King Charles II was restored to the throne of England in May 1660, and while the vast majority of permanent garrisons in the country had remained loyal to the Crown, Hull quite demonstrably had not.  It was therefore felt that some pressure had to be brought to install men who were then considered to be more reliable and trusted.  While the election of one Hull Member of Parliament was so influenced, that of the other was not.  Andrew Marvell, the poet, was also a hardened Republican, but was still returned to Parliament for the town.  Hull quite plainly had not yet abandoned its loyalties to the Parliamentary cause, and was seen therefore as a potential threat to the safety of the realm and nation.  By 1665 however, the town was considered safe enough for the Duke of York (the future James II) to visit with the aim of reporting upon the conditions of the fortifications.  Further discontent continued to be displayed in other parts of Yorkshire, but Hull meanwhile would appear to have settled into the new regime, which new found loyalty to the Crown was ensured by further visits by the aristocracy.  From the date of the Restoration Hull had retained three companies of soldiers who were garrisoned at the castle and blockhouses.  An Act of Parliament called the Disbanding Act, received royal accent in September 1660, specifically exempted those garrisons at Hull, Berwick, and Carlisle, who were to be “retained in pay until the completion of the disbandment.”   When the process was completed, Hull was instructed to muster 100 men to safeguard the place, six companies, under the command of Lord Belasayse, who received his Letters Patent on 5^th December 1660.  In September 1663, the Royal Regiment of Guards was sent north to garrison Hull, Berwick, and Carlisle.  Hull received three of the twenty-four companies of the regiment, which necessitated the reduction of the locally formed garrison.  Also in 1660, another inventory was made of the munitions stored at the Hull fortifications, they included at that time at the Southend fort: 19 guns; a large basilisk, a cannon of eight, three culverins, and nine demi-culverins.  At the South blockhouse there were 21 guns; the north blockhouse ten guns; and the castle only eight sakers (smaller guns).  In the stores there were also 9,696 round-shot; 264 stone cannon balls; 343 rounds of case-shot; and 103 assorted other projectiles.  For infantry use there was also 1,126 hand grenades; match and shot for muskets; 600+ front and back armour; 766 pot helmets.  There was also, a store of 793 barrels of powder.  The condition of the blockhouses while considered reasonable, were still in need of repair; consequently a Royal Warrant for £500 was issued to the governor with which to make all necessary repairs.  Further to this, it then became apparent that the North blockhouse was actually in a very poor condition indeed.  In actual fact it was learnt that deputy-governor Gilby had been taking the very bricks out of the structure of the north blockhouse with which he was able to build for himself a brand new house at Sunk Island in Holderness.  By this time however, it was more than apparent that the Henrician fortifications were so far out of date that they formed little safeguard whatsoever.  The art of war had progressed, ships were stronger and better armed, artillery had improved considerably, and Hull had little to offer against such threats other than some defences and guns, many of which were 100 years old, and even older in concept.  It was decided at government level that Hull was in need of refortification, and the final great military project of the reign of Charles II was set in motion, the construction of new and up to date defences at Hull.

On the 18^th April 1681, a Royal Warrant was issued for “causing the works and repairs at Hull to be undertaken.”  The required monies had somehow been raised by various means for the work to commence by the Office of the Board of Ordnance, the governmental department then responsible for such projects.  The Board had also appointed Major Martin Beckman to take over as planner in chief.  Beckman had been a mercenary soldier, who had been employed by the Crown since 1661, and as second engineer to the Crown since 1675, his skill lay in the deployment of artillery, and he had a fascination for all things connected therewith.  He was the ideal choice for the task in hand.  His initial report was straight to the point: “….. The Blockhouses are very much out of repair; the North Blockhouse is altogether dismantled, all the lead and wood converted to private uses.  The moats about the Blockhouses is altogether grown up even with the ground about it, and not a drop of water in it.  The King has not one foot of ground beyond this old moat and as it is altogether necessary that the Blockhouses be repaired I will say nothing of any new works…..”  Almost immediately the purchase of land on the Holderness side was set in motion.  Beckman envisaged a triangular plan artillery fortress that was to incorporate both the Castle and the old South blockhouse.  The ruined north blockhouse was to be left to decay.  The whole of the new fortress was to be surrounded by a wide ditch with the Hull and the Humber providing wet defences westward and southward.  A considerable delay was caused by the wrangling of local builders whose estimates never agreed with the men in London.  Eventually normal practice won the day, and the lucrative contract was issued and made with Sir Thomas and his brother John Fitch of London, associates of a certain Mr. Wren, and who had connections within the Board of Ordnance, who were the contractees.  Money to begin the project had been found by various means including selling off large amounts of gunpowder, selling of felled timber in Sherwood forest, and later, in the reign of James II, by treasure ‘salvaged’ from a Spanish galleon off Hispaniola.  Beckman remained in overall charge, and he was responsible for ensuring that the builders adhered to the planned structure. 

