King John's Bones

King John's effigy

"First then, I desire that my body be buried in the church

of the Blessed Virgin and St. Wulfstan

Worcester."

We all know the story. Good King Richard is away on Crusade and his evil brother John tries to usurp the throne. From Elizabethan times onwards King John has been cast as the villain in countless theatrical productions and films about Robin Hood. My regular readers will know that seeing those movies and television shows left a lasting impression on me and I have spent many years researching the lives of those two feuding Plantagenet brothers. Unfortunately John does not appear in any of the surviving early medieval ballads about the outlaw, but his treacherous reputation eventually introduced him into the legend.

One recent book I would highly recommend is King John by Marc Morris (2015). Not only did I find it informative and well-written, but I was intrigued to read Morris's account about the discovery of King John's remains in Worcester Cathedral. In fact they were discovered twice. Recently I visited Worcester and had the opportinity to gaze upon the tomb of King John. I had to find out more.

King John (1166-1216) was a frequent visitor to Worcester. Nearby were his two favourite hunting grounds, the Royal Forests of Kinver and Feckingham. He also seems to have had a special affection for Wulfstan, Bishop of Worcester (1062-1095), who was canonized during his reign.  

In October 1216, John contracted dysentery at King's Lynn during his campaign to recover East Anglia from the barons.  He gradually became weaker and to make matters worse, he misjudged the tide when crossing the Wash in Lincolnshire and lost a significant part of his baggage train in the marsh.

By the middle of the month he became so ill, he had to be carried on a litter to Newark. When his party reached the castle, he was attended by Thomas de Wodestoke, abbot of Croxton, who was said to have been a skilful physician. But John knew he was dying and dictated a very brief will. Probably an indication of how weak he now was. In the last paragraph he expressed his desire to be buried at Worcester. Wodestocke then heard John's confession and performed the last rites.

Newark Castle

King John died at Newark Castle in the early hours of 19th October 1216. A strong gale howled outside. The abbot of Croxton took away the kings heart and intestines and had the body hastily embalmed. A monk named John of Savigny, who came to Newark at daybreak to mount vigil over the body and say Mass for the king's soul, encountered members of John's household scurrying out of the castle with as much loot as they could, before some official arrived to seal the royal chambers. John's corpse was then draped with rich cloth and a company of mercenaries in full armour solemnly escorted it on the long journey from Newark to Worcester.

He was interred four days later between the shrines of St. Oswald and St.Wulfstan at Worcester abbey church by Bishop Sylvester. But unlike his brother and earlier kings, John was not buried wearing his crown. This was probably due to many of the royal treasures previously being lost in the Wash. Instead, John's head was covered in the linen coif that was used to hold in place the Holy Oil used to anoint him.

John's memory would be kept fresh at Worcester by the observance of an annual fast and John's heart and intestines were preserved at Croxton Abbey in Stafford - a macabre reward to the abbot for his services.

Ten days after John's death, his eldest son Henry III (1207-1272) was crowned at Gloucester Cathedral. King Henry later helped raise the funds for his father's effigy and tomb and the considerable rebuilding of the east end of Worcester cathedral which had been badly damaged during the great fire of 1202. The church was reconstructed and the location of John's tomb would become the Lady Chapel.

How King John's original tomb might have looked

His tomb at this time, appears to have been a stone coffin 'of a dark colour with his figure upon it, raised a little above the surface of the earth', beneath the Great East Window. William Stukeley described King John's tomb in 1776 originally being :

Before the altar of the eastern most wall of the church, on each side of him, upon the ground are the effigies of the two Holy bishops, and his chief saints, Wulfstan and Oswald, from whose vicinity he hoped to be safe from harm.

This is the oldest royal effigy in England, dated from between 1228  to 1232, and made from Purbeck Marble, brought in from Dorset. It shows John in the prime of his life (thought to be a likeness) and was originally painted in bright colours and encrusted with precious jewels from Germany, Africa and eastern Europe. The pitted holes in his crown, sleeves and the collar of his gown are where the jewels would have been embedded. His head lies upon a pillow supported by the small figures of the Bishops' Oswald and Wulfstan, and his feet rest upon a lion.

A reconstruction of King John's coloured tomb

The king's right hand is holding a vial that might have contained a bone or relic of his favourite saint. His left hand grips the hilt of his unsheathed sword, which is unusual considering the convention of the time forbidding anyone to be battle ready in God's house.

