Academic Paper Writing Service http://StudyHub.vip/A-Life-In-Castles-.-Essays-In-Honour-Of

1. ’A Life in Castles’
Essays in Honour of Dr. Edward Cooper
!
The ‘6th Nonverbal arts; verbal discourses’ conferences
London Metropolitan University
London, May 28th 2008
!
!
!
Edward Cooper and the Study of Medieval Warfare
Francisco Javier López-Martín
!
!
!
Esteemed members of the Sir John Cass Department of Art, Media &
Design, London Metropolitan University; colleagues at the Queen
Mary College; colleagues at the Victoria & Albert Museum; Ladies
and Gentleman, appreciated guests and friends:
!
!
It is both an honour and a privilege to be here today and I would like to thank
Prof. Brian Falconbridge and Dr. Paul Cobley for inviting me to this special
occasion. I now have the opportunity to thank Edward in public for giving me
not only the chance to do a Ph.D. in England (a once in a lifetime opportunity),
but for sharing with me his friendship and knowledge. Also for teaching me
many things throughout these years such as the reason to approach a specific
archive, the fastest way to open the gates of castles today in private hands, the
correct use of the prepositions “in” and “on” (which, in fact, I found impossible
to learn) or the importance of the taste of the French cheese “Époisses de
Bourgogne” (from Waitrose, Finchley Road). A more important fact is that he
also taught me the importance of the epistemology for historical research.
!
I came to London in February 2000 to undertake a long and hard dissertation.
Many of you know me since I run from Jewry Street to Commercial Road
looking for books or technical advice (technician Rennay knows that very well).
During those first years Edward was a continuous and strong supporter of my
research even when I faltered. I would like to thank him for believing in me.

2. !
As everybody knows, he is a reputed hispanist, his topic being Spanish medieval
castles. After years of studying fortress typologies, their workshops, promoters
and bricks, he felt the necessity to move forward to a field of knowledge which
was, and still is, a bit abandoned: the artillery, a field that I took over in my
research. If Edward belongs to the Department of Building, I have my desk in the
Demolition room. I think that there are strong connections between Edward’s
research and mine and it is not coincidence. We have been foreigners in those
countries with castles or cannon to inspect. I had to learn English to do my
dissertation whereas Edward needed to learn Spanish, something (if you will
permit me to say so) uncommon to the English spirit, though he also knows a bit
of German, Polish and French due to his stays in those countries. The way he
guided me, the pushing for the study of as many collections of artillery as
possible, the use of photography, which was his personal idea, and the primary
search which I started in the Royal Artillery Academy at Woolwich and in
Simancas archive, was the best starting point for my research.
!
In 2002 I moved to a house in Wembley Park next to Edward’s. A year later, he
became my landlord when his upper flat became free. I spent the day with my
supervisor and the evenings with my landlord -a very stressful situation indeed.
However, I had the chance to discuss with him many points of view: from the
Castilian artillery framework in the late 15th century, to how to prune his apple
trees. All this accompanied by the music of Bach, Handel or Cristóbal Morales.
!
He published the 1st version of his Castillos Señoriales en la Corona de Castilla
in 1980, updating his 1969 University of Cambridge Ph.D. thesis. A 2nd version,
considerably improved, was published eleven years later.
!
“Castillos Señoriales”, his major work and the true starting point for my own
research, became a landmark in Spain for many reasons. I would like to remark
briefly on two of them: the use of archival sources and the use of photography.
This afternoon we will have the chance to attend to other points of view.
!
Everybody in this room knows that the search of archival references is a key step
in historical research. One can feel happy if, in the course of the investigation, an
important document is found. But when the research covers a plethora of
monuments the search must be intensive and, as one document led us to another,
the search became endless. Edward spent many months over many years at
Simancas, where the staff remembered him very well. During the 1980s he had
the chance to meet old friends again such as Geoffrey Parker, at that time
studying the Spanish Armada. He had also the opportunity to gain access to more
problematic archives such as that of the late duchess of Medina Sidonia, in
Cadiz, the biggest private Spanish archive. The Duchess received him very well,

