0

Launceston Castle, Cornwall

Conservation Management Plan

1

Summary Launceston Castle is situated on a naturally defensible terrace high above the River Kensey. This natural land form gives the Castle its strategic position, with open views from the south east round to the north east, over looking the ancient land crossing from Devon over the River Tamar into Cornwall. The first motte and bailey fortification was constructed by Count Robert of Mortain sometime before the Domesday Survey of 1086. During the 11th Century the Castle and newly founded town became the administrative centre for Cornwall with the Castle being home to the County Court and Goal for the majority of its life. The Castle reached the height of its power and grandeur during the thirteenth century under Richard, Earl of Cornwall, who completely remodelled the Castle. The Castle has belonged to the Duchy of Cornwall since its creation for Edward the Black Prince in 1337. In 1951 the Castle was placed in the care of the State as a Guardianship Site and is now maintained by English Heritage. Heritage Values Surviving on the top of the motte are the Shell Keep of twelfth century date and the inner High Tower dating to the thirteenth century. The survival of a stone Shell Keep is rare in Britain and as such Launceston Castle is of pre-eminent historic and architectural significance on an international level. The fact that the inner High Tower was constructed at a time when motte and bailey castles were falling out of favour makes the continued development of this Castle intriguing. Designations The Castle site as a whole is designated as a Scheduled Ancient Monument and within the boundaries of this monument are a number of listed buildings that include the Shell Keep and High Tower as well as the two surviving gatehouses and their attached sections of curtain wall. Management Objectives and Policies These have been designed to provide a sustainable approach to the management of the site that balances the needs of both the archaeological monument and its role as a visitor attraction. These include: The Management and Condition of the Monument, Combating Incidents of Vandalism and Enhancing Visitor Experience. The detail of the management strategies to address these issues will be outlined in the site management plan.

2

Table of Contents

Summary

List of Figures

Abbreviations

Part One: Introduction to the Management Plan ……………………. 4

Aims ……………………………………………………………….… 4

Limitations of the Plan …………………………………………… 4

Structure of the Plan ……………………………………….….… 5

Part Two: Description and Historical Background …………………... 6

Location …………………. ………………………………….……. 6

The Management Plan Area..………………………………..…. 6

Setting of the Castle and Underlying Geology ………………. 7

Current Management and Land Ownership..…………..…..… 8

Statutory Designations ………………………………………...... 9

Part Three: Summary History………………………………………….. 12

Part Four: Significance ………………………………..………………. 19

Criteria for Assessment …………………………….………..… 19

Evidential…………………………………………………………. 19

Historic…………………………………………………………….. 22

Aesthetic………………………………………………………….. 24

Communal………………………………………………………... 25

Part Five: Conservation Management Issues ……………..………. 27

Management and Condition of the Monument ……..……... 27

Vandalism and Security…………….……………………..…... 30

Enhancing Visitor Experience …………………………….….. 32

Site Interpretation and Signage…..………………………….. 36

Consultation………………………………….…………..……… 38

Bibliography.……………………………………………………..……... 40

Appendix A ………………………………………………..……….…… 42

3

List of Figures and Plates

Cover Image – Launceston Castle motte.

Figure 1 – Location map of Launceston.

Figure 2 – Boundaries of the Scheduled area.

Figure 3 – Map showing the listed buildings within the boundary of the site.

Figure 4 – Plan of the remains at Launceston Castle.

Figure 5 – Painting of the Castle dating to approximately 1770.

Figure 6 – Reconstruction illustration of the late eleventh century Castle.

Figure 7 – Reconstruction illustration of the mid thirteenth century Castle.

Plate 1 – The motte of Launceston Castle.

Plate 2 – The communal gardens within the Castle, 1935.

Plate 3 – Aerial photograph showing the Second World War Nissan Huts.

Plate 4 – Plaque commemorating St Cuthbert Mayne.

Plate 5 – Plaque commemorating George Fox.

Plate 6 – Plaque detailing the inclination of the high tower.

Plate 7 – Graffiti on the curtain wall.

Plate 8 – CCTV camera within the bailey.

Plate 9 – The intrusive growth on the South gatehouse.

Plate 10 – The intrusive growth up the motte stairs.

Plate 11 – Intrusive growth within a bush relating to the communal garden.

Plate 12 – Current presentation of the Administration Hall.

Plate 13 – The current fence.

Plate 14 – Visitors sitting on part of the curtain wall.

N.B. All plates are copyright of the Author unless otherwise stated.

Abbreviations

HER – Historic Environment Service

NMR – National Monuments Record

DCMS – Department for Culture, Media and Sport

4

Part One: Introduction to the Management Plan

Launceston Castle lies at the centre of the historic town of Launceston, the ancient

gateway into Cornwall. Launceston Castle has a long and colourful history with the

first fortifications being erected at the site during 1068, after a failed rebellion against

the rule of William the Conqueror (Saunders, 2006). The extant building and

earthwork remains date to the Medieval and Post-Medieval periods and form the

cultural landscape of the site. These elements have a great value and inform the

significance of Launceston Castle.

1.1 Aims of the Plan

The main emphasis of the Management Plan is to provide English Heritage with a

set of management guidelines and objectives that will allow the conservation of the

monument. Conservation as it is used here includes not only ensuring the survival of

the physical remains of the Castle, but also enhancing the interpretation and

presentation of the site.

The aim of the Conservation Management Plan is to:

• Establish authoritatively why the site is significant.

• Identify how the site is vulnerable and how this could affect its significance.

• Inform a sustainable approach to the management of the site that balances the

needs of both the archaeological monument and its role as a visitor attraction.

• Prepare an implementation plan that prioritises the actions that need to be taken

on site to aid conservation and to promote its better understanding and

appropriate presentation (including for instance managing vandalism and

harnessing its energy).

1.2 Limitations of the Plan

The scope of this Plan, as stated above, is to provide English Heritage with

management objectives to conserve Launceston Castle. As part of understanding

the site a description of the main periods of its history has been included. Further

references on the history of the site can be found in the bibliography.

5

1.3 Structure of the Plan

The structure of the Plan follows closely the model suggested in guidance notes

produced by the Heritage Lottery Fund and English Heritage’s Conservation

Principles and comprises:

• A description of the site, its archaeological and historical background and its

character, a statement of significance and the current ownership.

• The identification of the key management issues facing the site.

• The suggested objectives that could be used to address the management

issues.

• An implementation programme suggesting how the objectives can be put into

practice.

The significance of Launceston Castle is outlined using the criteria set out in English

Heritage’s Conservation Principles (2008). This will involve looking at the Evidential,

Historical, Aesthetic and Communal values of the site, all of which influence the

significance of the site.