1681

By 14^th September work had begun with bricklayers repairing the South blockhouse parapet, and ‘country people’ had been employed to excavate a drain that would allow ground works to progress.  1,000 timber boards arrived, and work had commenced on those parts of the north and southwest bastions that were west of the old fortifications.  A few weeks later, three passages had been cut through the old curtain wall, and that nearest the south blockhouse had been demolished.  The south blockhouse was re-roofed and made strong enough for it to be used a gun platform, while work had commenced on constructing the earthworks for the rampart surrounding the blockhouse.  Within a few weeks the structure was 12 feet high and 20 feet broad, ditches had also been dug to a depth of about 10 feet at both the south and north blockhouses.  Brickwork continued until the winter weather prevented it, in late November.  Further work began on excavating the ditch near the eastern, Drypool side of the north bastion.  By December 1681, it was recorded that only 50 or 60 men had been employed for the season’s work, mainly because the town Governor had refused Beckman permission to utilise the soldiers garrisoned in the town, that and the fact that a late harvest prevented many likely employees from working the site.  It is recorded that also, the unit cost for labour had increased to an average 18p a day!  Beckman was also wary of the contractors, the brothers Fitch, whose ideas about building earthworks did not agree with his own.

A full season’s work began in March and finished in November, but the flooding of trenches in January 1682, necessitated the repair of sluices which drained them being done in February.  By the end of March, bricklayers and masons were finishing the parapet and coping of the south blockhouse, while work to restore the lath and plaster work, plus the flooring, within the blockhouse were also in progress.  By the 24^th July, the parapet of the southwest bastion were brought to breadth, and by the following week, it stood 3 feet high, at which point the gun embrasures were set out.  Less than a month later, the parapet was 7 feet high, and a ‘Oprill’ had been constructed to facilitate the installation of the first guns.  Work continued on the ditch system, and by the start of October 90 men were employed filling in any gaps remaining in the parapet that were left by scaffolding.  Work also continued to infill the old moat next to the Henrician defences.   Progress on the north bastion was slower but by the first week in August, scaffolding was being erected there, and by that October, the earthworks were only 2 feet short of their intended height.  It is likely that other smaller sections of the south bastion were also this year undertaken.

This year brought only a narrow window of time for the works to continue, from March until July, when that very English of weapons was brought to bare – strike action – by the labourers.  Men had been brought in from as far a field as Lancashire and by early March, it was reported that there were 180 working on the north bastion and the platform, and by May, the latter was completed together with its gun embrasures.  April saw the completion of the infill of the ‘old moat’ between the Castle and South Blockhouse.  Work continued under the supervision of Captain Charles Lloyd in the absence of Beckman, and by April 28, he had the north bastion raised to a height of 10 feet.  An east-flanking wall was completed near the Castle; it was buttressed by the end of the same month, when two ‘oprills’ were built to bring the guns to their allotted positions.  The parapet was 6 feet high by the 18^th June, and by August was complete except for the placement of musket embrasures.  Capt. Lloyd also made great strides with the revetment and rampart between the north and south bastions, but his demand for speed was corrupted, and it was later discovered that he had built a vertical retaining wall instead of the more efficient and improved, sloping walls that allowed for the angle of repose of the backfilled soils.  Work also began preparing the ground for the east bastion, which by 30 August was about 8 feet high and 56 feet broad, work had also commenced on the nearby section of ditch.  Some tidal flooding damaged the sluices in late August, which necessitated immediate repair, and cracks, which had consequently appeared in one of the bastions, were also repaired.  The aforementioned strike brought about an early cessation of works for this year.  Detailed accounts survive of an estimate of costs for the Saluting Platform made in 1681 but completed this year, they state:

A New Platform to be raised on the Humber River under the South Blockhouse.

