Talk:Tower of London

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Tower of London article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

Tower of London is included in the 2006 Wikipedia CD Selection, or is a candidate for inclusion in the next version. Please maintain high quality standards and, if possible, stick to GFDL-compatible images.

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Related task forces (general topics): Military technology and engineering task force Related task forces (nations and regions): British military history task force Related task forces (periods and conflicts): Medieval warfare task force (c. 500–c. 1500) World War II task force

	Architecture Portal This article covers subjects of relevance to Architecture. To participate, visit the Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture for more information. The current monthly improvement drive is Castle.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the assessment scale.

	This article is within the scope of the Castles WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.

---

Contents 1 Overuse of links 2 Traitor's Gate? 3 The Krays? 4 The Tower Liberties 5 The Tower does not have a Roman origin! 6 Saxons on the Rampage 7 Date of foundation 8 Ravens 9 How to improve this article 10 Last Englishman to be held in the Tower

[edit] Overuse of links

It is just me, or are there too many words highlighted in this article? What's the use of linking to Demolition, Office, or Butt? I don't know if there's an actual page for William Blake's "Tyger! Tyger!" poem, but linking to there is better than just linking to poem, isn't it? See Wikipedia:Make_only_links_relevant_to_the_context. Alfvaen 20:31, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Traitor's Gate?

Probably a more specific mention of Traitors Gate should be placed somewhere in the article other than the caption of one of the pictures. Suggestions? -- Rune Welsh ταλκ 17:09, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

I agree. A couple of years ago when I did the tour, the Warder spoke at length about Traitor's Gate. What he said about it, I can't remember now, but I'm sure there is info worth mentioning. I seem to remember something about Sir Walter Raleigh and Traitor's Gate, but I can't remember what!! Someone with some good knowledge of it would do well to put some info about it in this article. IanUK 10:56, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Krays?

The Krays were held prisoner there? The Tower was used in the 1950s for casual locking up of (who they were at the time) random Army deserters??? This can't be true?

I personally have never heard of the Krays being kept there, but as for WW2 deserters: some were executed by firing squad at the tower, so they could well have been detained there too. IanUK 10:53, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I saw a documentary on the Tower a few months ago: it said that the Krays were stationed in the Tower during national service, in the 50s, and got involved in a drunken brawl while out on the town. They were locked up for a night (or possibly two) in the guard cells as a result.--Bilbo B 20:21, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Tower Liberties

Maybe somebody could add some info on the former local administrative role of the Tower of London with regard to the 'Tower Liberties'? Colin4C 16:46, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Would Tower division contain the correct information , or are the Tower Liberties the much smaller area round the castle? Lozleader 21:55, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Should have *read* the artcle:

• The liberty of His Majesty's Tower of London, consisting of:
  • The liberty of the Old Artillery Ground
  • The parish of Trinity, Minories
  • The Old Tower precinct
  • The precinct of The Tower Within
  • The precinct of the Well Close

Lozleader 21:57, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Tower does not have a Roman origin!

I have deleted disinformation to the contrary. The Roman origin of the Tower is a longstanding myth, popularised by Shakespeare in his Richard III, where he ascribes it to Julius Caesar...However all the evidence suggests that William I was the first to build a fortress here. Colin4C 21:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Saxons on the Rampage

This bit from the article intrigues me:

'He [William the Conqueror] chose this location because he considered it to be a strategic point being opposite the site where Earl Godwin had landed in Southwark in 1051 during his Saxon rebellion against the Norman influence of Edward the Confessor'

I can't help wondering what the source of this statement is...It sounds very speculative...telling us, as it does, of William the Conqueror's thoughts on strategy as he built the Tower...There could be a grain of truth in it though...London's riverside was devoid of defenses after the original Roman riverside wall crumbled to bits sometime in the Dark Ages. Therefore it would make sense to build the Tower plus the other two Norman London riverside castles: Montfichet's and Barnard's Castle to defend against a riverside attack by Vikings or revolting Saxons etc...Colin4C 12:39, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Date of foundation

Article has recently had foundation of White Tower amended from 1078 to 1066. I believe 1066 was the date for a motte and bailey wooden castle's foundation and construction in stone began 12 yrs later. Anyone got a source? --Dweller 09:53, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

1078 is the correct date. I have changed it back. The Tower was part of a series of fortifications built at that time along the London waterfront (Montfichet's and Baynard's castle were the other ones - now gone) and the coast to protect the London and the country from Viking attack (though an undying 'factoid' has it that the Tower was built to 'overawe' Londoners...which seems a bit of a silly suggestion to me, despite its ubiquitous appearance, and repetition by tour guides). Thus there is no reason to believe that a motte and bailey castle was built on this exact spot in 1066! I have no idea where this latter idea comes from....The man who built the Tower, by the way, was one 'Gundulph', Bishop of Rochester, though nobody has seen fit, as yet, to include that in the article..Colin4C 11:26, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ravens

With reference to this extract from the article:

"The only time ravens have been recorded absent at the tower, was in 1946 during the second world war, when the Kingdom was close to falling."