6

Part Two: Character of the Management Plan Study Area

2.1 Location National Grid Reference: SX33118464

Monument Name:

Launceston

Castle

County:

Cornwall

District:

North Cornwall

Parish:

Launceston

HER Number:

2753

Monument Number:

15005

2.2 The Management Plan Area

The area covered by the Conservation Management Plan is enclosed by the

boundary of the scheduled area of the monument. The boundary, see figure 2,

follows the line of St Thomas Road in both its southern and western sections. The

boundary then turns due east following the course of the north curtain wall. The

boundary encompasses the North Gatehouse and then curves around the base of

the motte. At its most northern point the base of the motte runs down to Castle Dyke

with the north eastern and eastern line of the boundary then following the line of the

Dyke southwards. The south eastern section of the boundary follows the line of

Western Road until it meets St Thomas Road. This area includes the area managed

and cared for by English Heritage (see below).

Figure 1: Location of Launceston (© www.magic.gov.uk – Crown Copyright. All rights reserved)

7

Figure 2: Map indicating the scheduled area. Source: Digimap - © Crown Copyright/

database right 2007 – Ordnance Survey/ Edina supplied service.

2.3 Setting of the Castle and underlying Geology

Launceston Castle sits on the edge of a natural terrace, high above the River

Kensey. Along the western and northern limits of the site the land falls away steeply,

running down to meet the river. A rocky knoll of higher ground occupies the north

eastern corner of the site, which the Norman builders used to engineer the motte that

both the Shell Keep and High Tower now stand on, see plate 1. This particular land

form is due to the underlying geology of shale which has been raised by formations

of greenstone beneath (Pattison, 1852). To the east of the Castle the medieval town

8

of Launceston was constructed, nestling at the foot of Beacon Hill, which rises up to

form the top of the ridge.

Plate 1: Picture showing the motte and keep.

It is this natural land form that afforded the Castle its strategic position. The open

views from the south east round to the north east allowed the Castle to control all of

the lands between Dartmoor and Bodmin Moor, as well as guard the crossing point

over the River Tamar, two miles east of the Castle. This was the only land crossing

into Cornwall until the construction of the Saltash Bridge (Saunders, 1998).

The Castle still dominates the skyline today and can be clearly seen when

approaching the crossings into Cornwall over the River Tamar from Polson in the

east and Dutson to the north west.

2.4 Current Management and Land Ownership

Today Launceston Castle is managed by English Heritage on behalf of the

Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS). English Heritage was established

as a result of the National Heritage Act 1983. The main responsibility of the

organisation is to advise the Government on how to manage all aspects of the

historic environment. English Heritage provides advice on how to best preserve all

types of heritage that make up the countries unique historic environment.

9

There are over four hundred guardianship sites directly in the care of English

Heritage, who have a responsibility to ensure their preservation.

English Heritage is only one of many other bodies who have a direct interest in the

management of the Castle. Other bodies include:

• DCMS

• Duchy of Cornwall

• Cornwall Council

• Launceston Town Council

• Devon and Cornwall Police

• Local Residents

• Launceston Forum

2.5 Statutory Designations

There are a number of statutory designations in place at Launceston Castle.

Launceston Castle is in the freehold ownership of the Duchy of Cornwall and is in the

care and management of English Heritage. It is a scheduled ancient Monument. A

Schedule for Ancient Monuments was created in 1882. The DCMS is responsible for

identifying nationally important monuments and including them on the Schedule.

Launceston Castle was included on the Schedule of Ancient Monuments in 1951. Its

status as a Scheduled Ancient Monument has been reaffirmed twice since that date,

in 1981 and again in 1992 (Cornwall and Scilly HER). As such it is afforded statutory

protection under The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 and so

any works that would affect the site require Scheduled Monument Consent (SMC).

English Heritage enjoys a class consent for works it undertakes on the sites in its

care, SMC class Consent 6 (smcc6). The whole site itself is designated as a

scheduled monument but within the grounds there are two structures that no longer

survive above ground but which are scheduled in their own right. The first is the

remains of the County Goal, which stood at the base of the eastern rampart and the

other is what was known as Witches Tower. This stood in the south eastern angle of

the Curtain walls but collapsed in the nineteenth century when St Thomas’ Road was

constructed (English Heritage, NMR).

10

There are a number of listed buildings at the site, see figure 3, which have been

listed by the DCMS due to their special architectural or historical importance. Listed

buildings are classified into Grade I, Grade II* or Grade II based on their significance

and are given statutory protection and are dealt with by the Local Authority. As these

structures are within the bounds of the scheduled area the scheduling takes

precedence over listed building protection. The Grade I listed buildings are the Shell

Keep, High Tower, Guard Tower and retaining wall, the North Gatehouse and

attached buildings, the South Gatehouse and attached buildings, the well and the

remnants of the Curtain wall. The Grade II listed structures are the perimeter walls

and the water pump that stands at the base of the eastern rampart (English Heritage,

NMR).

Figure 3 : Map showing the listed structures within the boundary of the site. Image courtesy

of English Heritage.

11

The Castle also lies within a Conservation Area that covers the whole of Launceston.

Areas designated as Conservation Areas are judged to have a special character that

is due to a number of factors and are not based solely on the historical value of a

place. Within the Conservation Area of Launceston all features contribute to this and

so all are protected.

A public right of way crosses the centre of the site, running through both the South

and North gates.

12

Part Three: Summary History of Launceston Castle

Launceston Castle has a long history that has been well documented since the

construction of the first phase of fortifications at the site. The ownership of the Castle

has for most of its life been linked to the Crown, often being in the hands of the heir

to the thrown. Archaeological excavations carried out at the site between 1961 and

1982 by Andrew Saunders have provided more depth to this picture, showing how

the Castle developed during its history. The periods used in the discussion below are

taken from Saunders’ excavation report and denote the main phases of activity in the

Castle’s history.

Introduction

Pre- castle

Indications of previous cultivation and a small number of post holes were discovered

in the south west corner of the bailey and close to the South Gatehouse. No dating

of these features was undertaken, although from the finds it is likely that this phase

of activity stretches back no further than the early medieval period, the sixth to tenth

centuries AD (Saunders, 2006). The Historic Environment Record for the Castle

does indicate that Prehistoric features were discovered during the course of

excavation (Cornwall and Scilly HER) yet there is no mention of this in the

excavation report. The earliest material find was a Roman coin of the Emperor

Gallienus, AD 260-268, and a small number of tile fragments and a glass fragment

that date to the Anglo-Saxon period (Saunders, 2006). Both the Cornwall and Scilly

HER and the National Monuments Record show that there are a number of

prehistoric settlement sites; termed rounds, in the area of the Castle, the closest

being two rounds approximately one mile north west. This type of settlement site

generally dates to the Romano-British period but a number have been dated to the

late Iron Age (Todd, 1987). Further to the north west is a fragmented field system,

although it has no confirmed date it is likely to belong to the Iron Age (Cornwall and

Scilly HER). The density of Iron Age settlement in the immediate landscape suggests

that it is possible that the site of the Castle was utilised during the Iron Age, although

no traces were picked up during the excavations.