1529

After the death of his eldest son, Arthur Prince of Wales, in 1502, Henry VII had an elaborate tomb and chantry dedicated to him to the right of the altar at Worcester Cathedral. During this period of renovation and reconstruction a decision was made to remove King John's marble effigy from its small base in the Lady Chapel eastward onto a raised tomb chest in the centre of the choir.

The raised tomb

While this reconstruction was taking place, the workman 'discovered' the monarch's skeletal remains - including his head covered by what they described as a monk's cowl. So, under the auspices of the sacrist, Robert Alchurch, the bones were carefully put inside the new sarcophagus and the original 13th century stone effigy was lowered in place.

1797

There seems to have been some confusion over exactly where King John's remains were lying during this period (The dean apparently had no knowledge of the Tudor discoveries). So when restoration work was planned in this year it was decided to 'satisfy every doubt' and open the tomb by the altar steps.

King John's tomb by the altar steps

Fortunately we have several detailed accounts. This appears in An Historical on the Magna Charta by Richard Thompson (1829) :

...on Monday 17th July 1797 the tomb was opened, and a stone coffin was found within containing a skeleton, whose scull was detached and lying in a different position to the body. Some of the teeth and anatomical details were in good preservation, but, notwithstanding the remains had been embalmed by Thomas de Wodestock, Abbot of Croxton, there were evident marks of putrefaction.

The dress discovered upon his body, was similar to that upon the effigy on the exterior, except that there were no gloves upon the hands and that instead of a crown, a monks cowl, used by the king's desire as a preservative against evil spirits, was found upon his head. This fitted very exactly, but the buckles or clasps of the straps were gone, having probably been of some precious metals, and were most likely removed during the Civil Wars.

The body was clothed in a long robe, which seemed to be a crimson damask of a peculiarly strong texture, and some of its embroidery remained near to the right knee; the whole object was then however a dusky brown. The legs were covered with an ornamental close dress tied at the ankles, whilst the bones of the feet were visible through the decayed parts of the drapery, of whom no account could state the material with certainty. The left hand, as in the stone effigy once held a sword, but it was then greatly mutilated and scattered down the same side of the body. The whole length of these remains measured five feet six and a half inches.

The coffin found within the tomb was of the plain white Higley stone of Worcestershire, and was broken by a considerable fracture which appeared to cross it obliquely.

The tomb remained open but a very short period, for so great was the impatience of the multitude to view its contents that it was thought prudent to close them up on the following day.  

The open tomb

Unfortunately it seems that closing the tomb (after two days) in 1797 did not prevent some of John's remains being removed. After 160 years, King John's reputed thumb bone was finally returned to the cathedral: And stored in Worcester Cathedral Art Gallery and Museum are two molars boxed together with a handwritten note stating: 'These are two teeth taken from the head of King John by William Wood, a stationers apprentice, in 1797'.

King John's two molars and thumb bone

A remnant of King John's shroud showing a heraldic beast

The teeth and thumb bone together with pieces of textile and a portion of his leather shoe (all allegedly removed from King John's tomb) are now currently on display at the British Library's Magna Carta: Law, Liberty, Legacy exhibition. My pictures of King John's reconstructed effigy are taken from the fascinating display at Worcester Cathedral.

Sources: Marc Morris, King John (2015)
               W.L. Warenne, King John (1961)
               Richard Thompson, An Historical on the Magna Charta (1829)
               Maurice Ashley, King John (1972)
         

Richard the Lionheart's Siege of Nottingham Castle.

Robin Hood  kneels before Richard the Lionheart

Although Richard I does not appear in the existing medieval ballads of Robin Hood, it was only a matter of time before the two legendary characters came together in English myth. Today, Richard the Lionheart and Robin Hood are now inseparable in countless film and television productions of the outlaws adventures in Sherwood Forest. The Lionhearted king has always had a fascination for me and particularly his siege of Nottingham Castle in 1194. It was during this period in Richard's return to England that we come closest to the moment when the two legendary characters 'might' have met.

Robin Hood and Richard the Lionheart.

Due to the unrest at home and the threat to his lands in Normandy, caused by his brother John's alliance with Philip of France, Richard uncharacteristically had to turn his back on the Crusade in the Holy Land and return to England. Unfortunately his journey home was a disaster, culminating in his capture and imprisonment by Duke Leopold of Austria in December 1192. The Duke then sold Richard to Henry VI Emperor of Germany in March 1193. Meanwhile his trecherous brother Prince John, toured England, telling anyone that would listen that, King Richard was dead.

