^{page 64 note 1} A completely anglicized vocabulary of artillery fortification has never existed. Wherever possible I shall follow Corporal Trim's commonsense and use English terms. (‘… The best engineers call them gazons, Trim, said my uncle Toby…. Whether they are gazons or sods is not much matter, replied Trim.’ Laurence Sterne, The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman, bk. ii, chap. 5.) But I shall not revive ephemeral English terms or translations: preferring for example, the bastard-French ‘orillons’, by reason of frequent usage, to the much less common ‘ears’, And I shall prefer ‘counterforts’ or ‘batardeaux’ to clumsy English equivalents such as ‘internal buttresses’ or ‘coped dams across the ditch’.

^{page 64 note 2} The bastions were given their present names, which are used throughout this paper, from the sixteenth to the eighteenth centuries.

^{page 64 note 3} The History of the King's Works, ed. H. M. Colvin, 1963–(in progress), vol. ii, pp. 563–71. The plan of the town defences and the castle, given here on fig. 1, etc., based on present evidence and sixteenth-century plans referred to below, is not meant to be definitive.

^{page 65 note 1} Calendar of Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, Henry VIII, vol. v, no. 832. I am indebted for the location of this and most of the following references to Sir John Summerson.

^{page 65 note 2} Letters and Papers, For. and Dom., Henry VIII, xx, part 1, no. 1077.

^{page 65 note 3} Public Record Office, MP. F/137. Compare the square bastioned citadel used in conjunction with an ancient wall with towers illustrated at Fécamp, Normandy, by Giovanni Battista Bellucci (1506–54) in his posthumous Nuove inventione di fabricar fortezze di varie forme, Venice, 1598, p. 92 (name on t.p. ‘Belici’).

^{page 65 note 4} George Ridpath, Border History of England and Scotland, 1810 ed., p. 574 note.

^{page 65 note 5} Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, Addenda 1547–1563, no. 7.

^{page 67 note 1} Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, Addenda 1547–1565, no. 68.

^{page 67 note 2} In 1564 the Italian engineer Giovanni Portinari accepted without question that Lee alone was responsible for the siting of the north fronts: P.R.O., SP. 59/8, ff. 110–17.

^{page 67 note 3} This paragraph is an interpretation of MP. F/137.

^{page 71 note 1} P.R.O., SP. 59/5, f. 110. In this volume are two statements, made in 1561, of masonwork executed at Berwick and work required to complete the structure according to plan: ff. 74–82, delivered by Sir Richard Lee at St. James's in September; and ff. 110–11, a declaration by Rowland Johnson to the queen dated 5th October. The statements contain some inconsistencies and must be used with caution.

^{page 72 note 1} Length and spacing of counterforts: P.R.O., MP. F/336. Only one counterfort was sought by excavation at Brass Bastion: that at the point of the junction between the return of the orillon and the frontal wall of the original flanker. Since a counterfort was found there (see fig. 14), the representation of counterforts shown on drawings in the Cecil Papers (pl. xxiv) behind the whole length of walling of curtains, bastions, and flankers was confirmed beyond reasonable doubt. For if the counterforts were to be omitted anywhere, they would be omitted at the orillon returns, which were invulnerable to artillery fire (they were in fact frequently omitted in this position: see Gen. Zastrow, A. von, Geschichte der beständigen Befestigung, Leipzig, 1839Google Scholar, tabs, ii, iii).

^{page 72 note 2} Cecil Papers, Maps I/29 (at Hatfield House).

^{page 72 note 3} At this date the covered Way is a very recent innovation in Europe.

^{page 72 note 4} SP. 59/5, ff. 79–82.

^{page 72 note 5} SP. 59/8, ff. 110–17.

^{page 72 note 6} e.g. Zastrow, op. cit., tab. ii, fig. 2.

^{page 72 note 7} Architectura von Vestungen, 1589 ed., pp. 32, 38, etc.

^{page 73 note 1} SP. 59/8, ff. 110–17. A bird's-eye view of Hesdin in about 1700, given by Frederik de Wit in Theatrum ichnographicum omnium urbium…. Belgicarum XVII provinciarum, n.d., shows the sentry-path. The fortifications are now either destroyed or altered out of recognition.

^{page 73 note 2} That Chemin des rondes (sentry-path), and zwinger were used as synonyms appears from Wilhelm Dilich's definition in Peribologia, 1640, p. 100.

^{page 73 note 3} Zastrow, op. cit., tab. vi, fig. 1.

^{page 73 note 4} Cormontaingne, Louis de, Mémorial pour la fortification permanente, Berlin, 1809Google Scholar.

^{page 73 note 5} SP. 59/8, ff. 125–7.

^{page 74 note 1} e.g. Zastrow, op. cit., tabs, ii, iii.

^{page 74 note 2} In Giovanni Portinari's report of 1564, SP. 59/8, ff. 110–17.

^{page 75 note 1} Ibid.

^{page 75 note 2} Zastrow, op. cit., tab. ii, fig. 2.

^{page 76 note 1} Acts of the Privy Council, N.S., vi, 429.