3. even when other Spanish scholars had the doors completely closed. “Castillos
Señoriales” deals with around 400 castles or fortresses, all of them properly
studied and explained. This bulk of information, extracted from archival
research, represents the most important study on Spanish castles since the works
of Sarthou Carreres and Sainz Robles in the middle of the 20th century.
!
With regard to photography I must stress that it is not just photography: it is Art.
Everybody in this University knows the state of perfection that Edward achieved
with his old Edixa, a West German product that owed more than a little to the
GDR’s Practika camera. After thousands of photographs, the old Edixa died, and
he began to use a Russian made Zenit and then a Practika, which served him over
the last 20 years. All the photographs developed in his laboratory at Wembley
Park are B&W, as he refuses the use of colour. There is nothing better to capture
the clarity of the, in times gone by, clean Spanish atmosphere contrasted with a
crude stone block of a castle. Photography is since its very beginning the most
useful tool to reproduce reality mechanically. It must show every detail without
special effects. This rule is achieved by Edward in every single photograph he
made.
Vélez Blanco castle, a photograph that Cooper took with his Edixa camera in 1966
!
!

4. I’m very fond of one of his photographs: it shows an old wrought iron bombard
on the ramparts of the castle of Grajal de Campos (in Leon) with a flock of sheep
behind it. Edward took this picture in 1986 with a Zenit at the precise moment
when the shepherd was leading the sheep to graze. It dramatically symbolised the
symbiotic relationship between castles and sheep droving.
The bombard on the ramparts of the castle of Grajal de Campos. It was still in situ in 2001
!
For me, however, this cannon is more important than the castle or even the sheep.
When I saw Edward’s photograph I immediately realized that there were some
guns in the Museo del Ejército (now in Toledo) with the same unusual lug
formation. The photograph led to the hypothesis that different masters or
workshops could have applied their own shapes to the reinforcing rings of the
cannon.

5. Therefore, I tried to fill the gap and went to see this cannon for myself. It was
exactly where Edward had left it! I took my own version of the photograph on
Dec. 27th 2001. Being cheaper, wrought-iron guns were widespread throughout
Europe. However, they have few characteristics, such as decoration, that enable a
date or place of manufacture to be ascribed. There is thus no geographical or
chronological pattern. The only parts that can be easily identified in a wrought
iron gun made of staves and bracing bands are precisely the lugs. After Edward’s
photograph I checked all the guns with, to my knowledge, the same lug pattern
and found twelve pieces in Spain alone (1). It may seem a small number, but we
are dealing with late 15th century artefacts which have been reused and modified,
corroded by the passing of time, or even destroyed. Wherever the workshop
responsible was, it supplied the Crown.
!
A possibility is that the principal master craftsman was Johan de Peñafiel,
resident in Roa (Burgos). He was contracted in 1469 by Ferdinand while still
Prince of Aragon and King of Sicily, to make thirty-eight wrought-iron pieces.
After this group, I started to establish more typologies. Thus, I found that four
major groups of cannon were made by different masters throughout Spain. The
second group (2) is formed by ten pieces whose lugs are straight-sided. This
workshop also worked for the Crown.
!
A third group, whose lugs are rounded (3), contains twelve pieces. Another
category of cannon with the same type of lug is formed by fifteen examples in
Spain, Switzerland, Austria and Belgium (4). It is in the form of an apex of
triangular section pierced longitudinally to receive a lifting ring or facilitate
aiming but more are likely to exist. The lug shape is the commonest that is found.
Another main category can be identified in Europe, and it is not found in Spain.
It is formed by a group of pieces today in Belgium, Denmark, England, Northern
France and Genoa, though the piece from Genoa was recovered from a wreck,