On Richard's departure to the Holy Land, John had not been given Nottingham Castle as part of his estates. But it was partly re-built in stone and held by Prince John  along with several others,when news reached England of Richard's imprisonment  and ransom  of 150,000 marks (£100,000). This huge sum was twice the annual revenue of the English crown. Although, as Richard was master of the provences of the Angevin empire, the sum would eventually not only come from England, but also Normandy, Britanny and Aquitaine.

John had offered the Emperor 80,000 marks to keep Richard I imprisoned until Michaelmas, or a proportionate sum for every month he kept him captive beyond it. But the Holy Roman Emperor stood by his word and Philip sent a message to his ally, Prince John, "have a care, the devil is un-loosed." The Lionheart was a free man again, having been captive for one year, six weeks and three days. It was said that the castellan of St. Michaels Mount in Cornwall dropped dead of fright when he heard of Richard's return. Immedialtely Prince John escaped to France and lay low in Normandy.

King John

On the 20th March 1194, King Richard landed in Sandwich in Kent, from where he hastened to Canterbury, declaring that he did not want to visit any other church in England until he had visited the seat of St.Thomas Beckett. He then made his way to London via Rochester where a thanksgiving service was held in St.Paul's Cathedral. After two days in London the Lionheart then rode north to Nottingham to deal with his brother. While Richard was on his way back to England, the great Council had declared all Prince John's estates forfeit and the assembled bishops excomunicated him.

Richard reached Nottingham on 25th March, "with such a vast multitude of men, and such a clangor of trumpets and clarions, that those who were in the castle were astonished and confounded and alarmed, and trembling came upon them, but still they did not believe that the king had come and supposed that the whole of this was done by the chiefs of the army for the purpose of decieving them. The king, however,took up his quarters next to the castle, so that the archers of the castle pierced the kings men at his very feet. The king being incensed with this put on his armour, and commanded his army to make an assault on the castle. "
(Roger de Hovenden, Itinerarium Regis Ricardi ).

Richard's effigy in Fontevrault, France

Ralph Murdoc and William de Wendeval were holding the castle in Prince John's name and refused to surrender.

The siege had already been started by William Earl of Ferrers, David Earl of Huntingdon (the brother of William the Lion, king of Scots) and Randulf Earl of Chester. This is peculiar because the legend of Robin Hood not only links him with the earldom of Huntingdon but also with Randulf Earl of Chester ( 'Piers Plowman' c.1377).

David, Earl of Huntingdon, took part in Richard's coronation and shortly afterwards married the sister of Randulf Earl of Chester.

King Richard according to some sources arrived with just a few hours of daylight left and as he stood watching the siege, two of those next to him were suddenly hit by arrows.The Lionheart ordered an immediate assault. Such were his military talents that by dusk the wooden gateway to the outer bailey and the barbican had been captured and burnt. But the defenders lay secure behind the high stone walls of the middle bailey and during the night deliberately burnt down some buildings.

Clothed in a simple coat of light mail, with a steel cap on his head, he [Richard] advanced as far as the gate of the castle, preceded by men bearing before them large shields. 

Nottingham Castle

The next day Richard ordered  Master Elias of Oxford to bring stone throwing engines from London.The king decided not to make another assault on the castle till the machines were ready. Meanwhile he hung from gibbets, in full view of the defenders, some men at arms captured outside of the castle. He also summoned the Archbishop of Canterbury to excommunicate the defenders. 

On the following day the Bishop of Durham brought additional forces and prisoners from nearby Tickhill Castle. 
But while the king was at dinner:

Ralph Murdac and William de Wendeval, constables of Nottingham Castle, sent two of their companions to see the king; who after having seen him, returned to the castle, to tell those who had sent them what they had seen and heard respecting the king and his preperations. When William de Wendeval and Roger de Montbegum heard of this, they went forth with twelve others from the castle, and threw themselves at the king's mercy, and returned to the castle no more.
(Roger de Hovenden, Itinerarium Regis Ricardi)

 But, it was not until the third day of the siege, and the mediation of the Archbishop of Canterbury, that the defenders were persuaded to surrender:

Ralph Murdac, Philip de Worcester and Ralph de Worecester his brother, and all the rest who  were in the castle, surrendered the castle to the king, and threw themselves on the king's mercy, for life and limb and worldly honour.
(Roger de Hovenden)

Medieval Nottingham

The gates were opened and Richard entered the castle. Three days later, a Royal Council was held in the main hall. Richard sat between the two archbishops. The Queen Mother also attended the debate, which was to last for four days. They finally reached the decision to call upon Prince John to appear and answer the charges of treason whithin forty days. But due to the inter-cession of their mother, the feuding brothers were eventually reconciled.

