Eynsford Castle
Our very last trip on that muggy yet very wet Sunday was Eynsford Castle. Yet another one we'd never even heard of, but a unique example that we've now added to our adventures.
The castle was built on an Anglo-Saxon Burh which essentially is a fortification or fortified settlement to protect the Anglo-Saxons from Viking invaders or other attackers attempting onslaughts. Complete with Anglo-Saxon cemetery, the castle was built on the manor of the settlement and was erected in order to shield Lanfranc from Odo, the Bishop of Bayeux by William de Eynsford. Now this castle is unique as it didn't have a keep, it is made up of an inner and outer bailey guarded by the curtain wall. So in terms of the traditional imagery that comes to mind when you mention a castle, Eynsford has the makings of one, but no grand living quarters, it was just several buildings within the wall, nothing special for our fairytale princesses.
In 970 The manor of Eynsford was acquired by what is now known as Canterbury Cathedral and a series of stone buildings were built over the site later in the 11th century. The structures were then surrounded by a ditch and possibly reinforced by a rampart which would have added to the defences. This would have also included a Anglo-Saxon cemetery located to the south east of the castle although it's unknown quite how far the defences spanned as it differs to what is seen today as it was pre-castle. These stone buildings and the forming of the burh were seen as quite unusual for the time but they were quite complex and formed an aristocratic residence.
After the Norman invasion it was Odo who took over the castle once he became Earl of Kent. The settlement in the burh continued, likely as a power play by the Normans. However, as these lands were bordered by Canterbury it then fell into the Canterbury domain and when Lanfranc became Archbishop of Canterbury he sought to reclaim the manor/settlement and we assume he managed this following Odo's arrest by King William. This caused him great paranoia as he was then concerned by the threat of Odo returning to reclaim it from him, so he appointed Knight Ralph as custodian in order to run the settlement and then this duty fell to his son William who became William de Eynsford. It was William who was authorised by Lanfranc to improve the defences and so he built the wall which ensured that this then became a castle.
The castle then remained looked after by the next six generations of the de Eynsfords' who were all named William so had to be numbered in the usual fashion (roman numerals). William I retired to be a monk in 1130 and passed the castle to William II, in the same year a great hall was built within the wall and the wall was heightened. The remnants are as we see them today as the hall, the new gatehouse, and the higher wall all increased defence and ended up as the latest renovations as the previous buildings were too outdated and were abandoned in favour of the hall during the time anyway.
William III was excommunicated for a little while when he became involved with a dispute between King Henry II and Thomas Becket. He was an ally of the latter but they fell out when Becket went to appoint a priest to Eynsford church, this caused his temporary exile from the religious community as a consequence.
William IV died not long after inheriting the castle from his father, but his son William V sided with the rebels against King John and was captured at Rochester Castle, Eynsford then being forfeit to the crown. He redeemed the castle once the war was over and became constable of Hertford Castle. It was then his grandson William VI (William V had a daughter, not called William) who rebuilt the hall when it burnt down and added glazed windows. He died young, so did his son William VII and thus the long line of William de Eynsford died out.
The de Eynsford estates ended up divided equally among two descendants of William V, one a wealthy and powerful landowner and the other a smaller Kentish landowner. However, both these men lost the castle when they supported the rebels against King Henry III and the empty castle was seized by a royal official and passed to a royal judge. Ralph de Sandwich, said judge, then decided to levy the castle from the rich and powerful landowner by manipulative force by the sounds of it, and co-owned the castle with the Criols which were the small Kentish family.
When de Sandwich sold his share to William Inge, conflict came and the Criol descendants battled the attempt at exerting his rights over the property by attacking several of Inge's properties and causing general mayhem. Inge brought forward a legal case and both ownership claims were upheld which actually then led to the castle becoming abandoned as neither party could then do anything with it without the others involvement. Manorial court was held in the hall when needed, but aside from this the castle lay dormant.
The Criols died out and Inge's share went to the Zouche family who then gained full ownership due to the death of the other family. The castle, ruined by this time, was then passed to several other people who used the site as various things such as stables and kennels or even attempting to excavate, but the fate of the castle was to remain as the ruin we see today aside from the nice new bridge which was added in the 60s to cross the moat.
Of course this is now an English Heritage site and is free to enter for all, but searching nearby sites within our membership is how we came across it. We had no idea it was even here otherwise, but it was a great find and one which was pretty much abandoned by the public as well as its previous owners. It didn't take long to wander around and see what was left of the site and it certainly got our steps in, but there was no grand history to wow us, just the curtain wall which enabled the site to be grander than it was.
There was a general feel of unease when we visited this site, there didn't seem to be any wildlife, just silence which put us on edge. The rain had stopped during our travel from St Leonard's Tower to Eynsford, but the newly found sunshine did nothing to stop the loneliness and eerie feel from the crumbling stones. This site felt unloved, lost, but we didn't see the ghostly monk in black which is reported to haunt the site. This didn't quite feel like a haunted spot, just one of those ones where the building is the ghost rather than anything else paranormally inclined.
Would we go again? Perhaps for a large group picnic. It's fairly scenic and a nice quiet spot, but exploration wise its lonely stone and sadly nothing special. Just a legacy left behind by at least six men named William and in the shadow of the religious sector.
DISCLAIMER: Now for the official bit. This blog does not receive any paid promotions from the places mentioned above. We have not been approached to promote or act as spokespersons for any attraction mentioned within this post and this is simply a post intended to act as a day in the life of a couple on a cute date. All photos included are taken by ourselves and as such the rights for these images our ours, no links, brands, or companies mentioned otherwise belong or are associated with Phantom Adventures UK. We are responsible only for this blog. Opinions are our own and not influenced by any third party source..
If you have any recommendations on places to visit or somewhere you would like to see on the blog, please feel free to drop us a message on instagram under @phantomadventuresuk or email us at phantomadventuresuk@gmail.com
Comments
Post a Comment