Orford Castle, which we visited last week, was built between 1165 and 1173 A.D. by order of Henry II. The castle is 90 feet high, circular in shapewith three square towers equidistant around it. It is quite remarkable for the completeness of its domestic 'facilities' and arrangements. There are toilets on all of the floors (I think), with shafts running down the outside of the walls, and emptying into the moat (now dry). On the floor below the roof is a small room, lined with well fitting stone, which appears to have been built as a large cystern, probably filled originally by rain water (my idea).
Above are two of the loos. Below is a snapshot of the castle well, which is, of course, in the basement/undercroft.
Below is a photo of the Castle Chapel, a well fitted little room, with a passageway to the Priest's chamber, complete with its own lavatory.
The picture below is taken inside a room in one of the square towers on the castle roof, and shows one of the two ovens there.
The outer walls of the castle fell during the early part of the 19th century. About a century after the castle was built it withstood a short seige during the reign of Edward Ist, and this was about sixty years before serious artillery (cannon) were in use. It then saw virtually no further action, This must, I think be the main reason that the castle at Orford has survived in such a remarkably good and complete condition. It is really very well worth a visit.
It has always seemed to me that a visit to Framlingham Castle, which has never had a keep, but has the outer walls complete, followed by a visit to Orford (about twelve miles away) which now has no outer walls, but a very well preserved keep, would give between them, a good and complete impression of a mediaeval English castle.
The outer walls of the castle fell during the early part of the 19th century. About a century after the castle was built it withstood a short seige during the reign of Edward Ist, and this was about sixty years before serious artillery (cannon) were in use. It then saw virtually no further action, This must, I think be the main reason that the castle at Orford has survived in such a remarkably good and complete condition. It is really very well worth a visit.
8 comments:
Thank you M 'n' A (I suspect Mike did the writing while A provided the back-up services). This is fascinating. I wondered about the shape and outline of the towers in the light of Rochester castle, which is a square keep with three square corner towers and one round one. The round tower was built later after the right angle of the square tower it replaced was found to be vulnerable (in the reign of King John) to demolition by ram, pick, etc. Or so I believe. Perhaps there's another theory?
Hello Christopher. The shape of Orford is traditionally so as to limit the number of 'blind spots' for attackers to shelter in, and to make it more difficult for sappers and miners. Neither of these explanations seem to me to be completely true. The best prevention of blind spots would be a completely circular keep, I'd think, and the same would be true of attack by miners, i.e. that the strongest wall is probably one with NO corners. I'd guess that the shape was experimental. And anyway, in the event, the matter was never put to the test at Orwell.
The arch over the oven doorway Mike, is that made from reclaimed roman tiles by any chance?
Hello Crowbard. I didn't think to look very closely, so I don't know, but I should think it's perfectly possible.
Pretty please can you put the photo of us all sitting in the chapel up as well?
Orford Castle feature's in the background scenery on Sir B's model railway.
It's years since I've actually been inside Orford Castle. Sir Bruin and I have walked up to it a couple of times but were discouraged by the entry charges.
Hello Nea. See next blog entry 'Friday'.
Hello Liz. We are very lucky in that it's run by English Heritage, to which our eldest daughter gave us a year's membership last Christmas. Quite agree though that entrance prices are rather steep.
Post a Comment