On Palm Sunday, Richard rode off into Sherwood Forest to enjoy two days at the royal hunting lodge in Clipstone.

Roger of Hoveden in his Itinerarium Regis Ricardi, says:

Richard King of England did a view (perambulation) of Clipstone and Sherwood which of he had never seen before and it pleased him much.

We get more detail of Richard's trip by John Manwood (d.1610) in his Treatise of the Forest Laws:

“I have seen many ancient records in the tower of Nottingham Castle very badly kept, and scarce legible; in which Castle the Court is usually kept for Peverill-Fee: Amongst which it appears, that in the year 1194, King Richard being hunting in Sherwood Forest, did chase a hart out of the forest into Barnsdale into Yorkshire; and because he could not recover him, he made a proclamation at Tickhill in Yorkshire, and at several other places thereabout, that no person should kill, hurt or chase the said Hart; and this was afterwards called a Hart-Royal Proclaim’d.”

Sherwood Forest

Richard then returned back to Nottingham.  Sadly, we have no more information about his time amongst the beautiful glades of Sherwood and whether he met a certain outlaw in Lincoln Green. But the legend lives on.

The Tomb of Maid Marian

Matilda Fitzwalter's tomb c.1782

Occasionally I like to delve into various subjects linked to the Robin Hood legend and recently I decided to look at one particular place associated with Robin’s girlfriend - Little Dunmow, near Colchester in Essex. I was glad I did and unearthed far more than I expected!

Today all that survives of the Augustinian priory of St Mary the Virgin, (founded in Dunmow in 1106) is the present church in St. Mary’s Place, which was the Lady Chapel. It is here that local tradition states, is the tomb of Maid Marian.

Little Dunmow church

Dunmow formed the caput of a feudal barony along with Baynard’s Castle in south-west London, which was granted to Robert Fitzwalter of Woodham (c.1198- 1235) on the death of his father in 1198. Robert was the baronial leader, styled ‘Master of the Army of God and the Holy Church’ who later went on to oppose King John and lead the revolt that culminated in the Magna Carta in 1215. Today he has become romanticized and styled the champion of English liberty, but history reveals that he was far from the saintly character created by modern myth.

King John had refused to allow the pope any right to appoint an archbishop of Canterbury without royal assent. He banished from England five monks from Canterbury and seized all the English offices held by Italian bishops. He then went on to refuse to allow any papal legates to enter the country. By the spring of 1208 the Pope had placed the country under an Interdict forbidding any church services to be held.

In 1212, Robert Fitzwalter had been heavily implicated in an assassination plot against King John during his expedition against the Welsh. The king was to be killed, or to be abandoned to the Welsh while a new king was chosen. But John had received intelligence of the scheme and Fitzwalter was outlawed and fled to the court of King Philip of France. John seized Fitzwalter’s lands and destroyed both Baynard and Benington castles. But in the ‘Historire des ducs de Normandie (p.118)’, compiled between 1215-16, it states that when Robert Fitzwalter fled to France, he told King Philip that his break with John was caused by the latter’s attempt to rape his daughter Matilda. How this allegation arose is unclear and not taken seriously by modern scholars. Some historians suggest that Fitzwalter may have left his wife Gunnor de Valognes and the children, at Arras in Northern France while he had gone to repeat his tale to Philip Augustus!

Seal Dye of Robert Fitzwalter

Meanwhile another enemy of John, Eustace de Vesci, had also been allegedly enraged by what he described as the king’s attempt to seduce his wife Margaret, the daughter of King William of Scotland. Later a chronicler wrote of these allegations, at the Cistercian Abbey of Waverly, accusing King John of violating the wives and daughters of many of his barons. These attempted rapes were also confirmed by Matthew Paris; who although not a contemporary of John continued to re-write and add to the work of Roger of Wendover, with extreme hostility, describing the monarch as irreligious, lazy and wishing to convert the country to Islam.

This is perhaps unsurprising when you consider that King John had been excommunicated by the Pope and this severely biased all views of him emanating from monastic sources -‘veiled behind fable, invention and hostile criticism.’ So true or not, as hostile propaganda, these allegations helped to establish the image of an immoral and untrustworthy king that has lasted to the present day. 

The story of the seduction of Robert Fitzwalter’s daughter by King John first appeared in the manuscript chronicle of Dunmow (Ms.Cotton, Cleop, C, 3. f29). Sadly only one copy survives from the 16^th Century, but it was probably begun by Nicholas de Brumfield a canon of Dunmow in the latter part of the 13^th Century.

