The comprehensive gazetteer and bibliography of the medieval castles, fortifications and palaces of England, Wales, the Islands.
The listings
Other Info
Print Page 
Next Record 
Previous Record 
Back to list 

Mount Bures

In the civil parish of Mount Bures.
In the historic county of Essex.
Modern Authority of Essex.
1974 county of Essex.
Medieval County of Essex.

OS Map Grid Reference: TL90453255
Latitude 51.95883° Longitude 0.77048°

Mount Bures has been described as a certain Timber Castle.

There are earthwork remains.

This site is a scheduled monument protected by law.


The steep-sided earthwork, 60m in diameter at the base, survives to 10m above the present ground surface, and is surrounded by a dry ditch c.3.5m deep and between 10m and 12m wide. Very little evidence of the bailey appeared to have survived. No evidence of a stockade or major fortification ditches was found, although the presence of two parallel ditches indicate a palisade. The Norman church stands immediately south of the mound and may originally have stood within the bailey. The work is on high ground which drops sharply towards a stream to the W; on the slope is a nearly rectangular area scarped on three sides, with an oblong depression near the W side. This is probably the site of a terraced garden to the hall. Plan and section of motte in RCHME. J.H. Round said 'I have been disposed to think that Mount Bures may have been the castle of the Sackvilles, raised perhaps in the anarchy under Stephen (1135-1154) or possibly under Henry I (1100-1135)' However the early C12 date of the church and the scale in proportions of the motte suggest that it is an early example of its type. (Derived from Unlocking Essex's Past)

The absence of cut features on the motte summit which could have held the foundations of large timber buildings such as a defensive tower or lord's residence suggests that if there was a timber structure on the top of the motte, this must have been small with little or no sub-surface foundations. Just 11 sherds of pottery were found in the 40 square metres excavated on the motte top: four of these were modern ironstone china of 19th or 20th century date (possibly associated with the previous unrecorded excavations on the site) while a further sherd dated to the Roman period and was residual in later layers. The other six sherds were medieval in date, comprising five sherds of Early Medieval Sandy Coarsewares (12th – 14th century) and one of Hedingham Fine Ware (late 12th – 14th century). The scarcity of archaeological finds indicates that the motte was not permanently occupied or manned. All this, combined with its unusual height (10m) and its prominent location providing superb views for miles in all directions, suggest it was used as a lookout post in the medieval period, rather than as a residence, military storehouse, prison or defensive retreat. The medieval motte may have been built by enlarging a pre-existing burial mound, as Bronze Age (1500-800 BC) pottery and struck and burnt flint was found in excavations nearby.
The 2011 excavations, along with surface examination of the sides of the mound, indicate that the medieval motte was built as a series of tiered concentric circular layers which were reduced in diameter as the motte increased in height. These layers were mostly made up of the sandy gravel sub-soil naturally occurring in the immediate area, which was methodically removed from around the base of the motte to create the deep ditch which surrounds the mound. The 2011 excavations (including a sondage into the backfill of a very deep earlier unrecorded excavation) showed that the loose sandy fabric of the mound was stabilised by building a retaining ring of clay around the mound perimeter, and by carefully levelling every load of spoil before the next was added.
It has been suggested that a bailey (an enclosed, defended yard containing residential and ancillary buildings associated with the motte) may have lain in the area now occupied by the churchyard. There is no historical or archaeological evidence for this, but the suggestion is not unreasonable and is made on the grounds that (a) most medieval mottes are associated with at least one bailey (b) the churchyard is the most likely place as it is on level ground and includes the present parish church, whose graveyard may have concealed the earthworks of a bailey and (c) there is no evidence whatsoever for any bailey elsewhere around the motte, where traces of such a feature would be expected to be visible in the un-built upon land. Although there is today a scarp around the edge of the churchyard which might represent the denuded remains of a bailey bank, this may equally be due to the raising of the ground surface in the burial ground. The 2011 excavations did not produce any definitive evidence for a bailey in this area, such as a ditch or bank, but the presence of undoubted domestic occupation contemporary with the motte immediately adjacent to the church does suggest this is the location of a seigniorial manor/church complex linked to the motte. This thus gives some support to the suggestion that there may have been a bailey here. Whether or not this actually did exist, however, remains unproven.
In the twelfth century, probably during the Anarchy of Stephen and Matilda when a lack of effective royal control of warring factions threatened the security of all, a substantial motte was built adjacent to the manorial complex (perhaps enlarging the pre-existing remains of a prehistoric burial mound), Defences built at this time may, just possibly, also have included a bailey enclosing within it the manorial site, the church and any other contemporary settlement. With or without a bailey, this very prominent motte would have looked highly defensible while also providing a good strategic lookout post. It was not intensively used, with no large keep or watch tower on top of it; although a small, timber-framed look-out structure may conceivably have surmounted the mound. It did not continue in use after the 12th century, although must have remained a useful vantage point. (Lewis, 2011)