13

Phase 1: 1068-1075

In December 1067 a rebellion broke out in Devon and Cornwall. It was William the

Conqueror himself who led the army to Exeter and laid siege to the town in an effort

to quell the uprising. The siege lasted only eighteen days before the surrender was

given. In the spring of 1068 his army marched into Cornwall to put a final end to the

last vestiges of the rebellion. Count Brian of Brittany was handed control of both

counties and shortly afterwards established the first fortifications at the site of

Launceston Castle. Excavations revealed that during this period the site was

occupied by a number of sunken floored buildings (Saunders, 2006).

Phase 2: 1075 - 1104

In 1075 Brian took part in a rebellion against the King, which ultimately failed and his

lands passed to Robert, Count of Mortain, William’s half brother. Robert controlled

most of the Cornish lands holding 227 of the 360 manors in the county (Saunders,

2006). It is Robert who built the first Castle on the site. The Domesday Book records

the Castle of Count Robert at Dunheved, as Launceston was then known, a newly

founded town constructed in an outer bailey, east of the Castle. There is also an

entrance for St Stephen’s Church, on the opposite side of the Kensey Valley to

Launceston, showing Robert removed the market, worth 20 shillings, from the

Church to the Castle (C and F Thorn, 1979). These references suggest that the

Castle had become the administration centre for Robert’s lands in Cornwall. On the

death of Robert his lands were passed over to his son William.

The archaeological evidence shows that during this period the bailey rampart was

heightened and remodelled as well as being extended along to northern edge of the

bailey. An early form of the motte was also brought into existence (Saunders, 2006).

Phase 3: 1104 - 1175

In 1106 William, Count of Mortain and cousin to King Henry I, was dispossessed of

his lands and imprisoned for life after a failed rebellion against Henry. In 1141, during

the Anarchy, the Earldom of Cornwall was granted by Matilda to Reginald de

Dunstanville. The motte was heightened and the stone Shell Keep was erected. The

terrace in the side of the motte was created, the bailey ramparts were heightened

and a large number of permanent stone buildings were constructed within the bailey.

14

The last major structure built during this period was the first phase of the South

Gatehouse. After the accession of Henry II the Earldom remained with Reginald,

who held the title until his death in 1175 Saunders, 2006).

Phase 4: 1175 - 1227

The Earldom passed back to the Crown until 1189 when John, Count of Mortain was

granted it. With John’s accession to the throne the Earldom again reverted back to

the Crown. During the reign of John, both as Earl and King, the Castle was well kept

with references to money spent on its upkeep in the Pipe Rolls. The bailey ramparts

were again heightened and remodelled and the buildings within the bailey were

rebuilt with the addition of two towers, one in the south west corner and another

along the line of the northern defences. The Pipe Rolls indicate that one of the new

buildings was a gaol, which was erected in 1187 (Saunders, 2006).

Phase 5: 1227-1272

In 1227 Richard, younger brother to King Henry III was granted the Earldom, by

which time Launceston Castle was home to both the Court of the Royal Justices and

the County Gaol. During his time as Earl, Richard undertook a major programme of

building at Launceston Castle. This began with re-facing of the Shell Keep and a

remodelling of its gatehouse as well as the construction of a chemise around the top

of the motte. A Guard Tower was added at the foot of the motte terrace to guard the

bridge, and the staircase up to the keep was enclosed. A revetment of the terrace

was constructed and joined to the new Guard Tower. The ramparts were heightened

further and a stone curtain wall was constructed on top in a continuous circuit. Along

the eastern rampart mural towers were added and a secondary ditch dug at the foot

of the motte. The South Gatehouse was completely remodelled and enlarged with

the twin drum towers being added. Within the bailey the buildings were altered. A

new Great Hall was constructed as was a new Lesser Hall. A kitchen block was

constructed as was the garderobe to the east of the South Gatehouse. Saunders

also believes that the High Tower that was inserted into the Shell Keep during this

period (2006).

15

Phase 6: 1272 – 1337

Richard died in 1272 and the Earldom passed to his son Edmund. During this period

Edmund moved the centre of administration for the Earldom to Restormel Castle,

although the county court had already been moved from Launceston Castle to

Bodmin by his father. The building of the North Gatehouse falls into this period, most

likely on the orders of Edmund. After his death in 1300 the Earldom again reverted

back to the Crown (Saunders, 2006).

Phase 7: The fourteenth century

In 1337 the Duchy of Cornwall was created by King Edward III and granted to his

son Edward, The Black Prince. In the intervening years the Earldom had been

granted to a number of people including the wife of Edward II. On creation of the

Duchy, a survey was undertaken of its lands, the Caption of Seisin. The survey

records the condition of Launceston Castle at that point. The survey makes it clear

that the Castle was in a ruinous state. Repair work was undertaken at the Castle on

numerous occasions throughout the time of the Black Prince. After Edward died in

1376 the Duchy was given to Richard of Bordeaux. When Richard became King the

Duchy reverted to the Crown until his death in 1399, when it was granted to Henry of

Monmouth (Saunders, 2006). Richard had kept in his employ a master carpenter,

tiler and plumber who were tasked with keeping the Cornish Castles in repair and so

it is likely that periodic work was conducted at Launceston (Brown, et al., 1963).

During this period the two storey Council Chamber was added to the Great Hall

(Saunders, 2006).

Phase 8: The fifteenth century

Henry of Monmouth retained the Duchy when he became King in 1413. In 1421

Henry of Windsor, King Henry VI, became Duke of Cornwall, he too held the Duchy

throughout his reign as King. Edward Plantagenet, later Edward IV, became Duke in

1471. During this century no major changes appear to have taken place within the

Castle (Saunders, 2006).

Phase 9: 1500 – 1650

Repairs to the Castle appear to have slowed during this period in its history, most

likely due to the fact that for the majority of this period the Duchy was in possession

16

of the Crown (Brown, et al., 1963). The buildings within the bailey began to decline

with the only real use being for the Assize Court. The Borough Charter in 1555

reinstated Launceston as the administrative centre for the Duchy, stating that all

sessions of the court in the county of Cornwall had to be held within the Castle.

However, by 1610 even the Great Hall, where the court was held, had ceased to be

used (Saunders, 2006). In 1603 Henry, Duke of Rothesay, eldest son of James I,

had been granted the Duchy, yet he had decided that the degradation of the Castle

was irreparable (Brown, et al., 1963).