6. !
!
!
!
and its country of origin is unknown (5). The lugs, always in one or two pairs,
form right angles. Three further pieces seem to form another group. The upper
edges of the lugs in a Swiss piece are notched, a treatment found on the 1st and
9th hoops of a Spanish piece. A gun now in England is similar. According to the
English Royal Armouries catalogue it was found on the roof of Avila cathedral.
!
These pieces have little in common except this feature and the only indication of
date comes via an engraving by Israhel Van Meckenem, Judith and Holofernes,
of c. 1495. It shows four breech-loading guns mounted on wheeled carriages, of
which at least two have exactly the same tupe of lugs. Two sacks, perhaps of
Judith and Holofernes, engraving by Israhel Van Meckenem, c. 1495
(courtesy of the Spencer Museum of Art, Kansas)
!
ammunition or gunpowder, also appear and may identify the location: one
features the pineapple of Augsburg; the other the two-headed Imperial eagle. The

7. guns depicted might have belonged to the arsenal of Maximilian I. These groups
might have been augmented by artillery recovered from shipwrecks. Two port
pieces retrieved from the Mary Rose have identical scrolled lugs and must have
come from a single workshop.
Mary Rose Museum, Portsmouth
!
!
What a mine of wonderful information derived from a single B&W photograph!!
!
“Castillos Señoriales” also has a chapter on the early use of cannon in Spain and,
although it does not try to establish any artillery categories, it gives a general
view of its first deployment, with examples from various parts of Europe, and the
relationship with fortification, which was obliged to adapt to it. Edward was the
first to link in this chapter late 15th century references of casting of iron guns in
Spain with some pieces in the Museo del Ejército. It is a group of eleven pieces,
now painted black, impeding examination. Four roughly finished guns have long
manoeuvring handles at the back, their muzzles have triple reinforce fillets, as
with bronze cannon, and their trunnions are asymmetrical. They are marked with
the same chiselled eight pointed star superimposed on a cross which has a
crimped surround, indicating that they come from the same workshop.
!
Their poor finish is a mystery. If they were forged, it is strange that the smith
could not put the finishing touches to them. They may have been made with iron
from a finery, which combined the characteristics of forged and cast metal, as
described in 15th century chronicles. The eight pointed star appears again twice
on the barrel of a longer, badly finished gun linking it to this group. Finally, six
more guns in the Madrid collection are, similarly, a series of identical shape and
balanced trunnions. According to the 1909 catalogue, all eleven pieces came to
the Museum from the same place: Valladolid. This might be interpreted as
meaning that the crown arsenal at Medina del Campo, also had a foundry. Even if
the first four pieces were forged, it is difficult to understand their state of
completion.

8. The other six guns have a remarkable uniformity of dimensions and shape.
Edward proposed a connection between these pieces and specific archival
references from Simancas, leading to the conclusion that artillery was actually
cast as well in iron at the end of the 15th century in Spain. Unfortunately, we are
still waiting for a metallurgical analysis, which will determine the nature of its
metal. Artillery was not, however, the main subject of this chapter, but the
adaptation of fortification to artillery. Edward studied the changes made in
castles to offer better resistance to siege artillery. For example, the transition
from arrow-slit to letter-box; the square tower with chamfered angles, to deflect
shots; the growing opposition to the use of brick in fortification; the shielding of
The old display at the Museo del Ejército, at Madrid, showing six pieces from the group
!
the base of the walls from direct hits, by means of an adjacent outer enclosure;
The ditch to keep the enemy at bay; or the increase of the round form of the
towers, to maximise deflection of incoming missiles, instead of angle towers
from around 1530. He focuses finally on another important warfare aspect. I will
use his own words:
!
“The sloping plinth, revetment, moat area, low profile ramparts and
increased wall thickness associated with bastioned defences were intended