To raise a stone wall of 420 feet long, 18 feet high, 9 feet thick at the bottom and 6 feet thick at the top containing 175½ Rodd.Amt. £7                                        £1228 00 00

To raise this stone wall with Brooch Ashlar well squared and jointed, laid in Tarras 9 inches deep and every course to be laid anchor stones of 3 feet or more long at the distance of 9 feet.  To be laid broake and band, and that the lowermost courses be not less that 15 inches high, 18 and 22 inches deep and 18 inches broad in front, and the lot to breast the Scantlings at the height by degrees, but the upper courses be 9 inches high and no less, but the depth and breadth to keep the first scantling, the angles to be cramped with iron and fastened with lead and to have such Batter or Fall as the Engineer shall think fit.  Qt 7560ft. Amt 2s 6d per foot. Amt to                                                                                             £817 00 00

 To set upon this wall a water table 9 inched high, 20 inches deep, and 2 broad in the front, of moulded half round laid in Tarras, cramped iron and fastened with lead.  Qt.420 ft. in length at 3½ shillings per foot. Amt.                                                       £73 10 00

To set upon this water table a brick wall or parapet of 4½ feet high, 6 feet thick at the bottom and 5 feet thick at the top. Qt.31¾ Rodds. Amt. £6 per Rodd.          £190 00 00

The bricks to be set on edge a top of the parapet and pointed or pitched with Tarras Mortar 4 inches deep at 3d per foot.  Amt. For 1680ft superficial                              £21 00 00

For coping the edge of the inside of the parapet and angles of the embrasures. Qt. 630ft the stones to be 6 inches thick laid in Tarras mortar cramped with irion and fastened with lead at 2s per foot.                                                                                           £63 00 00

To lay the platform with stone 12 inches thick in mortar laid upon a foundation of wet rammed Rubbish, of Brick 1 ft thick being 420 ft long and 20 ft broad. Qt. 8400 Superficial ft at 20s per ft                                                                                          £700 00 00

Note if the platform be made of Oak Planks laid at joists or sleepers it will cost £546 and be serviceable for but 12 years; but of stone of this scantling for ever.

The foundation of this wall to be 11 feet broad, to lay 3 ranging joists of Fir or Oak Timber the scantling whereof to be 9 by 12 inches and the cross pieces of the same scantling, which are laid at every 6 feet, wrought, dovetailed in the Ranging Baulks, and this frame to be laid and wrought in, upon the heads of the piles, which must be driven according to the direction of the Engineer on the place.  The number of piles will be about 36 more or less as the ground shall require, the piles to be of Fir, Elm, or Oak, the length of the piles to be from 6 to 18 feet more or less as the ground shall permit the scantling of the longest to be12 to 10 inches, the shortest 8 to 6 inches when the frame is framed and fastened on the piles.  Then the frame after the squares and well fitted and rammed with stiff clay to covered with 3 inch Oak planks and spiked fast to the frame with spikes of 7 inches long and 2 or 3 Rails of 4 to 5 inch scantling to be nailed on the planks to hinder the wall from sliding; this foundation ought to be at the front about 2 or 3 inches higher than behind.  This foundation will Qt. 26 Rodds of running measure of £19 per Rodd.  Amt.                                           £494 00 00

Total                                                                                                     £3587 00 00

Archaeological excavation has verified that the builders met the above specifications.  The surface of the platform was discovered to have a cobbled surface rather than being flagged, but this could have been a later re-surfacing.