Improvements were made to the Castle during the Civil War, when the town was

used as a Royalist base. The only defensive structures repaired during the War were

the High Tower and Shell Keep, most likely to restore the fighting platform for

housing of cannon. No repairs were undertaken on the curtain wall as the main use

of the site was as a Prison and too much repair work would have been required to

make them defensible. After the final defeat of the Royalists, the Royal estates were

sold off, which included the Duchy. Parliamentary Commissioners visited Launceston

Castle in 1650 and recorded that the North Gatehouse was still in use, the lower

chamber was used a prison named the ‘Doomsdale’, while the upper chamber was

lived in by the Constable. By this time the only structure surviving within the bailey

was the Mural Tower in the south west corner (Saunders, 2006).

Phase 10: 1650 -1840

From the beginning of this phase until the Restoration of the Monarchy, Launceston

Castle was owned by Colonel Robert Bennett. During this time the Doomsdale

continued in use and in 1656 George Fox, founder of the Quakers, was imprisoned

for 30 weeks. After the Restoration the Duchy of Cornwall was reformed and held by

King Charles II. The only functioning role of the Castle for this phase of activity was

as the site of the County Goal. The bailey was divided in two with a hedge or wall

running from the east side of the North Gatehouse to the west side of the South

Gatehouse. The area to the east of this was the gaol. Vegetable plots were created

on the motte along with small shacks. The area to the west became a communal

area for the people of Launceston.

17

In 1764 the Eagle House was constructed just outside the North gate, with much of

the stone used in the construction coming from the North Gatehouse itself. Further

alterations took place in 1832 when what is now St Thomas Road was constructed

which meant the ditch along the southern and western sides of the rampart was filled

in. The end of this period saw the demolition of the gaol which was moved down to

Bodmin (Saunders, 2006).

Phase 11: 1840 – 1939

In 1840 Queen Victoria received a letter from the Queen of Portugal, who had

passed through Launceston and was shocked by the dilapidated state of the Castle.

Queen Victoria brought this to the attention Duke of Northumberland who owned the

large estate of Werrington, which lay just outside the town of Launceston. The Duke

laid out a park garden within the bailey, which involved the landscaping of the site

and intensive planting, see plate 2. The Custodians Lodge was constructed in these

works to be used as accommodation for the Park Keeper. It was noted in the report

of a Duchy Surveyor in 1841 that the Castle

Green was being used as public promenade.

In July 1844, after a year of negotiation the

Duke was granted the lease of the Castle by

the Duchy of Cornwall. Records show that the

lease was later taken up by the Launceston

Corporation who over the course of their lease

conducted many programmes of repair

(Saunders, 2006).

Plate 2: Picture of the garden as it was in 1935

(Dunning, 2001).

Phase 12: 1939 to present

During the Second World War the Castle bailey was used as a hospital for the

American Army who constructed a number of Nissan huts on the site, see plate 3.

These were left in place after the war and were still in situ in 1951 when the Castle

was passed into the care of the State and was put in the care of the Ministry of

Works. During this period many repairs have taken place, to all structures within the

18

scheduled area. From the 1950s right through until the 1970s monthly reports were

made on the condition and numerous consolidation works were undertaken with the

Keep and Tower having sections consolidated almost yearly. A major consolidation

programme took place in the early 1960s with a concrete ring beam being inserted

into the top of the motte (English Heritage Files AM70102/01 and AM70102/04). The

ring beam was inserted to halt the subsidence of the motte, a process that had

begun due to the terracing of the motte in the nineteenth century. In 1959 heavy rain

made the stability of the motte worsen, which led to the decision to insert the ring

beam. The present use of the site is as an historic tourist attraction, although the

bailey is still open and is used as a communal space by the town people.

Plate 3 : Aerial photograph showing the Nissan huts from the Second World War. © English

Heritage. NMR. Reference Number: HAW 9401/20.

Please see Appendix A for reconstruction illustrations.

19

Part Four: Significance

An assessment of key characteristics that make Launceston Castle significant, for

which it was scheduled, is essential to inform management objectives for the site.

3.1 Criteria for Assessment

The way in which significance is assessed here is in line with English Heritage’s

Conservation Principles: Policies and Guidelines, which was published in 2008. The

document sets out heritage values, which are grouped under the four headings of

Evidential, Historic, Aesthetic and Communal. The values discussed under these

heading will demonstrate the significance of Launceston Castle as well as providing

an understanding of the relative importance, national, regional or local, of each.

Assessment in this way provides a more detailed picture than the use of statutory

protection criteria. Assessing heritage values will illustrate how best to retain the

significance of Launceston Castle.

3.2 Evidential

The evidential value of Launceston Castle lies within the buildings that were

constructed on the site, their survival and the information that can be gleaned from

them relating to the development of Castles within medieval Britain.

Launceston Castle is an exceptionally well preserved example of a motte and bailey

castle. The main component of the Castle is the Shell Keep and its inner High

Tower, which sit on top of the motte that, at its highest, reaches up to 17.1 metres

(Saunders, 2006). Both of these structures still stand nearly in their entirety, with

sections of the wall walk still being in place on the Shell Keep and details such as the

fire place and window still being evident within the High Tower. The preservation of

the stone Shell Keep makes the Castle nationally important. Out of approximately

600 castles constructed by the Normans of motte, or motte and bailey type only 71

are recorded as having Shell Keeps (English Heritage File AA070102/1). The small

number of preserved Shell Keeps makes them rare monuments, which gives them

an enhanced value in the study of medieval defences.

20

To further complement this there are a number of other components of the medieval

Castle that still survive to some extent within the bounds of the site. The majority of

these structures relate to the defence of the Castle. The excavations that took place

at Launceston Castle and the surviving documentation have allowed a clear phasing

of the fortification structures to be developed, see figure 4. The ability to be able to

clearly phase these structures adds to the academic potential for the study of

medieval fortifications. Many of these structures, detailed below, were constructed

during the thirteenth century when the Castle was remodelled by Earl Richard. This

enhancement increases the significance of the Castle as at this time motte and

bailey castles had begun to fall out of use. The Normans had realised that a motte

and bailey with a Keep was not the most effective type of military strategy (English

Heritage, NMR). Even if the new suite of defensive structures were no longer in line

with advanced castle planning it did mean that Launceston was exceptionally well

defended. This remodelling of Launceston Castle was likely undertaken by Richard

to demonstrate his power and wealth. As with the construction of Tintagel Castle he

may have been trying to tie himself to the Arthurian legend to strengthen his position

both in Cornwall and in Europe.

