Hanwell Castle as a building is clearly a shadow of its former self, indeed surrounded by later accretions it is quite difficult to imagine its strictly symmetrical facade (see below) exposing, according to John Goodall's litany, a typical composition of tower, turret, gatehouse, turret, tower (Goodall 2011:362). Indeed some doubt its castle credentials, 'not a castle in the true sense' (Sherwood and Pevsner 1974: 632). However, as we shall see, it is likely such a prestigious building with its remarkable landscaped grounds and its martial trappings would have been viewed as a castle by those who built it and those who came under its sway. The purpose of the project is not to undertake a detailed archaeological or architectural analysis of the castle itself but we need to appreciate the character of and background to the building if we are to afford it its pivotal position in the landscape around it. There are a few additional thoughts about the building of castles in the late medieval/ early modern period here.

The Victoria County History suggests that the earlier medieval manor was occupied by bailiffs or leased out despite a long line of descent through a number of notable families. The De Vernons held it from the early 12th. century until 1381 when it passed to Sir Richard Abberbury and then in 1415 to the Chaucer family. The redoubtable Alice Chaucer held it from 1436 when it passed through her marriage to William de la Pole in to the hands of the Dukedom of Suffolk until in 1498 it was conveyed to William Cope, treasurer to Henry VII. Interestingly Cope had property nearby, a moated manor just north of Banbury at a place called Hardwick.

Irrespective of whether it was tenanted or not the question of the whereabouts of the medieval manor is bound to arise and given the strict symmetry of the castle as built by Cope one wonders if he was applying himself to a 'green field' site and that the earlier manor lay elsewhere. Indeed it is interesting the way in which the road which snakes through the village makes a distinct bend to the northwards around an otherwise empty patch of ground north of the upper pond. Could the original manor have been here slightly closer to the village itself? We will no doubt see at some point.

William Cope is credited with at least starting work on the castle, possibly even in 1498 when he took on the property. However, it is clear that the construction was not without its difficulties. William died in 1513 and left his second son Anthony an unfinished  building as testified to by a court case of 1518 when William's executors needed the force of the law to ensure the house was, 'finished and made according as it is begun and according to the platt thereof made'. Anthony must have seen the castle to completion as he lived there until his death in 1551, indeed Leland visiting some time around 1540 described it as a 'pleasant and gallant' house rather than a building site. Given the difficulties in finishing the house I wonder if this makes it rather less likely that extensive landscaping of the grounds was undertaken at the same time. The idea of a contemporary flight of fishponds acting as a visual foil to the newly erected castle as per elite landscapes of the period is an attractive one but it is hard to reconcile with a building still unfinished after twenty years or so.

Anthony's eldest son Edward was successor but he died in in 1557 and as his son appears to have died before reaching his majority it ended up in the hands of a younger brother another Anthony. Sir Anthony, knighted by Queen Elizabeth and made a baronet in 1611 died in 1614 with debts of over £20,000! Given that he entertained King James I at Hanwell on two occasions, in 1605 and 1612, a notoriously expensive undertaking, it is not surprising he was in debt and perhaps the scale of his expenditure may have owed something to remodeling the grounds to create a landscape fit for a king.

As we have not had an opportunity to undertake a detailed examination of the surviving remains of the castle this account is largely based on The Victoria County History and Sherwood and Pevsner.

The early engraving reproduced below shows that the castle as built constituted a series of two storey ranges set around a square courtyard with three storey towers at each corner.  The V.C. H., on the basis of a plinth on the existing south range, suggests that the complex was actually open to the east. This to some extent is borne out by the early illustration as the towers   flanking the east side do not have turrets adjacent to that side. There are of course problems with relying too much on this engraving for details as it is unclear what sources the artist was drawing on for his image and I remain at present more inclined towards the idea of a closed courtyard (See some comparative plans below).

As already mentioned Goodall makes much of the 'distinctive rhythm of elements... that was to recur in major English buildings into the late sixteenth century' (Goodall 2011:362) which he suggests was a characteristic of buildings with royal connections or pretensions. At Hanwell the strongly symmetrical west front seems typical of this pattern appearing to comprise of two large square flanking towers with octagonal turrets on the western elevation, two smaller square turrets in intermediate positions and a comparatively restrained central gatehouse with an oriel window below a sculptured plaque which in turn is below a gabled pediment finished off with three square finials.

Curiously this exact arrangement is quite hard to find a parallel for. The corner towers in particular appear unique in their particular setting. They resemble on a smaller scale Ralph, Lord Cromwell's great brick tower of 1446 at Tattershall. It is perhaps worth noting that Ralph also figured in the nation's financial affairs as treasurer to Henry VI. Is Cope in some sense sharing in some of the glory of his illustrious predecessor? A closer parallel in terms of date is the tower begun in the 1470s at Buckden in Huntingdonshire by Thomas Rotherham, Bishop of Lincoln but in both cases we are dealing with single towers. Hanwell has four albeit slightly smaller in scale.

The most common parallel for a tower with octagonal turrets is of course the many late medieval brick gatehouses, starting with Herstmonceaux but running through Hertford (1463), Kirby Muxloe (1480), Esher (1484) to the extravagances of Oxburgh (1482) to name but a few but at Hanwell the gatehouse is under-emphasised and corner towers remain an very unusual and distinctive element in the design.

'The remains of the house, of brick with stone dressings include the SW tower of the entrance facade and the S wing running back from it... The tower has two octagonal turrets and mullioned windows with arched lights. On the N front of the S wing an oriel which would have opened onto the courtyard. the walls on this side have a diaper pattern of blue bricks which does not appear on the tower. this front, now the entrance, has a modern porch and lean-to of one storey, part of a restoration of 1902 when other additions were made in stone. inside, original stone fireplaces with four-centred arches, and in what may have been the kitchen, two large fireplaces back to back.'

(Sherwood and Pevsner 1974: 632)