At the start of the 1684 season it was discovered that some water damage had been caused at the south blockhouse, which needed re-pointing, but a delay in delivery of materials meant that it did not begin until June.  Consequently, the season lasted from June to December, much of which was spent correcting the errors made during Beckman’s absence the previous year.  On 17 June, work commenced upon the main gate, sally-ports, drains, and a wall at the north salient of the eastern bastion.  The main gate was situated midway between the north and eastern bastions, a long roadway extended from the gate to an in-completed raveline; the gate its self was flanked either side by a guardhouse.  By the 18th October, carpenters had been brought in to complete the interior panelling of the guardhouses, and by 3 December, the entire gate complex was almost completed.  Work advanced on the sally-ports, which were brought within sight of completion.  By far the most complex work undertaken in this year was the building of a revetting wall on the northern side of the east bastion, running east away from the citadel site.  Its location, near the Humber shore meant the land was boggy and poorly drained.  Construction began on the eastern section in early August, and within a week it was standing 3 feet high, and up to a level with the lower cordon by the 21^st.  Piling was necessary for the western section nearest the fortress, and that was started about the same time as work began on the eastern section.  On 17^th September, both sections of the wall were at a level with the lower cordon, and five days later, 9 feet above it.  Another week saw the wall at its full height of between 16 and 9 feet,

with an overall length of 68 feet; a berm of packed rubble was added to help reduce ingress of flood water.  By the end of October, the eastern end of the wall had been clad in ashlar, and the upper sections were being added.  By the 3^rd December, the wall was complete, all the brickwork had been finished, but was not yet set hard, so the entire structure was dressed with boards to act as protection against the winter weather then about to set in.  During this year also, work continued with the sluices, drains, and pumps, to ensure they were able to cope with the demands of winter.

In 1685, work resumed in April restoring the damage caused by winter storms, which was largely rectified by June.  In that same month, June, work began on draining the moat in preparation for the scarp of the eastern berm to be worked on.  A stone sentry box was mounted on the eastern bastion by June; and the bastion wall was coped by 7^th July.  A representation of the Royal coat of arms was mounted over the main gate, also in June; and a faulty arch there was repaired by the end of August.  Enclosure of the eastern bastion was completed by the 11^th July, at which date the guns were mounted.  400 labourers were working on the scarps of the north and east bastion faces.  A record of payment for powder could indicate that remnants of the old curtain wall outside of the citadel had been blown up during this year.  Work continued until December.

The winter of 85/86 had been severe, standing water in the citadel had caused the partial collapse of the east curtain, it was repaired with pilings and rammed clay in mid-February, and water-spouts had been inserted to aid drainage.  Extensive work was undertaken to level the ground within the citadel from June to October, with the intention to prevent further occurrences of internal flooding.   Work also began on the south wall of the fortress this year; it was to continue for a further 2 years.  A small breakwater of 200 feet was built to help prevent tidal erosion of the east bastion, which would take the brunt of all incoming tides.  Other work mainly included the consolidation of the previous years efforts.   Work also began digging the foundations for the southern section of the eastern bastion, but was delayed when, in June, the Humber broke through ‘blowing up’ 50 feet of timber foundations.  Restoration of the foundations, and the actual foundations themselves were completed by 21^st July, by which time brickwork over it was in progress.  By the 14^th October, access from the east by means of a bridge across the new moat leading to the main entrance had been built.  The paving of the gate passage and repair to the guardhouse completed; the season’s work was finished by November.

A late resumption of work in 1687 was possibly caused by a delay in the arrival of the year’s contracts, which arrived with Beckman on 30^th April.  Beckman’s instructions to his overseers, or foremen, for the season were to have trenches constructed, piling and timber work for foundations to be in place, the facing and buttressing of a wall, and the building of the rampart behind it.  An additional contract for a further 2 million bricks was agreed.  The wages bill for labourers during October rose from £89 to £238, an indication of the intensity of the work in progress at that time of the year, the reasons for such a rise could include a late harvest, which delayed the arrival of labourers onsite.  The season closed on 13^th December.

Political tensions were rife throughout the nation as James II became more and more unpopular.  It was considered by some that the citadel might be needed before it was even completed, so much was done to bring up to completion as possible.  Guns were installed in the northern bastion, and the south scarp was completed.  However, there was a need for the labourers to bolster up other sections of the town’s defences, which delayed work at the citadel.  An extant note saying ‘there is a great want here for Sir Martin Beckman’ indicates that he was not then on site, and that some serious problem had arisen requiring his personal intervention.