At the foot of the motte are the remains of a Guard Tower that still stands close to its

original height. Attached to the tower and running west is the remains of a retaining

wall, which encloses a terrace within the side of the motte. The terrace contains the

remains of a well. The stairs that lead up from the tower to the Shell Keep were

originally enclosed and parts of these walls remain along the line of the stairs. The

surviving walls flank both sides of the stairs, although more survives of the wall on

the western side. A substantial amount of the South Gatehouse survives along with

its barbican as well as the attached curtain walls, which survive best to the west of

the gatehouse. The South Gatehouse is today the main entrance on to the site and

still stands to an impressive height, with one of the original two storeys still standing

above the gate arch. The portcullis slot is still evident as is the remains of a stairway

into the chamber above the arch. Of the fortified barbican only the two flanking walls

remain, although the floor level is still evident as a row of beam slots. The North

Gatehouse only remains to a height just above the apex of the gate. Attached to the

west side of the gatehouse is a chamber that only survives to the height of one

storey above ground level. The western half of the chamber extends below ground

21

level for approximately two metres, forming a subterranean chamber (English

Heritage, NMR). Lastly the remains of the base of a mural tower survive in the south

west corner of the bailey. The interior has been excavated to reveal the surviving

walls that stand to approximately half a metre.

Figure 4: Illustration depicting the surviving structures that relate to the medieval castle. The

structures are coloured to show the phases of development that took place. (© English

Heritage)

There are a number of remains within the grounds that relate to the running of the

Castle as well as its later history. The survival of these structures does add to the

evidential value of the Castle and scheduled as part of a monument of national

significance. Inside the Castle bailey the outer walls of four stone buildings are

evident. To the east of the South Gatehouse stand the remains of two rooms, one of

22

which is a stone lined pit approximately one and a half metres deep, thought to be a

garderobe pit (Saunders, 2006). The walls of the second room stand at their highest

to approximately one and a half metres. West of the South Gatehouse is the remains

of a complex of four buildings; the first is the Administrative Hall whose walls extend

less than half a metre above ground level. To the west are the remains of the kitchen

which include the remains of two ovens housed in the south wall. It is here where the

remains are best preserved, standing nearly two metres high. North of this and

connected by a low wall are the footprints of the Great Hall and attached Council

Chamber.

At the base of the eastern rampart stands a water pump, which was constructed next

to the site of the Gaol in 1739 (English Heritage, NMR). The pump bears the

inscription ‘IH’ and is composed of lead pipes in a wooden housing with a granite

trough. The boundary of the Castle site is marked by a retaining wall built in the

1840s for the Duke of Northumberland, which enclose the entire circuit of the

grounds. At this time a lodge was also constructed within the grounds on the orders

of the Duke for use as a Park Keepers Lodge (Saunders, 2006). Today this building

is used as a ticket office for the Castle.

3.2.3 Historic

The historical values of Launceston Castle are centred on its use as a stronghold, a

seat of justice and power and its use as an administrative centre, all of which are

both of national and of regional importance. These values are made more significant

due to the development of the Castle into the primary stronghold of the Earls and

later Dukes of Cornwall.

Launceston Castle has been in continuous occupation since the first fortifications

were constructed on the site in 1068. It is a conquest castle, dating to the time when

William was consolidating his rule as King. The first fortifications at Launceston date

to the invasion of Cornwall in 1068 by William the Conqueror, who brought the

county under full control of the Crown. The first phase of the motte and bailey castle

at Launceston was constructed by Robert, Count of Mortain, one of the wealthiest

land owners of the time and half brother of William the Conqueror. Robert moved an

23

existing market from the Church of St Stephen’s to the area immediately east of the

Castle to be the economic centre for the newly founded town of Dunheved. This

Norman foundation continued to develop throughout the medieval period into the

town of Launceston. The layout of the town that grew up around the Castle reflects

this close relationship, with street plans respecting the shape of the Castle precinct.

The thirteenth century is the most significant period of the Castle’s history, when it

reached the height of its power under Earl Richard, who was made King of the

Roman’s in 1257 (Denholm-Young, 1947). Richard was one of the wealthiest men in

Europe and to reflect his status he undertook major remodelling works at Launceston

turning it into a visual symbol of his power. The impressive South Gatehouse, motte

Guard Tower and curtain wall date to his reign.

Launceston Castle had been the administrative centre for the county of Cornwall

until Earl Edmund moved this office to Restormel Castle. It regained sole

administrative rights over the county in 1555 with the restoration of the Assize Court

and County Gaol. During the period of administration from Restormel, Launceston

Castle retained its feudal tradition as the head of the honour. With the creation of the

Duchy of Cornwall in 1337, Launceston retained this function and fealty was sworn

there to Edward the Black Prince in 1354 (Saunders, 2006). The Castle still plays a

part in the feudal traditions administered by the Duchy as newly created Dukes

receive their feudal dues at Launceston Castle.

Archaeological investigation at the Castle has revealed remarkable survival of

medieval material relating to all phases of activity during the occupation of the

medieval castle. These remains have informed how the Castle evolved during this

period, showing phases of reconstruction within the bailey and indicating the periods

of major remodelling of the Castle. The survival of documentary evidence has

allowed these features to be tied to the Earl or Duke who initiated their construction.

This has provided a reliable history of the Castle from its first occupation through to

present day.

24

3.2.3 Aesthetic

The Aesthetic values of Launceston Castle, relate to the setting of the Castle and its

position in the landscape, which owes much to the topographical nature of the

immediate area. As stated above the Castle was constructed on a natural terrace

with open views from the south east to the north. This strategic position means that

the Castle dominates the sky line on all approaches to Launceston and so travellers

can hardly fail to notice it. The Castle looks out over all the land in between Bodmin

Moor and Dartmoor, with the two granite massifs being clearly visible in good

weather. It is this expansive view that really brings alive the reason for the choosing

of this particular site by the Norman builders.

Figure 5 : Picture of Launceston Castle by Hendrik Frans de Cort, 1770. © English Heritage

Photo Library.

It is the view of the Castle itself however, that has inspired a number of artists who

have depicted the Castle a number of times throughout the last few hundred years.

The most famous painting of Launceston Castle was created in 1770 by Hendrik

Frans De Cort, see figure 5, which was purchased by English Heritage and now

hangs in the exhibition room in the admissions office at the site. A number of other

paintings and engravings from the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries depict the

Castle and the buildings that survive within it. One such painting from the collection

owned by the Society of Antiquaries of London shows the Castle in the early 1800s

with the County Goal building in the foreground of the painting.

25

3.3.4 Communal

The Castle is the focal point of Launceston, being visible from many locations within

the town. There is a strong sense of pride relating to the Castle from many residents

of Launceston. This is aided by the use of the Castle Green, the bailey, as a

communal space. A sense of ownership is also afforded to the residents by the

clause within the Guardianship deed that specifies local residents must be given free

access to the motte and keep, which now form the paying zone within the grounds.

On average over the last three years the Castle has seen 2000 free visitors a year,

of which approximately half are local residents. The other half is made up off visitors

who hold Overseas Visitor passes, Great British Heritage passes and Corporate

members (English Heritage, Annual Site Report? Key Performance Indicators).

As the administrative centre for the county Launceston Castle was the seat of the

Assizes Court and County Gaol. Throughout its history Launceston Castle was home

to many prisoners and hosted a number of executions. In 1577 Cuthbert Mayne, a

Catholic priest, was arrested and taken to Launceston Castle where he was

imprisoned. Mayne was working in Cornwall as a missionary priest, preaching the

Catholic faith to followers in a time of Catholic suppression under Queen Elizabeth I.