In 1597 appeared Michael Drayton’s (1563-1631) England's Heroical Epistles, a series of poetical accounts, in imitation of those of Ovid. In this we first get our first glimpse of Dunmow’s heavily romanticized myth:

“King John enamour’d, by all means assay’d,

To win chaste Matilda, a chaste noble maid,

The Lord Fitzwater’s daughter; and to gain her,

When by his courtship he could not obtain her,

Nor by his gifts, strives (to far being in)

To get by force, what fear means could not win.

And banisheth the nearest of her blood,

Which he could think had his desires withstood:

When she to Dunmow to a nun’ry flies,

Whither be writeth, and whence she replies.”

It is interesting to note that between 1597 and 1602 Michael Drayton had strong connections in London with the theatrical syndicate of Philip Henslowe, and collaborated with many of the playwrights of that time. Drayton’s influence possibly inspired two Elizabethan dramas that left a lasting legacy on the legend of Robin Hood.

Henslowe’s famous theatrical diary states that the prolific Anthony Munday (1563-1633) registered two plays on the 1^st December 1600:

1. “The Downfall of Robert Earl of Huntington, afterwards called Robin Hood of Merrie Sherwood; with the lamentable tragedy of chaste Matilda, the Lord Fitzwater’s daughter afterwards his faire maid Marian.”

2. The Death of Robert Earl of Huntington, otherwise called Robin Hood of merrie Sherwood; with the lamentable tragedy of chaste Matilda, his faire maid Marian, poysoned at Dunmowe by King John. (On this second play, Munday was helped by another playwright, Henry Chettle).

In Munday’s fist play we see Matilda being persecuted by Prince John and following her lover to Sherwood where she assumes the name Maid Marian. In the ‘Downfall’ Maid Marian is once again pursued by the lecherous John (who has now become king) to Dunmowe Abbey, where he eventually poisons her.

During the ‘Downfall’ play, Matilda confusingly changes back to Marian then Matilda again, which possibly indicates how Munday was struggling to combine the two separate traditions. But both plays became hugely popular at the time and the ‘Downfall’ was later selected for performance at Court.

This popularity led to another play, ‘King John and Matilda,’ written about 1628 by Richard Davenport.  But critics tend to describe this historical tragedy as lacking originality and bearing a strong resemblance to Munday’s second Robin Hood production.

In 1631 John Weever published his ‘Ancient Funeral Monuments of Great Britain’ and under Little Dunmow writes:

“The church of this monastery is yet standing, in the choir whereof, between two pillars, lieth the body of Matilda the fair entombed, who was the daughter of Robert Fitz-Water, the most valiant knight of England. About the year 1213 saith the book of Dunmow, there arose a great discord betwixt  K. John and  his barons, because of Matilda surnamed the faire, daughter of Robert Fitz-Water, whom the king unlawfully loved, but could not obtain her, nor her father’s consent thereunto. Whereupon, and for other like causes, ensued war through the whole realm. The king banished the said Fitz-Water among others, and caused his castle, called Baynard, and other his houses to be spoiled. Which being done, he sent a messenger unto Matilda the fair, about his old suit in love, et quia noluit consentire toxicavit eam. And because she would not agree to his wicked motion, the messenger poisoned a boiled, or potched egg, against she was hungry, and gave it unto her, whereof she died in the year 1213.” 

The story was repeated, with more substance in William Dugdale’s (1605-1686) Monasticon Anglicanum (1693):

“...in the year 1216 Robert Fitz Walter refusing to consent to King John’s unlawful love to his daughter Matilda the Fair, that king seized upon his Estate and Barony , and his castle of Baynard at London; and Matilda, who was then there at Dunmow not admitting the King’s Suit, was poisoned in a mess of broth. These things occasioned the Barons Wars, which after a while were again composed, and Robert Fitz Walter restored to his Barony and the King’s favour as formerly.”

'Matilda's' tomb at Dunmow

So the legend was taken into the nineteenth century, but Geoffery Fitzpeter in his ‘Historical Essay on Magna Carta’ was more critical:

‘... between two pillars, on the north side of the choir, is the tomb of the fair Matilda, daughter of the second Walter Fitz-Walter, who, according to the monkish story, unsupported by history, is pretended to have been poisoned by the contrivance of King John, for refusing to gratify his illicit passion. Her figure is in alabaster, and by no means a despicable piece of workmanship. Her fingers are stained with a red colour, which according to the Ciceroni of the place, was done to represent the effect of the poison; but in all likelihood is the remains of a former painting.”