It was expected that William of Orange, claimant to the crown of England would land somewhere in the north of the country, and Hull was one possible, if not likely, landing place.  The then Governor of the town, Marmaduke Langdale, a loyal Catholic and Jacobian, prepared the town for a siege, the sluices were opened, and the surrounding land flooded, a chain was suspended across the mouth of the river Hull, and reinforcements arrived in the form of troops from the Duke of Newcastle, also, preparations were made to arrest all Protestant officers.  The plans were however discovered, and the town’s people armed them selves in order to protect their religion, they had out faced a king and his army before!  Capt. Copley, Deputy Governor, had his superior arrested in his stead together with all other Catholic officers in the garrison.  There followed some civil unrest, quickly dealt with, and the town, the new citadel, and much of the north of the country in consequence, was secured for the new king, William, and his queen, Mary.  It had been, in the parlance, a Glorious Revolution!  The town subsequently celebrated the time and the events with ‘Town taking day’. 

Some internal buildings such as the barrack blocks were also built at this time, enough for housing 200 men.   A further contract for the earthworks was agreed in May the same year, and in 1690, after king William III had succeeded James on the throne, a final contract was made for completing the Citadel, both brick and earthwork, the project was nearing completion.  The entire site occupied about 30 acres [0.33 hectares], totally enclosed by water, the Citadel was brick built with stone quoins, mouldings, and parapets.  A stone watchtower called a bartizan was set into the southwest bastion facing the confluence of the rivers Hull and Humber.  This bartizan is the soul remaining part of the Citadel known to have survived intact, and after similarly surviving a time in East Park in the city, it has now been relocated close to it’s original location, within the Victoria Dock village.  

Sadly little of the history of the Garrison has come down to us, likely because it was deemed to be too mundane, or that records have become scattered, and therefore very difficult to track down.  Research taking several years, and considerable expense [not what this place believes in – expense!], could provide a chronology of regiments and army units who were billeted there from 1700 until the mid 1800’s, but having looked into the feasibility of such a mammoth undertaking, it has been decided to forego the pleasure, and leave it to someone in a more favourable situation.  That does not mean however that the Citadel has to remain a lifeless structure entirely, some small snippets have come down through the various channels, to provide some small insight of the place.  Even such august establishments and archives like those of the Brynmor Jones Library contain very few documents relating to the citadel, and those predominantly dated prior to 1700. 

What is known is that the saluting platform, the gun base facing the Humber from where multiple gun salutes could be offered and returned for visiting dignitaries.  It was located riverside of the south blockhouse, elevated above the body of the rest of the curtain wall, and facing south with the return northwest at the southwestern angle. It was fitted out with a total of 25 embrasures that in 1684 mounted 7 guns, in 1699 14 guns, and in 1745 12 guns.  The garrison flagpole would have stood on the platform, the courtesy of flag etiquette demanding the exchange of dipped flags [the lowering and raising of one flag in salute to another] on special occasions.

By 1735, the Great Entrance, which had opened onto an uncompleted ravelin to the north and east of the citadel, had been replaced by a more convenient, if less imposing entrance at the Saluting Platform that opened towards the River Hull and the ferry access across it.  Work continued on this feature in 1745 when the palisaded front was repaired, and construction of a sluice and drawbridge were ordered.  Further work was undertaken in 1797 to the value of £10, and more in the year 1804 valued at £4.  Repairs to the saluting platform in 1806 and again in 1812-13 cost a further £145.

A local newspaper dated 29^th November 1794, contained part of a letter sent to a citizen on Hull, reporting that: “The Adjutant of the 42^nd Regiment of Highlanders, in a letter to a friend in Hull, says, that one morning, (after being for seven days without any change of linen or alteration in his dress,) as his servant was dressing his hair, a ball came in at the window, and killed him on the spot.  He also says that another morning, as he was at breakfast, some cannon shot came in at the window, went upwards and destroyed all the furniture in the room above.  He added that the 42^nd Regiment, since it left Hull, has had three men killed and ten men wounded.”  From this snippet we can determine that the 42^nd Highland Regiment, the Black Watch, were at some time prior to the publication date of the newspaper, garrisoned at the Hull Citadel.