Mayne was sentenced to death and he was dragged on a hurdle into Launceston

town square where he was hung drawn and quartered; his head was then displayed

above the Castle gate. Until recently an annual pilgrimage brought his skull back to

Launceston where his followers paid their respects to the Catholic martyr (Bate

Venning, 1976), see plate

4. Although this pilgrimage

no longer takes place

Launceston Castle still

receives visitors who wish

to see where he was

martyred.

Plate 4: A plaque commemorating St Cuthbert Mayne within the grounds of the Castle.

26

Launceston Castle also has a place in the history of the Quaker Society of Friends

religious group, as founder member George Fox was held in the Doomsdale in 1656,

see plate 5.

Plate 5: Plaque commemorating George Fox, located at the entrance to the Doomsdale.

The position of Launceston on the main route into and out of the county of Cornwall

ensures the town’s place as one of the main destinations for tourists. The Castle

occupies the centre of the town attracting large numbers of visitors each year,

making it one of the principle tourist attractions in the county.

For the last few years the number of visitors has declined. In 1997 visitor numbers

were just over 20,000 for the seven months the Castle is open to the public. This

figure has however, has dropped with figures for 2008 recording 16,000 visitors

(English Heritage, Key Performance Indicators). Although the number of visitors has

dropped, satisfaction levels remain high with the majority of visitors enjoying their

experience. The natural beauty of the site and views from the top of the High Tower

are often quoted as reasons for visitor enjoyment.

The principal educational values of Launceston Castle are two fold. Access to the

site provides an opportunity for the visitor to understand the role and function of a

motte and bailey castle in the medieval period. This is done through the provision of

interpretation material that places the site in its context. In addition, the preservation

of the Castle plays its own interpretive role in the education of children, helping to

bring history to life.

27

Part Five: Conservation Management Issues

This section of the Conservation Management Plan examines the conservation of

the Castle. The need to identify the conservation management issues has been

informed by the Description and Significance of the site discussed above. These

have defined why Launceston Castle is important and clearly stated the need to

preserve the Castle for future generations.

The management issues that need to be dealt with in the bounds of the Scheduled

Monument have been identified by site visits, existing surveys and current usage of

the site. The conservation issues have been broken down into four sections which

examine the conservation needs of the site as a whole and provide

recommendations for achieving the continued conservation of the site.

5.1 Management and Condition of the Monument

The Castle remains are represented by both built structures and earthworks, namely

the motte. These hard and soft elements of the Castle face differing conservation

threats.

Built Structures

The documentation shows that during its life span the Castle has been repaired on

many occasions, with English Heritage records showing that numerous programmes

of repointing and consolidation have taken place over the last fifty years. These

programmes of repair show that the bedding material is prone to decay; perhaps this

is due to the harsh Cornish weather and the exposed site the Castle occupies. A

recent small collapse of material from the roof of the stairwell within the High Tower

highlights that this deterioration process is on going. Investigation of the Shell Keep

suggests that areas of original mortar are still in existence. It is a light orange colour

suggesting that a clay loam is likely to have been used in the lime mix. The mortar

includes an aggregate material of small pebbles. Where possible this should be

prevented from deteriorating to the point where it will need replacing.

28

Later repairs by the Ministry of Works have significantly altered the profile of bedding

material used, as at this stage in Conservation it was the practice to use hard

mortars for the purposes of re-bedding. Large areas of grey material, which looks to

contain a high amount of cement, can be seen at the Castle. Due to its nature this

material is unlikely to deteriorate but future damage may be caused to the stones

around it as they cannot move in this bedding material. A modern mortar is evident in

the Castle structure. It is brown in colour and highly refined, containing no visible

aggregate material. This mortar is currently on display on the roof of the stairway

within the High Tower, where it appears that damp is causing the mortar to rot and

become loose. Lastly recent repairs have been conducted with a lime mortar that is

white in colour, which does fade into a softer less visible shade after a short period of

weathering.

Soft Structures

Erosion of the motte has already been a serious issue in the recent history of the

Castle. During the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries the motte was dug into for

use as vegetable plots and shacks were erected on its sides. This activity had made

the motte unstable and caused it to begin slumping. This damaged both the Shell

Keep and High Tower causing them both to begin to fracture. The High Tower began

to lean out of its vertical,

further damaging its structure,

plate 6. In 1959 heavy rain

caused further slumping,

which led the Ministry of

Works to insert a concrete ring

beam around the top of the

motte in 1961 (Saunders,

2006).

Plate 6: Plaque detailing the inclination of the keep.

Climate change is likely to have an effect on the Castle, the motte in particular. It has

been predicted that climate change will entail more frequent and heavier rainfall that

has the possibility to cause further instability in the make up of the motte. The

29

increase in rainfall and its intensity has already begun to be witnessed with very wet

summers being recorded for 2007 and 2008. The present condition of the motte has

not changed. It is heavily planted and a number of trees grow up its sides and

around its base. The planting is currently unobtrusive and adds to the aesthetic

values of the Castle site.

Recommendations

Monitoring

• In order to stop any advanced deterioration occurring to both the hard and soft

elements of the site, a regular programme of survey should be introduced.

This can be achieved through the Asset Management Survey programme that

English Heritage already has in operation.

• The most recent of these was conducted in 2008, while the previous survey

was in 2002. The Asset Management Programme aims to survey sites every

four years and so at Launceston these surveys need to be conducted on a

more regular basis.

• A full history of the maintenance episodes should be put together which draws

on all of the surviving maintenance records, including all of the different stone

and mortars that have been used in each component part of the site. In the

event of repair work being necessary this will then enable the correct material

to be used.

• As part of this, areas that need maintenance work should be identified and a

schedule of works should be drawn up. If such a schedule is drawn up every

year then maintenance work will be able to be proactive rather than reactive,

and should minimise the amount of work needing to be done over the next

few years.

Recording

• A measured survey of the site would be of great use for analytical survey and

for interpretation.

• Such a plan should be drawn up and stored with the maintenance records.

This would allow the different areas of construction materials to be accurately

plotted and would act as a visual aid.

30

• A measured survey may provide new details of the Castle structure that can

be passed on to visitors. New and updated information is always welcomed in

a research context as well.

Investigation

• Each area identified should undergo preliminary investigation once identified

to assess how urgent the repair work is and the extent of the area needing

maintenance.

5.2 Vandalism and Security

Incidents of vandalism have escalated over the past couple of years, with much

damage to the historic fabric occurring. Climbing and walking on all of the walls is

commonplace. Walking on walls of such antiquity may not show tangible signs of

damage immediately but nonetheless damage is likely to have occurred. Graffiti is

also commonplace, being both scratched into and drawn on the fabric of the Castle,

see plate 7. This type of damage can be combated in numerous ways. The current

good relationship with the local Police force and the installation of CCTV cameras

has helped with this issue, see plate 8, but more could be done to deter vandals.