This for me has been a very interesting journey. On the way we have seen how the seeds were sown to portray King John as the bad king of popular literature and film and also witnessed the gentrification of Maid Marian, the village May Queen into Matilda Fitzwalter daughter of Lord Robert Fitzwalter.

After the death of his wife Gunnora de Valognes, Robert Fitzwalter married Rohese Bayard who survived him. He is recorded in most sources as having four children, Robert (pre-deceased him), Walter his heir from his second marriage (d.1258), and Christina who married William de Mandeville.

But did Robert Fitzwalter have a daughter called Matilda? I have searched for historical evidence, but frustratingly, apart from a mention in Sidney Painter’s ‘King John’ (1966), that ‘Matilda did die about that time [1212] but it is unlikely John poisoned her,’ there is no reference.

The tomb of King John

In W.L.Warren’s excellent book on the life of King John, he writes:

 “[Robert Fitzwalter and Eustace de Vesci] put out stories of John’s lecherous designs upon their woman folk - an easy enough charge to make, but the stories they told were so confused and unsubstantiated as to be beyond unravelling, let alone belief. They seem indeed to be unintelligent fabrications to cover lack of rational excuse; and it is hard to believe that Fitzwalter and Vesci were anything more than baronial roughnecks. They had been out simply for John’s blood in the conspiracy of 1212...”

Warren goes on: “Fitzwalter was altogether disreputable and mischievous, rescued from ignominy only by his great fiefs, and owing his leadership largely to his dominating aggressiveness. He was quick to take offence and draw his sword.”

Maurice Ashley writes, “The story that John importuned and molested the wives and daughters of his barons, including specifically the wives of Eustace de Vesci and Robert fitz Walter, sounds improbable and was no doubt cooked up by the monks.”

The damaged face on the alabaster tomb

The figure, said to be of Matilda, the daughter of Robert Fitzwalter, on the tomb in Priory Church Little Dunmow, is made of alabaster and dated from the early fifteenth century. It is likely to belong to a later member of the Fitzwalter family, but this endearing legend will of course live on.

Lucy Griffiths as Marian Fitzwalter in Robin Hood (1992)

  

1215 The Year of Magna Carta by Danny Danziger and John Gillingham

The Reign of King John by Sidney Painter

King John by Maurice Ashley

King John by W.L.Warren

Magna Carta by Geoffrey Hindley

King John and Newark Castle

Newark Castle

Since Tudor times, King John has been portrayed as a ‘bad’ king. Although in more recent times there have been some attempts at historical revisionism, decades of films and television productions have reinforced this negative image. From movies like ‘Ivanhoe,’ ‘The Lion in Winter’  and of course the many Robin Hood productions, including Ridley Scott's recent blockbuster. But even though, like his brother Richard, King John does not appear in the early medieval Robin Hood ballads, this Plantagenet king has always fascinated me.

It was at Newark Castle, in Nottinghamshire on 18th (possibly 19th) October, 1216 that King John died of Dysentery, brought on by too much hard riding and over-eating. Six days earlier his baggage train, carrying his treasure and jewels, had been trapped in the quicksands crossing the old River Ouse. The wagons had lost their way in the autumn mist, got stuck in the whirlpools and were overwhelmed by a rush of 'waters retuning from the sea'. After this King John is said to have worsened his fever by supping too greedily on peaches and new cider, probably to try and drown his sorrows.

King John's Tower

The sick and distressed King John eventually dragged himself along to the Bishop of Lincoln’s castle at Newark where he lay for three days, tended by the Abbot of Croxton, who had a reputation for medical skill. But he could do nothing for the King except perform the last religious rites. Many legends claim that King John was poisoned.

One in particular states that Friar Tuck poisoned ‘the ‘evil' king in revenge for the murder of Maid Marian.  Also that during the night a terrific thunderstorm was said to have swept over Sherwood Forest and was later described in it's ferocity as 'the Devil himself coming to claim King John's soul'.

I was very pleased to receive this latest instalment from Albie on his visit to Newark Castle. Albie has included once again some of his great pictures. This time of the surviving parts of Newark Castle and information on its amazing history:

"Originally this was the site of an Anglo-Saxon fortified manor house. A motte and bailey castle was erected shortly after the Norman Conquest in 1066 replacing the house. The 1st stone castle was built by Alexander, Bishop of Lincoln between 1125 and 1135. The castle was heavily modified during the next 500 years and eventually became more a palace than a fort in the late 1400’s.


