputable fact that many Saracenic coins of the ninth century have been found in the shingle and sand at Eastbourne.
- ↑ They are of various sizes from nine to fifteen inches diameter. Many of them are still lying in different parts of the castle.