Plate 7: Graffiti drawn on the curtain wall.

The CCTV System

In 2008 five CCTV cameras were installed at three different locations within the site

to try and deter the vandalism that had been occurring on site. However, the

installation and the programming of the cameras was never fully completed and a

31

number of problems do exist within the system. The two cameras set up in position

close to the Northgate entrance experience problems in operation that affects the

quality of the picture. This has caused problems for the Police in identifying

individuals from the images. The second problem with the system is that the two

roving cameras are not synchronised together which leaves blind spots in their tours.

This makes it difficult to properly monitor the system and reduces its effectiveness.

Damage to property within the scheduled area

Within the bailey, which as stated is open to the public twenty four hours a day, a

number of benches had been provided for visitor and community use. These were

destroyed in a number of ways including burning. The bin provided was also set

alight, which causes a

considerable hazard to members

of the public and the emergency

services who deal with such

incidents. The Custodians Hut

has been vandalised on

numerous occasions causing

hundreds of pounds worth of

damage. The CCTV cameras

appear to have put a halt to this

behaviour and improved the

situation.

Plate 8: A CCTV camera within the bailey.

Flood Lights

The motte is surrounded by flood lights that illuminate the motte, Shell Keep and

High Tower at night. These switch on automatically at dusk making the Keep visible

from different areas within the town throughout the night. Unfortunately they are a

target for vandalism and the perspex panes protecting the lights have been cracked

and painted over on many occasions. Another issue has arisen with the sighting of

32

one of the flood lights that sits on the north side of the motte. The angle the light is

placed at means that it lights the back part of the motte rather than the Keep, which

is a security issue. The light allows people to get access up this part of the motte to

the Keep in the dark.

Recommendations

• The current problems with the CCTV system need to addressed as soon as

possible to make the system as effective as possible. There is little point in a

CCTV system that does not work properly.

• During 2010 a CCTV system similar to the one in operation at the Castle is to

be installed in the town and will be monitored for the Police by trained

volunteers. Discussions are already underway between English Heritage and

Devon and Cornwall Police to integrate the two systems meaning that the

Castle cameras will be monitored on a regular basis.

• A new fence should be installed, along the line of the current fence separating

the paying and free areas.

• It is suggested that the new fence should be higher than the one currently in

place. This would make it harder to climb over and would allow anti vandal

paint to be used on the top of the support posts.

• The flood light at the rear of the motte should be re-angled so as the light falls

on the Keep rather than the motte, which should help to deter people climbing

up.

5.3 Enhancing Visitor Experience

There are currently a number of issues that detract from visitor experience that can

be addressed under the scope of the conservation management plan.

Intrusive plant growth

Currently all areas of the site are suffering from intrusive plant growth. The worst

affected area is the entrance through the South Gate, which is lined with plants, see

plate 9. The motte stairs are also badly affected by intrusive growth, see plate 10.

Not only is this poor presentation but some of these plants also present a risk to

visitors, although the risk is low. Ragwort is one of the intrusive plants, which acts as

33

a skin irritant. Another issue of regarding intrusive plants growth is the woody plants

that have taken hold in the historic fabric. These plants have taken root in the mortar

and their growth forces the mortar and stones apart. It is the growth of these types of

plants that need tighter management to limit the potential for any damage to the

structure of the Castle remains.

Plates 9 and 10: 9 shows the intrusive planting within the South gate entrance, while 10 shows the intrusive planting up the motte stairs.

The areas of planting within the Castle date to the use of the site as a park garden.

Many of these plants have become damaged by intrusive growth within them, see

plate 11. In certain cases this

has drawn complaints from the

people of Launceston. These

represent a phase in the history

of the Castle and should be

properly maintained with

continued growth being

encouraged.

Plate 11: Intrusive growth damaging a bush that relates to the use of the site as a communal park.

34

Renewal of surfaces

The floors of the buildings within the bailey have a layer of protective gravel over

them, which dates to the time the Castle was under the care of the Ministry of Works.

The gravel was used not only as a protective layer but also worked as part of a

presentational code. In all sites under the care of the Ministry of Works building

remains that would once have been roofed structures had a layer of gravel put down

to communicate this to the public. This practice has been kept up at Launceston and

the gravel still remains. This layer has dissipated in most of these buildings leaving

areas of green growth, see plate 12. The layer of gravel within the Shell Keep and

High Tower is also beginning to dissipate. This is leaving areas of exposed mud and

clay that are slippery and dangerous when wet. This should be addressed to ensure

minimal risk to visitors.

Plate 12: An area of weed growth in the Administrative Hall due to gravel dissipation.

Benches and Boundary Marking

The bailey is a communal area that had a number of benches within it for use of

visitors and the community. To enhance the experience of people using the bailey

these benches need to be reinstated. With the issue of vandalism being combated it

should be possible to replace the benches without the fear of having them destroyed.

The fence that separates the free and paying zones is coming to the end of its life.

The fence is beginning to sag in many areas and looks untidy, see plate 13. This is

due to it being climbed over by people gaining access into the Castle after hours.

35

Plate 13: Picture shows the ageing fence that is in need of replacement.

Visitor flow routes

There are currently five footpaths crossing the Castle. Three of these are paved with

concrete and so will weather well. The remaining two are not paved with any man

made material. The first follows the line of the eastern rampart to the bridge over the

motte ditch. The second is cut into the side of the motte and winds round the motte

from the bridge coming out onto the western side at the base. At present both paths

are in good condition. There is, however, an area of erosion that is starting to appear

at the beginning of the second path that will need to be monitored as it may present

a risk to both the site as well as visitors in the future.

Recommendations

Site presentation is one of the major factors that influence visitor experience. Sites

that appear to be well cared for are more likely to experience higher levels of visitor

satisfaction and encourage repeat visits.

Presentation

• The appearance of the buildings within the bailey detracts from the visual

experience of the site.

• The current floor surfaces have dissipated leaving large areas of weed and

moss growth. Raking these surfaces to remove the plants and laying down a

36

new layer of gravel would give the site an instant lift. A new layer of gravel is

also required in the Keep and High Tower.

• More benches should be provided for the bailey area.

• A new fence should be erected and designed so as to help further reduce

incidents of vandalism. Please see the vandalism section above.

Ground Maintenance

• More intensive ground work should be undertaken, which should include

regular spraying of the Castle structures. This should remove intrusive plants

and prevent them from reoccurring.

• The woody growth may need to be removed carefully by hand and any

damage evident recorded.

• A balance needs to be found between intrusive and woody plants that detract

from visitor experience and plants that enhances the aesthetic value of the

site.