It was heavily involved in the English Civil War between 1642 and 1646 and was garrisoned by Royalist troops loyal to King Charles I. Newark was strategically important as it stands on the River Trent and on the Great North Road (London-York-Edinburgh road) which passed in front of the gatehouse. The king visited several times during the Civil War and rode out from there in May 1646 to surrender to Scottish troops in nearby Southwell. The castle suffered badly after being laid siege to by Parliamentary soldiers. It was slighted after the war with just the curtain wall and gatehouse being left standing – the demolition would have been complete had not a worker been killed and destruction stopped as it was seen as a bad omen.

Norman Gatehouse

Being so close to Sherwood the castle has associations with the Robin Hood legends. It was certainly standing during these times. The closets association is with King John. He died in the castle on October 18th 1216 from dysentery whilst en route to his hunting lodge at Clipstone. It was thought he died on a chamber in the so-called King John’s Tower. This is the oldest surviving part of the castle and dates back to 1135. However, many scholars now believe John died in an apartment in the gatehouse, which is the finest of its type in England. The castle was mentioned in at least one Robin Hood film and many TV series including Robin of Sherwood in the 1980’s.

It would have been a brave force trying to get into the castle in John’s day. Although there was no moat, to cross the gatehouse would have been heavily defended. It survived all attacks in both the English civil war and from the wars of King Stephen between 1135 and 1154.

There are several dungeons and a vaulted under croft (hall) below the ground. These can be entered via the river walk but are only open on certain days of the year. The castle was renovated in the early 1980’s and rooms in the North West and King John’s towers can be accessed. There are no surviving drawings or paintings showing how the castle looked before its destruction took place.

Albie."

(Pictures taken - Saturday 29th May 2010)

Many thanks Albie!

King John's Palace at Clipstone

On the road from Edwinstowe to Mansfield, 19 miles from Nottingham, in the heart of what was once part of the royal forest of Sherwood, is the village of King’s Clipstone. Standing in what is known as Castle Field at grid reference SK605647 is the enigmatic ruins known today as ‘King John’s Palace’ or ‘the Castle’.

It is a site I have wanted to visit for a very long time. According to my notes this place was first documented in 1164 when ‘£20 was spent on repairs to the king’s houses’. The buildings were originally constructed in timber and later replaced Mansfield and Kingshaugh as the principal royal accommodation during the monarch’s hunting parties in Sherwood. For over 200 years this ‘palace’ was the main royal residence in the area and Henry II, Richard I, John, Henry III, Edward I, Edward II, Edward III, and Richard II all stayed for weeks or even months at a time. Ideally situated at the heart of ancient Sherwood, and only a day’s ride from Nottingham, they could enjoy the pleasures of the beautiful countryside and rich hunting away from the main royal residences. Situated on the high ground above the River Maun with the Great Pond of Clipstone to the east, the site would have been fairly secure and very pleasant.

The excavation in the 1950’s and field walking revealed numerous small Roman remains. It seems the site was probably first occupied by the Romans, later becoming first a Saxon, then a royal manor. The Plantagenet kings transformed the building into a royal palace. Excavations in 1956 showed that the palace consisted of a number of buildings, some timber framed and some stone, including a great hall, knights' hall, queen's hall and kitchen, king's kitchen, great chamber, great chapel and long stable, surrounded by a ditch.

The owner of historic ‘King John's Palace’, Mickey Bradley, is hoping to raise the profile of the site to save the ruins, which are in urgent need of work to stabilise the crumbling walls and recently the site was added to the English Heritage's Buildings 'At Risk Register', which highlights important sites that are in 'grave danger of irretrievable decay'. With the backing of local group the ‘Kings Clipstone Project’ –– Mr. Bradley is hoping that once the site is made safe, it can be opened up to visitors.

The group, which is working in partnership with Nottinghamshire County Council, Greenwood Community Forest, Sherwood Forest Trust, Newark & Sherwood Council and the Forestry Commission, wants to make the whole area more accessible to ramblers and cyclists.

Stephen Parkhouse, of the ‘Kings Clipstone Project’ said, "This area is like a jigsaw puzzle and all we need to do is put the pieces together. We're keen to make this a part of the Nottinghamshire tourist route.

"The things we are talking about –– for example a footpath up to Sherwood Forest Pines –– are not going to cost a lot of money, but will give people better access to what is a major royal site."