Carenza Lewis's dig of 2011 is, as one would expect, excellent archaeology, but the report is marred by an interpretation of castles which is markedly dated and which, apparently, fails to appreciate the developments, archaeological and, particularly, historical, in castle studies. The dating to the Anarchy is an example of 'received wisdom'; It is not an impossible date but is no more likely than a date shortly post-Conquest. Likewise the use of a small tower on top of the motte as a watch tower is not impossible (although one has to take account of the financial cost of mounting such a watch) but the main function of such an impressive mound must have been to impress the concept of Norman dominion on the local people rather than to be part of enforcing Norman military domination.
Links to archaeological and architectural databases, mapping and other online resources

Data >
PastScape   County HER   Scheduling        
Maps >
Streetmap   NLS maps   Where's the path   Old-Maps      
Data/Maps > 
Magic   V. O. B.   Geology   LiDAR   Open Domesday  
Air Photos > 
Bing Maps   Google Maps   Getmapping   ZoomEarth      
Photos >
CastleFacts   Geograph   Flickr   Panoramio      

Sources of information, references and further reading
Most of the sites or buildings recorded in this web site are NOT open to the public and permission to visit a site must always be sought from the landowner or tenant.
It is an offence to disturb a Scheduled Monument without consent. It is a destruction of everyone's heritage to remove archaeological evidence from ANY site without proper recording and reporting.
Don't use metal detectors on historic sites without authorisation.
The information on this web page may be derived from information compiled by and/or copyright of Historic England, County Historic Environment Records and other individuals and organisations. It may also contain information licensed under the Open Government Licence. All the sources given should be consulted to identify the original copyright holder and permission obtained from them before use of the information on this site for commercial purposes.
The author and compiler of Gatehouse does not receive any income from the site and funds it himself. The information within this site is provided freely for educational purposes only.
The bibliography owes much to various bibliographies produced by John Kenyon for the Council for British Archaeology, the Castle Studies Group and others.
Suggestions for finding online and/or hard copies of bibliographical sources can be seen at this link.
Minor archaeological investigations, such as watching brief reports, and some other 'grey' literature is most likely to be held by H.E.R.s but is often poorly referenced and is unlikely to be recorded here, or elsewhere, but some suggestions can be found here.
The possible site or monument is represented on maps as a point location. This is a guide only. It should be noted that OS grid references defines an area, not a point location. In practice this means the actual center of the site or monument may often, but not always, be to the North East of the point shown. Locations derived from OS grid references and from latitude longitiude may differ by a small distance.
Further information on mapping and location can be seen at this link.
Please help to make this as useful a resource as possible by contacting Gatehouse if you see errors, can add information or have suggestions for improvements in functality and design.
Help is acknowledged.
This record last updated 26/07/2017 09:19:30

Home | Books | Links | Fortifications and Castles | Other Information | Help | Downloads | Author Information | Contact