• The current erosion of an area of footpath on the east side of the motte needs

to be monitored. The edge should be reveted to prevent collapse and to

maintain the path for visitors.

5.4 Site Interpretation and Signage

One of the purposes of English Heritage is to interpret its sites for the benefit of the

general public. This is achieved by the provision of information boards at each site.

Appropriate signage is essential both within and outside the Castle. Signs placed

outside the Castle grounds, in the town, encourage people visiting Launceston to

also visit the Castle. These signs not only inform visitors of the presence of the

Castle but they also guide them to the entrance into the grounds.

Interpretation Boards

Two of the six interpretation boards attracted the attention of vandals, who knocked

over the two boards irreparably damaging the poles that anchor them into the

ground. This has meant that they have had to be removed from public display and

now only one board remains in the free area providing interpretation for visitors. Two

further boards situated on the approach to the tower at the base of the motte are

37

bleaching due to the effect of the sun. To ensure the Castle is interpreted to the

highest possible standard, so as to maximise visitor enjoyment, these interpretation

boards need to be well maintained with all of the text being clear and readable.

Signage

At present there is only one small, unreadable sign within the town. To encourage

more visitors to the Castle, appropriate signs need to be provided for the town centre

and erected in visible locations, although this will need permission form Launceston

Town Council.

As discussed above there is a problem with people climbing up the walls. This does

not solely apply to after hour’s visitors, with many people using the bailey in the day

climbing up the South Gatehouse and standing sections of the curtain wall, see plate

14. Climbing up these high sections of wall causes damage to the historic fabric and

presents a risk to the

climber. There is no

signage with the Castle to

request that visitors do not

climb up the walls and this

should be looked at so as

to avoid the risks to both

historic fabric and climber.

Plate 16: Visitors sitting on top of a section of curtain wall.

Recommendations

• The interpretation boards within the grounds of the Castle need to be

maintained to ensure the interpretive material is of the highest possible

standard. To this end a number of damaged boards will need to be replaced.

• The two boards that previously stood within the bailey need to be replaced.

This should be of a high priority as without the boards there is no

38

interpretation for people visiting the site when the motte and its associated

buildings are closed to visitors.

• Another form of interpretation that may be of use on the site is an audio tour.

Currently this is not provided for visitors who have to rely on the guidebook,

interpretation panels and the information in the small exhibition room in the

ticket office. As the guidebook is an extra expense a number of visitors opt to

walk around the site without it and so do not get as much out of their visit as

perhaps they could.

• Good signage within towns locating heritage sites can attract visitors to the

site who were not aware of its presence before arriving. Launceston Castle

dominates the town and so tourists should be aware of it as they approach the

town.

• Many people have trouble locating the entrances as these are not well

signposted. To avoid this occurring in the future, clear signposts, indicating

the direction of the gates should be erected within the town square.

• In order to make it clear that climbing on the walls is not allowed and to

discourage it, signs should be erected that clearly state climbing up and

walking on these structures is not allowed.

5.5 Consultation

The preparation of this project has included the consultation and input of a number of

different individuals from different organisations. These are:

• English Heritage staff including Francis Kelly, Richard Baker, Debbie Swatton,

Phil McMahon, Clarissa Payne, Carole Owen, Heather Sebire Keith Robson,

Linda Taylor, Caroline Atkinson, Chris Bally and Liz Allison.

• Launceston Town Council, Robert Tremain and Rita Skinner.

• Cornwall County Council Historic Environment Service, Jane Powning

• Cornwall and Devon Police, individuals include David Sheppard, Stephen Edser

and Lawrence Hambrook.

The Conservation Management Plan was presented to the Town Council during a

Council meeting on Tuesday 15th June 2010. From the comments and discussion

after the presentation it became clear that some members of the Council felt some

39

hostility towards the way that English Heritage was currently maintaining the Castle.

One of the main causes of this was the provision of benches on the Castle Green.

Two of the benches currently situated on the Green have been donated by a

member of the community and the Council felt that it was English Heritage’s

responsibility to provide benches for use rather than relying on donations.

The condition of the Northgate house was discussed with the Council members

asking why it was not open to the public as it is one of the main attractions for

visitors, having once been the Doomsdale prison. Its current use is as a store room

and is not safe for visitors to enter. A suggestion was made that it could be cleared

and made presentable to visitors even though they could not enter inside.

Another area that caused hostility was the lack of provision of a public toilet. The

current toilet facilities are in the paying section of the site although they do not meet

the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and so cannot be opened

to the public, which was explained to the Council. There are public toilets in the

perimeter wall on the south east corner of the site, reached from the pavement

outside of the Castle. These were closed during the 1970s and it was asked why

these could not be re-opened to provide public facilities. It was thought that these

toilets would be under the care of Cornwall Council and so enquires should be made

to them. From this arose the fact that some of the members of the Council thought

that the dog walkers who frequented the site should be made to keep their animals

on a lead. It was pointed out that this was difficult to enforce, especially in the winter

months when there was no one on site.

40

Bibliography

Books

Bate Venning, A. (1976) The Book of Launceston (London: Malcolm G. Read Ltd)

Brown, R., Colvin, H. and Taylor, A. (1963) The History of the King’s Works, Volume

II (London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office)

Thorn, C and F. (1979) Domesday Book: Cornwall (Chichester: Phillimore)

Denholm-Young, N. (1947) Richard of Cornwall (Oxford: Blackwell)

Dunning, M. (2001) Launceston: A Photographic History of Your Town (Salisbury:

Black Horse Books)

Pattison, S.R. 1852 Launceston Castle Journal of the Royal Institution of Cornwall

33rd Annual Report Appendix 1, 19-37

Saunders, A. (1998) Launceston Castle (London: English Heritage)

Saunders, A. (2006) Excavations at Launceston Castle, Cornwall (The Society for

Medieval Archaeology, Monograph 24)

Guidance Notes and Policy

Heritage Lottery Fund (2008) Conservation Management Planning

English Heritage (2008) Conservation Principles: Policies and Guidance For The

Sustainable Management of The Historic Environment

Government Legislation (1983) The National Heritage Act

Government Legislation (1979) The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas

Act

English Heritage and Historic Environment Service

English Heritage, National Monuments Record, Kemble Drive

Swindon, SN2 2GZ

English Heritage Files: AM70102/01

AM70102/04

AA070102/1

English Heritage, Key Performance Indicators

Cornwall and Sciliy HES, County Hall, Truro, TR1 3AY

41

Websites

Edina – www.edina.ac.uk – accessed on 1st April 2009

Magic – www.magic.gov.uk - accessed on 1st April 2009

42

Appendix A – Reconstruction Illustrations

Figure 6 : Illustration depicting the late 11th century Castle (Saunders, 2006).

Figure 7: Illustration depicting the mid 13th century Castle (Saunders, 2006)