Conservation Management Plan - Tamworth Borough Council

From the place name evidence the late 7 th century Tomtun (contemporary with the Staffordshire Hoard) was already
marked out as an important place at that time. We can be more certain that Tamworth was a major centre for Mercia
by the late 8 th century. A large number of Mercian charters were witnessed at Tamworth between 781 and 857
(Meeson 1979: 17) and the settlement is referred to in terms such as ‘in loco sede regali’ (at the royal seat) in regali
palatio (in the royal palace), in loco celeberrimo (at the most celebrated/splendid place).
All surviving Mercian charters dated to Christmas or Easter are ratified at Tamworth, indicating that the Mercian
kings regularly came there for their main Christian festivals, together with many of the important people in the
kingdom, archbishops, bishops, abbots and ealdormen, who acted as witnesses to the charters. Although the
Mercian kings, like their contemporaries in other kingdoms, were peripatetic, staying at royal vills and monastic
sites, Hart (1977: 58, 60) suggest that there was an annual royal progress by the Mercian kings between their major
residences at London and Tamworth and that a permanent royal treasury was maintained at Tamworth.
Tamworth would have comprised a major royal residence or palace, one or more churches, residences for the king’s
reti nue and servants, and industrial and commercial structures to meet their needs. This would not have been a
town, as such as this stage, but a proto, or developing town, where a significant proportion of the population is
engaged in non-agricultural occupations.
The location of the ‘palace’ at Tamworth is not known. Traditionally it has been suggested that it might lie within
and beneath the bailey area of the castle overlooking the river Anker (H.M.Taylor 1966). Wainwright carried out a
trial excavation in this area in 1960, but found no evidence of Anglo-Saxon occupation. His excavation records are
incomplete and the work was never published, but the records do survive within the castle archive in Holloway
Lodge. However traces of stratigraphy containing saxo-norman pottery were found during a watching brief, within
the bailey which suggests that early deposits survive beneath the turf of the castle park, which makes this an area
of high archaeological importance.
Bob Meeson suggested that the site of the palace enclosure may have been around the area of St Editha’s
churchyard and extending south of Church street (Fig.1) (Meeson 1979: 22-30). This 1.5ha elevated enclosure
at the centre of the area defined by the defences, may have formed the site of the palace together with one or
more associated churches. Or it could have been entirely ecclesiastical, the site of a monasterium. John Blair has
suggested that ecclesiastical sites which were fixed and permanent, as opposed to the itinerant secular royal
sites, are likely to be the focus for later town development, and certainly provided hospitality to kings during their
progress round their kingdom (Blair J 1996).
The importance of this central enclosure is entirely plausible, lying at the highest point and close to the junction of
the main roads. Was it lying at the heart of an even larger 22ha enclosure, which ran on the same lines as the later
Saxon and medieval defences.
Meeson’s theory has not been tested by excavation or geophysical survey and later burials within the churchyard
are likely to have destroyed traces of any earlier timber buildings. However, there is at least one decorated late
Saxon tomb-stone re-used in the ceiling of the crypt on the south side of St Editha’s.
The Town Defences (Figs 1 & 2)
A large number of sections have been cut across the town defences, but all have been small scale and the sequence
is therefore uncertain. Bob Meeson summarised the known evidence in his dissertation in 1979 (Meeson 1979:
112-120 and this was repeated by Bassett 2008). Meeson suggested four phases, plus an additional two potential
phases. His phase three was a timber fronted rampart and ditch separated from the rampart by a berm. This has
10 th century dating evidence and would fit with Aethelflaed’s Burh defences built in 913. Phase 4 is a re-facing of the
rampart in stone. Phase 5 is refurbishment in 11 th century, with the excavation of a new ditch and rampart, perhaps
coinciding with the construction of the castle. Phase 6 is the silting up of the rampart in the 13 th century, suggesting
that the defence of the settlement is no longer a priority.
Meeson has also identified two earlier phases on the same line which appear to predate the Aethelflaedan rampart
and perhaps belong to Offa’s palace (757-796). The central palace/monasterium enclosure may have been
surrounded by a larger enclosure of 22ha which could have provided accommodation, garrison, industry, trade,
agriculture or a combination of any of these.
Tamworth Castle Conservation Management Plan www.marionblockley.co.uk
Part 1
23