World War 2 ended in 1945...Colin4C 19:49, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, that's slightly embarrassing - I wrote that! Well spotted, and thanks for correcting it! IanUK 10:50, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Still embarrassing. Absence of ravens is meant to foretell collapse. While the Kingdom may have in danger from 1939 to 1945 (well, not quite 1945), in 1946 the war was well over and the Kingdom was safe. So the absence of the ravens then is proff that it is just supersition. Perhaps it should simply read: The only time ravens have been recorded absent at the tower, was in 1946, and nothing happened. Emeraude 20:47, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Didn't we lose the British Empire round about that time? Just a thought...Colin4C 11:30, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

No, we didn't. That happened later. Besides, the loss of the British Empire is not connected with the absence of ravens, only the White Tower, the monarchy and the kingdom. Emeraude 11:42, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, in that case I believe that there must have been at least one raven there in 1946: possibly hiding in one of the Towers. Colin4C 13:30, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Do you have any sources for that fact, that there was no raven in 1946? [1] says, that there were none during WWII, while [2] mentions at least one.

Additional question: Does anyone know, who pays for the ravens? --Flominator 00:05, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Interestingly, the official Historic Royal Palaces info sheet on the ravens makes no mention of them ever being absent [3] (interesting to read), which is not to say it hasn't happened. I don't remember the guides at the Tower ever saying they had been absent either, though they do spend a good deal of time on the legend. In answer to Flominator, they will be paid for from the general expenses of the Tower of London, i.e. from admission charges and general taxation. Emeraude 11:51, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

This site [4] states that there were no ravens in 1946, several websites seem to give slightly different information. But all say it was during or just after the War. There is no way to know which one is correct. I'm rather surprised at the lack of an official website for the Tower of London, to be honest!

That site sounds remarkably like the Wikipedia Tower of London page did a few months ago (see [5]) on this subject! The fact is, if it's right there were no ravens in 1946, a year after the war, then the myth is false because there was then no danger to England. And if there were none during the war, it's still false, or Germany would have won! I think the link to The Guardian article (number 4 in the references) may give a true picture. The Historical Royal Palaces site I mentioned before is official. Not very informative though. Emeraude 15:21, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I still maintain that there was at least one raven perching on a roost on the Bloody Tower throughout 1946, maintaining in its avian way the Crown of England. Can you prove otherwise? Colin4C 23:04, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I think I agree with Colin4C, in that there was probably a raven at the Tower somewhere or other during those times, even if it was in a cage in the cloakroom loo! But seeing as we have no source (I don't think the Guardian is any more reliable than all the others), perhaps the date should be removed altogether? IanUK 09:26, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your replies. I think that the officials wouldn't tell us, if there were no ravens during WWII, because then, the legend would have been shown to be wrong. Maybe we could mention, that some source claim that there were no ravens present of something like that. My next question: How many of them are there now? The BBC-page mentioned in the article says 8 while http://www.historicroyalpalaces.org/webcode/content.asp?ID=546 says 6. Are there any visual confirmations? --Flominator 10:11, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I have just read in Tales from the Tower (2006) by Fiona Jerome that 'no one can remember the Tower without Ravens' and that a solitary raven named 'Grip' DID survive WW2, even though its feathered friends succumbed to the Lufftwaffe. 1946 marks the date when a new batch of ravens were brought in to augment the numbers. Jerome also points out that in olden days wild ravens were indigenous to London and would roost on the Towers. I.e. before the tame wing clipped ravens of today, the Tower hosted wild ravens. Colin4C 15:59, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I too am having a problem with the paragraph that says that all the ravens were killed by bombing and tower records clearly stating "there are none left" - can we have a source for that please? I can't find any tower records, I'm sure there are some though, all I keep finding is mirrors of Wikipedia! The Daniel Diehl book, "Tales from the Tower of London" and Edward Impey's "The Tower of London: The Official Illustrated History " along with several websites eg [6] all say that one raven called 'Grip' was left at the end of the war and the other birds were scared away (not killed) by the bombing. The raven stock was topped up in 1946. These seem to be reliable sources. There is a similar unsourced comment in Common Raven. Does anyone have any objection to me changing this part? Artemka 16:58, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

No objections from me. GRIP lives! Colin4C 17:58, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] How to improve this article

This article could be improved in many ways...However one glaring omission is that there is virtually no mention of the role of the Tower as a Royal Palace and its role in the coronation procession of the kings and queens of England. Maybe someone could fix this??? Colin4C 10:59, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

The article could also benefit from a more lengthy discussion of the many famous prisoners of the Tower, the ghost stories, and the graves found in the Chapels Royal. The Victorian renovation of the Chapels - during which the bodies of Anne Boleyn, Catherine Howard and many others were found and identified, isn't even mentioned at all. I am no expert on this, but I should think the article should at least include what is mentioned & discussed on a typical tourist Yeoman Warder-led tour. (For that matter, there really isn't much discussion of the Yeomen Warders in this article either.) LordAmeth 13:44, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Last Englishman to be held in the Tower

The article states that George Salaman was the last Englishman to be held in the Tower. I am guessing that this occurred around 1941 or 1942. It is also stated that the Kray twins were held in the Tower during 1952. The Krays, according to their entry in this encyclopedia, were born in London. It would appear, then, that the Krays were the last Englishmen to be held in the tower. Perhaps the article should be edited to clarify this matter.

See Talk:Tower of London#The Krays? above. They were based there during their National Service and, like many other soldiers, put in the barracks lockup for breaking regulations. So they weren't exactly prisoners in the tower in the sense that they were convicted in court and sentenced there. Emeraude 11:59, 3 January 2007 (UTC)