9. also to neutralise another technique tried out by besiegers with the advent
of firearm technology: the military powder mine”,
!
which procure the collapse of walls by means of a subterranean explosion. From
his point of view, the supposed Italian origin is more the product of patriotic
literature than of serious research. Thus, he establishes different alternatives for
its first use. He is also reliable with the use by the Spanish troops, of what can be
the first use of a mercury fulminant, a crucial step to accelerate the explosion,
which he placed before 1541.
!
As I said before, I had many hours a day to discuss with Edward different aspects
of military warfare. Another topic was the use of models and moulds and the
possibility of making replicate pieces during the late Medieval times and the
dawn of the early Modern period. The existence of a technique which allows the
making of identical objects, which I have demonstrated in my dissertation,
establish the principle that cannon did not have to be all different. Following a
pattern, the system could have reproduced as many copies as needed, and this
presupposes a new production system: a repeat production. Artillery production
in any material depended on working on the design through drawing.
!
This is not the occasion to bother you with this type of topic. Nevertheless, just
let me say that Edward also stopped at this same point. In Castillos Toledanos en
la Corona de Castilla (2005), he studied the use of models for the making of
heraldic castles, such as one which has survived in the church of Piedrahita,
Avila. He suggested that template drawings of castle images might have
Toledo, Bridge of Alcantara (detail) c. 1484. The reversal of a template drawing explains the
switched location of the catflaps in the castle doors: one left, one right

10. circulated on paper among artists and sculptors, to be copied in other materials
such as copper or stone, or turned round and recycled back-to-front. This must
have happened with the design of artillery and, in fact, we have an example of
guns with representation of castles which must have come from a single model.
!
Again, I already knew of a wrought-iron breech-loading gun from the armoury of
Duke of Medinaceli. It is faceted for two thirds of its length and round for the
remainder. Separating these zones is a copper strip with the representation of a
castle in the middle. A piece basically identical to that of the Medinaceli
collection has survived in private possession at the castle of Batres, in Madrid.
As these drawings show the main difference between their measurements is in
the last faceted sector of 13.5 cm before the muzzle, which the gun at Batres
castle has, but not the one in the Army Museum, which either never had it or was
truncated. The master gunmaker, probably in the third quarter of the 15th century,
could have had visualised not just a model for the whole piece, but, logically, one
for the castle on the copper strip, which is exactly the same. They could have
come from a single model used by craftsman who forged the cannon. I was able
69 cm 40 11.3 6.6 36.5 1.6 2.7
70 cm 41 18 6.6 37 13.5 1.6 2.4
!
to get access to this castle thanks to Edward’s “web of connections”, which also
helped me in the castles of Ampudia (Palencia) and La Mota in Medina del
Campo.
Museo del Ejército-38098
Batres castle

11. !
I would not like to finish this paper without mentioning one of the latest works of
Edward, even when it does not strictly focus on warfare but on chemical
research. In La Mitra y la Roca (the Mitre and the Rock), the topic is Alum, a
mineral derivative crucially important in the medieval economy, used for fixing
the colour in dyed worsted cloths. Mazarrón in Murcia, became an important
centre from the 1st decade of the 16th century after the fall of Constantinople in
1453 and the opening of the Papal mines in Tolfa, a small city within the Papal
boundaries, in 1463. The high economic benefits derived from the Alum,
prompted political conflicts which, in the end, were solved with military action.
In Spain, the main characters were Alfonso Carrillo, archbishop of Toledo, Pedro
Fajardo, 1st Marquis of Los Vélez, from whom at least one superb gun survives
at the Army Museum, Toledo. It could have been used to defend his interest on
the Alum industry. As you see, not only the medieval warfare is in Edward’s
sights. Further alum research, carried out in the School of Geosciences, Madrid
University, is also in the battlefront.
!
At the beginning of this chat I have referred to some similarities between
Edward’s research and mine. I hope eventually to publish the thesis I wrote under
the aegis of Sir John Cass Department of Art, Media & Design, maybe by next
Christmas, and rival the tutor. The only area in which I cannot compete with him
is in wearing striped T-shirts with matching socks!
!
Thank you Edward.