Subjects:
Rochester Castle was built in 1088, by the Bishop of Rochester - Gundulf. It was known that the Bishop owed the King - King William Rufus, a sum of £100. To settle the dispute the King ordered Gundulf to build a motte and bailey castle at Rochester. Th cost was £60, and the money came from Gundulf. The structure of the castle consisted simply of a single stone wall. In 1122, a square stone keep was built inside the bailey, by John of Worcester. In 1230 a cross wall was built. It divided the Bailey into two parts - the outer bailey and the inner bailey. This information was extracted from the Textus Roffensis - Register of Rochester castle.
During it's existence, Rochester Castle was sieged three times. Once in 1088, then 1215 and finally in 1264.
The siege in 1088 was against King William II, as his brother, Robert and his uncle, Odo, wanted to overthrow him and place Robert on the throne. The plan failed and Robert remained king.
The siege in 1215 was against King John because he refused the nomination of Simon Langton as Archbishop of Canterbury. Langton became Archbishop, and was appointed to 'look after the castle', but the king asked for it to be r
. . .
Conclusion
From all of the evidence I have collected, I can see that Rochester Castle was an important military site.
The first siege in 1088, did not damage the castle much. Therefore the king must have considered Rochester castle as an important military site, otherwise he would not have spent so much ,money on it. The fact that Rochester castle was sieged so many times, and even when it was ruin also proves that it was an important military site.
Over the 282 years(1088 - 1370), several changes and repairs were made to the castle. This puts the castle at an advantage as the inhabitants of the castle would be able to see attackers approaching on the River Medway. The were narrow so that attackers outside could not shoot arrows inside. Obviously people thought that it had enough significance that it was worth the effort of sieging it.
Because Rochester Castle was en route to London it may have meant that attackers were dealt with at Rochester instead of at London. Anyone intending to get to London from the south coast of England had to pass through Rochester first. For example from the 1264 siege the outcome was that the king lost control over Rochester Castle and did not rule for one whole year as he was imprisoned, and the Barons ruled the country during this time.
Rochester castle also had many repairs made to it which means that the King wanted to keep it and thought that it was important enough to maintain and repair.
Essay's Topics
All research is for reference purposes only.