Mediæval Military Architecture in England, Volume 1 (of 2) — A Closer Reading

Earthworks as the Foundation

Clark insists that the earliest fortifications were not stone but earth: banks, ditches, and especially the moated mound or motte. He credits himself as the first to set forth this connection between the ninth-century earthworks and the later masonry placed upon them. The reader should watch for how he reads the landscape—the shape of a mound, the line of a ditch—as primary evidence, often more telling than the stonework that survives above ground.

In the excerpt on Bôves (near Amiens), he notes that the earthworks are 'seen to great advantage from the Bôves Station of the Amiens Railway,' a characteristically practical observation that grounds his analysis in accessible viewpoints. He dates the Bôves earthwork to the ninth century, for defence against Northmen, based on its character rather than documentary proof.

The Keep as a Puzzle

Bowes Castle in Yorkshire presents a problem: a single rectangular tower, isolated, with no bonded masonry or foundation traces around it. Clark points out that Norman keeps are usually part of a larger castle complex—Brough, Appleby, Richmond all have surrounding buildings—but Bowes stands alone. He measures it precisely: 82 feet east-west, 60 feet north-south, about 50 feet high, with broad flat pilasters at each angle and midway on each face.

He notes the absence of a base or plinth, save a plain string-course at the upper floor. The churchyard and cottages now crowd its sides, but show no old wall material. Clark does not resolve the puzzle; he leaves it open, letting the reader consider whether the tower was always solitary or whether its companions simply vanished without trace.

Siege Mechanics in the Text

One excerpt describes a siege in vivid technical detail: a wall undermined by props set on fire, a collapse in dust and smoke, then an assault through the breach. The keep, 'built upon a scarped rock and protected by a double wall,' becomes a final refuge. Then a machine appears—sometimes a mangonel scattering small stones, sometimes a single stone 'projected with a velocity exceeding that from a sling.' Fissures appear in the shaken walls.

Clark does not name the source of this account, but the specificity suggests a chronicle. The passage illustrates how he weaves narrative sources with architectural observation: the keep’s double wall and rock foundation are not just features but explanations for why it held out. Readers should note how Clark uses such siege stories to test the defensive logic of the structures he describes.

Iteration and the Reader’s Path

Because the papers were written independently, the same arguments recur—especially the earthwork-to-keep thesis. Clark acknowledges this in the preface, hoping the repetition will be excused. For a first reading, this means the introduction is essential: it lays out the core idea that later chapters will illustrate rather than develop. The castle studies can be read in any order, but the cumulative effect reinforces Clark’s method: measure, compare, and always look for the earlier earthwork beneath the stone.

The dedication to E. A. Freeman, historian of the Norman Conquest, signals Clark’s intellectual allegiance. Freeman’s topographical familiarity with English ground is praised, and Clark’s own work follows that tradition of tying architecture to historical geography.

Clark’s volume rewards a reader who treats each castle account as a case study in a larger argument about continuity from earth to stone. The repeated claims are not flaws but deliberate emphasis. To get the most from the book, start with the introduction, then sample a few castle descriptions—Bowes for its puzzle, Bôves for its earthworks—and note how Clark’s eye for detail always returns to the ground beneath the walls.