^{page 79 note 1} Calendar of State Papers, Foreign, 1559–1560, nos. 635, 718.

^{page 79 note 2} SP. 59/8, ff. 110–17.

^{page 81 note 1} SP. 59/2, f. 205.

^{page 81 note 2} SP. 59/5, ff. 110–11.

^{page 81 note 3} Maps I/23.

^{page 81 note 4} SP. 59/5, ff. 110–11.

^{page 81 note 5} Ibid., ff. 74–82.

^{page 83 note 1} Based on the drawing described above, Cecil Papers, Maps I/23.

^{page 83 note 2} Cal. S.P. For., 1562, no. 1217.

^{page 83 note 3} Cal. S.P. For., 1563, nos. 620, 864.

^{page 84 note 1} Cal. S.P. For., 1564–1565, nos. 293, 321.

^{page 84 note 2} Ibid., no. 345.

^{page 84 note 3} Ibid., no. 353.

^{page 84 note 4} Ibid., nos. 419, 468.

^{page 84 note 5} The Italians expressed their opinions in reports submitted in June 1564. Portinari's report: SP. 59/8, ff. 110–17. Contio's report: SP. 59/8, ff. 125–7.

^{page 84 note 6} Described in Contio's report.

^{page 84 note 7} Cecil Papers, Maps II/29.

^{page 86 note 1} By Rowland Johnson, 1565: Cecil Papers, Maps I/29.

^{page 86 note 2} In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries the covered way is usually about 30 feet wide.

^{page 86 note 3} The sixteenth-century bastioned fortifications of Ambleteuse are now destroyed. Their general plan is shown on MS. Cotton Aug. I, ii. 73. The plan given by Nicholas de Fer, Les Forces de l'Europe, pl. 46, confirms that the fortifications were actually built to this design. The Cotton plan gives no detail of the arrangement of the flankers.

^{page 87 note 1} Cf. Specklin, op. cit., p. 13.

^{page 86 note 2} Ibid., p. 33, and Belluci, op. cit., pp. 77–78.

^{page 92 note 1} Acts of the Privy Council, N.S. vii, 208. SP. 59/9, ff. 44–46.

^{page 92 note 2} Cecil Papers, Maps I/29.

^{page 92 note 3} SP. 59/9, ff. 156–9.

^{page 92 note 4} Cal. S.P. For., 1566–1568, nos. 681, 751.

^{page 92 note 5} SP. 59/16, ff. 23–24.

^{page 92 note 6} Cecil Papers, Maps I/29.

^{page 93 note 1} The cavaliers are not certainly dated. They are not shown on a plan of 1598 (MP. F/222) but they appear on Sir Martin Beckman's survey plan of 1682 (Dartmouth papers in the William Salt Library, Stafford: Historical MSS. Commission, vol. 15, appx. i, p. 54, no. 2). The only considerable works known to have been carried out within this period were in 1639–53. Cal. S.P. Dom., 1630–1640, sec. ccccxli, no. 67; ccccxlii, no. 10; ccccliii, no. 38; and cccclvii, no. 47, may refer to the cavaliers, but there are no indubitable references. I am indebted to Mr. Andrew Saunders for the location of the Beckman survey plan.

^{page 93 note 2} Cal. S.P. Dom., 1639–1640, sec. ccccxlii, no. 76. Ibid., 1640, cccclvi, no. 61; cccclx, no. 9.

^{page 93 note 3} Cal. S.P. Dom., 1655–1656, p. 96.

^{page 93 note 4} P.R.O., WO. 55/1788; Beckman plan as note 1 above.

^{page 93 note 5} WO. 55/344, p. 9.

^{page 93 note 6} WO. 47/23, p. 211; WO. 47/31, p. 41.

^{page 93 note 7} WO. 51/40, p. 59; WO. 51/97, P. 64.

^{page 93 note 8} WO. 51/105.

^{page 93 note 9} WO. 51/103.

^{page 95 note 1} WO. 51/120, p. 78.

^{page 95 note 2} WO. 51/172, p. 171.

^{page 96 note 1} P.R.O., Z. 13/61, Z. 13/40.

^{page 96 note 2} Plans, e.g. Z. 13/54. Work on a considerable scale seems to have continued to about 1770.

^{page 96 note 3} WO. 55/818.

^{page 96 note 4} J. Scott, Berwick-upon-Tweed, 1888, p. 311.

^{page 96 note 5} Ibid., pp. 311–12.

^{page 96 note 6} From copies of the deeds in the files of the Ministry of Public Building and Works.

^{page 96 note 7} Ibid.

^{page 96 note 8} Interest began with a controversy over the proposed demolition of part of the north Edwardian wall near the Bell Tower in 1903–4. As a result the Office of Works took over the remains of the Edwardian wall, and the Berwick Historic Monuments Committee was set up by local initiative to promote conservation. A tangible result of the Committee's activities was the clearance of some of the flankers.

^{page 96 note 9} From the files of M.P.B.W.

^{page 96 note 10} By deed of guardianship dated 14th July 1931.