Page:Archaeological Journal, Volume 29.djvu/38

22 older, and probably Norman curtain. Whether it was connected with a gatehouse is uncertain, but there is, as already stated, an indication in the masonry that such was the case. Also the portcullis groove is large, and so heavy a grate could not have been worked without a chamber above, carrying a winch. Outside the gate are two buttresses, which have a late Norman aspect. One is nearly perfect, the other has been replaced in brick, but probably upon the old base. The south-west angle of the Quarry Street front is marked by the not inconsiderable remains of the postern tower, adjacent wall, and a large buttress, all pretty clearly late Norman. Towards the north and cast the walls are entirely removed, but in these quarters the line of the ditch affords a clue to the original boundary. The enceinte, thus laid down, measures about 535 yards; its greatest north and south diameter, 170 yards; and east and west, 140 yards. The Quarry Street front is straight and 138 yards long, with the gate nearly in the middle. From the postern tower to the end of the keep causeway is 213 yards, and thence to the King's Head angle, 184 yards.

Captain James has detected traces of a line of wall parallel to and about 30 yards south of the High Street, which may not improbably have been the boundary of an enclosed area appended to the castle, as may the extra-parochial lands on the east and south-east, but the actually defended area of the castle seems to have been as above described.

It may further be observed that Quarry Street, which runs along the foot of the west wall of the castle, and lay between it and the river, seems to have been defended on that side by the low cliff and talus already mentioned, supported probably by the retaining wall, of which traces, and the jamb of a gate, remain; while there is a tradition of a gate crossing the street near the postern of the castle, which probably guarded the approach to the town from the south, the only quarter from which a hostile approach would be apprehended.

Not only are the remains of the domestic buildings of a late Norman character, but among the repairs of the hall, in the reign of Henry III., two of the piers are mentioned as out of the perpendicular, a tolerably conclusive evidence that the hall resembled Oakham and Leicester, and was of Norman date. Altogether, it is sufficiently evident that the