Sunday 08 September 2002. UK.
A trip back in time, prompted by finding a file of photos on my computer. This dates back to my first digital camera and me trying to get used to it before we headed off for our first Egypt holiday. There was a learning curve, and I clearly still wasn’t used to the ability to take as many photos as the card would hold-I was still running on the assumption of 24- or 36- frame film that would cost money to be developed!
Anyway, I’m really not sure how we ended up at Tutbury Castle that day. Admittedly it wasn’t too far south of our then home in Nottingham and I had never visited. I was (am!) the history buff, always interested in castles and other ‘piles of rock’, or ‘footings’, as Mark would term them. He had little interest in that sort of thing. Also it was a weekend day and his job at the time, Warden at a Country Park, tended to mean working all weekend in the summer. Maybe September had eased into the winter schedule when he’d get one day off? At this point I can’t remember but I should be grateful that Mark was willing to spend a precious free weekend day at a ‘pile of rock’. I wonder if there had been a rare-ish bird in the vicinity?
My main interest in the castle was that it was one of the prisons used for Mary, Queen of Scots, who spent four periods living at the castle, beginning in February 1569 and culminating in a visit of about 1 year duration in 1585. From here she went to Chartley and from there to Fotheringay, where she was executed on 08 February 1587, for plotting against Elizabeth I. Mary reputedly hated Tutbury, in particular, complaining of it being old, with wet plaster and draughty, ill-fitting old carpentry. Clearly this would be worth a look for a history fan.
The remaining castle (and it is largely ruined) is mainly 15th and 16th century in date, but the first castle was built around 1071 as a classic Norman motte and bailey. It belonged at that time to the Earls of Derby, and had the misfortune of being repeatedly ‘slighted’ (i.e. partially- or fully-demolished) and then rebuilt, due to successive rebellions of the Earls of Derby against the crown. After the last of these episodes, the ownership of the castle and lands were transferred to the Earls (later Dukes) of Lancaster and remained so; in fact the castle still belongs to the present duke, who happens to be King Charles III.
The castle underwent a number of rebuilds by the Lancastrian family, including John of Gaunt, who seems to have been responsible for the gatehouse. Well, it is known as ‘John o’Gaunt’s Gateway’, so that’s maybe a clue! The castle became the principal residence for his wife, Constance, who formed a court there, thronged with musicians and artists.
After the high point of John of Gaunt’s time, the castle declined and so it was in quite poor condition by the time that Queen Elizabeth was looking for somewhere to lodge her unfortunate, but frankly annoying cousin, Mary. As a figurehead for catholic resistance to Elizabeth’s reign, Mary couldn’t be held too close to London or anywhere close to the Scottish border. The north of England tended to be a holdout for the old religion so Lancashire, Yorkshire and Northumberland were to be avoided. Houses in the midlands were the best option, so Mary’s long period of captivity was undertaken at a number of houses and castles in the East Midlands, of which Tutbury was one. Tudor noble households tended to stay in one place for only a short time, as the limited sanitation of the time meant that the houses tended to get dirty rather quickly. The household would then move out to another property whilst the first house was cleaned and fumigated. Mary’s last stay in the castle was an unusually long one, nearly a year, and she had complained about the state of cleanliness before she was finally moved in December 1585.
The castle continued to decline after Mary’s death, although her son, James (I of England, VI of Scotland) stayed there several times after his accession to the English throne. I wonder if he ever thought about his old mum mouldering away in here?
The castle had a late blossoming when it was refortified during the English Civil War, when it was in Royalist hands. An unsuccessful Parliamentarian siege was followed a year later by another. After three weeks of this second siege, the castle surrendered and it was subsequently slighted by order of parliament, ending its use as a defensive building.
There was some occupation continuing on the site, as evidenced by the so-called ‘King’s Lodging’, which is still intact, and that a folly was build on the motte in 1780. There was a fashion at that time for romantic ruins, as if the castle ruins weren’t already romantic enough, and so a ‘ruined keep’ was constructed on the mound where the original Norman keep would have been.
I have always enjoyed clambering around a ruined castle, up and down the spiral staircases and looking out from the battlements.
I left Mark down in the bailey and went for an explore. It seems that the castle served as a barracks during the Napoleonic Wars and afterwards, as there were interesting graffiti on some of the walls (along with less interesting modern stuff).
It looks like Mr. Crichton had plenty of time on his hands back in 1818, and that he was proud of being a Freemason. Henry Smith wasn’t quite so empathic in 1794.
Two generations of Cowenlocks seem to have been present, in 1829 and 1856.
What is it with the human desire to make their mark on history?
A local re-enactment group were drilling in the bailey. It looked like a mixture of uniforms, mainly Victorian, but added a bit of colour to the proceedings.
So that was Tutbury. Not a huge amount to see but I thought it definitely worth a visit. Nowadays it is a rather slick place if you look at the website, which you can hire for weddings or wakes, so I’m rather pleased I saw it when that side of things was less developed-although that large marquee in the background of the photo above suggests that it was already an option, even then.
San on the Lam 