And Mrs. Bradley, the wife of the owner, believes all the work going on behind the scenes to ensure the survival of the ruins is worthwhile because of the great importance of the site.

"Everybody that comes here is floored by the amount of history and can't believe we have a royal palace," she said.

"People talk of it as a ‘hunting lodge’, but there were a whole series of buildings on a large scale and we know from documentary evidence it had stables for 200 horses –– it was a very important location. The remains are very much in danger and there are bits falling off all the time, the way things are going I don't think it will be here in 10 years time.”

A condition survey carried out by Nottinghamshire County Council found the palace to be in a 'dreadful state', but thanks to the rich history of the site the council views it as a priority. James Wright, of Nottinghamshire Community Archaeology said, "King John's Palace is a tremendously important site, it's a medieval royal palace and you don't really get much more important than that. It was used as a meeting place for the kings of England to meet other royalty and as such it is of national and even international importance."

The 4th Duke of Portland was known to have robbed the foundations in 1816. The buildings are said to have covered two acres with stables for two hundred horses which gives some idea of the scale of building on the site.

Six generations of Plantagenet Kings’ were recorded as delighting in the pleasures, Clipstone had to offer. Its grandeur can be summarized by the fact that Richard Lionheart visited it on Palm Sunday 1194. It was shortly after his return to England after being ransomed by the Duke of Austria and the siege of Nottingham Castle.

“……….he set out to see Clipstone and the forest of Sherwood, which he had never seen before and it pleased him much.”

Roger of Hoveden (fl.1174-1201)

Richard I chose to return on April 2nd to meet King William of Scotland. We can only imagine the entertainment’s planned. No king of Richard’s standing would choose to meet a fellow monarch particularly when greater houses were within reach. Maybe less formality and the pleasure of the hunt were the reason for this choice.

King John, Richard’s brother was given The Manors of Clipstone, while still Earl of Mortain. Deprived of them once because of mutinous behavior in trying to seize the crown whilst his brother was at the Crusades, they were later restored. There are actually only five recorded visits to the ‘Kings Houses’ but possibly some went un-chronicled. For some reason ‘King John’s Palace’ stuck, but not at the time. William Senior’s map 1630 refers to the building as ‘Manor Garth’ and Hoopers engraving refers to the ‘Kings Houses’ in 1784.

It seems that it was the earliest O/S Maps who started to use the term ‘King John’s Palace’. Probably this term was taken from the local people who knew other local legends about him. One in particular relates how King John whilst hunting in Sherwood was bought news of a Welsh uprising, so ordered the 28 boy hostages held at Nottingham Castle to be hung.

Nearby lays Parliament Oak, it was under the branches of this tree where Edward I is supposed to have held a parliament during a royal hunt in Sherwood. Edward, intent on proceeding to the Scottish Borders, summoned Parliament to meet him at Clipstone, in October 1290. This truly brought such a number of nobles to Clipstone that would never be seen again. During the months that followed he was near or at Clipstone, when his wife Eleanor Castille became seriously ill. She was staying at Rufford Abbey away from the bustle of Clipstone until she moved to Hardby where she died, on 28 November 1290.

Some of the additions were large and expensive. In 1279 Edward I added two chambers with chapels costing £435 12s 6d, a huge amount and two years later he built stables for 200 horses at a cost of £104 8s 5d. In 1348/49 money was spent on the rebuilding of the knights’ chamber and the repair of the great hall, the queen’s hall, the king’s kitchen, the queen’s kitchen, great chamber, Rosamund’s chamber, Robert de Mauley’s chamber, the treasurer’s chamber, the chamber of Lionel, the king’s son, the great chapel, the chapel next to the king’s chamber, the king’s long stable, and the great gateway.

The last known royal visit was by Richard II in 1393. After 1401 the palace was granted as a reward to loyal supporters (returned to the crown on death) and it fell into an increasing state of disrepair. By 1568 the ‘King’s Houses’ were virtually gone. For the next 250 years the site was plundered of its stone to build village houses and Clipstone Hall, the replacement manor house.

Whether the kings who stayed at Clipstone ever thought of the property as a ‘palace’ is debatable. What is certain is that the ‘King’s Houses’ became a high status complex of buildings, reflecting the fact that for over 200 years it was the favored residence of the Plantagenet Kings when visiting the area. The large sums being expended provide very good evidence that many of the buildings were constructed of stone and records from the 17th century indicate a Romanesque style. The three walls now remaining probably date from around 1279 when Edward I added the new King’s and Queen’s Chambers.

I will try and visit this site this year and post some pictures.