In March 1797, the Duke of Leeds came to Hull “for the purpose of examining the provisional cavalry of the district, when a grand review took place at the Citadel, of the Hull and Cottingham Volunteers, the cavalry &c. “ Some evidence from the Hull Advertiser of the 30^th June 1798, suggests that the Durham Militia might have been garrisoned at the Citadel, as the entry asks if “Any person willing to engage as a SUTLER to the DURHAM MILITIA, may by applying (personally) to William Hollom, at the Dog and Duck, Scale Lane, Hull, or at Burstwick camp, hear something to their advantage, it being so near to Hull.”  Military camps in the virtual wilderness of Holderness, in the general vicinity of where an invasion might occur, continued until the early 20^th century.  In similar vane, on the 21^st June 1806, it was reported that “A Ball and Supper were last night given at the Neptune Inn by Earl FitzWilliam, Colonel of the First West York Militia, and the officer of that regiment, to the ladies and gentlemen of this town and neighbourhood.  The company was very numerous, and the entertainment splendid.”  It could be assumed that both regiments had or were about to serve time as the garrison at the Hull Citadel.

This was the time of great paranoia, the threat of French Republicanism sent chills of panic through the establishment.  Towns and cities throughout the land were making preparations for their own and the nation’s defence.  Voluntary organisations of this period however were soon replaced as Militia forced were reduced in favour of regular troops, of which Hull was expected to provide 1,056 men, the equivalent of an entire battalion.  An example of the local duties the garrisoned troops were detailed to perform was reported on page 3 of the Hull Advertiser, 27^th May, 1815 when:

“About six o’clock on Wednesday evening as officers of the Impress [the notorious Pressgang] at this town were attempting to take a seaman near the entrance of the Old Dock, by great exertion he extricated himself from their hold, and by the assistance of some men at the dock bason [sic] made his escape, during the struggle a mob had gathered together, and the press-gang were annoyed for a considerable time, by having stones, bricks, and dirt thrown at them, and with much difficulty effected their retreat.  After this the tumult in great part subsided until nine o’clock, when the mod assailed the house of the Rendezvous [the base of the Press-gang], the sign of the Spurn Lights [a public house called the Spurn Light, Lights, or Lighthouse], occupied by Mr. Smith, near the South-end, not satisfied with breaking all the windows and doors, and pulling down part of the front wall, they proceeded into the house, and destroyed all the furniture, linen, glass, &c.  The beds they tore open, and strewed the feathers into the street; the liquors and ale they drank or carried away in pitchers.  Most of this riotous procedure was the work of young lads and women, the latter encouraging the boys in this wanton destruction of property; a few men were observed in the mob, one of them, John Bewell, was taken up and examined before the magistrates yesterday, who committed him to prison, for rioting, aiding and assisting in demolishing the house of Mr. Smith, two others were remanded for further examination.  Several magistrates and part of the 58^th [the Rutlandshire] Regiment [of Foot], went to the spot as soon as information was given them of the out-rage – the mob instantly dispersed, and necessary measures have since been taken to prevent a re-occurrence of disturbance.”    

From various sources it can be established that many regiments and units saw garrison duty at the Citadel, or were billeted in the town during the war.  Militia and regular troops alike e.g.:

2^nd West Yorkshire Militia
North Lincolnshire Militia
East Suffolk Militia
Cumberland Militia
Westmoreland Militia
2^nd Surrey Militia
3^rd West Yorkshire Militia
69^th (South Lincolnshire) Regiment of Foot
6^th (Warwickshire) Regiment of Foot
68^th (Durham Regiment [the Durham Light Infantry from 1812]) Regiment of Foot
2^nd (Queen’s Royal) Regiment of Foot

In 1808, the garrison comprised of the 36^th (Herefordshire) Regiment of Foot, 34^th (Cumberland) Regiment of Foot, and the 84^th (York and Lancaster from 1809) Regiment of Foot.  In 1809, the Depot Battalion of the 65^th (2^nd Yorkshire North Riding) Regiment took in recruits and forwarded trained men to their fighting battalion.  It should be noted here that none of the regiments or the Militia units had any affiliation with either Hull or the East Riding.  This was deliberate policy in order to prevent there being any clash of interests, or indeed of personalities, as egos of officers and townsmen of the same town could lead to all kinds of trouble. At the same time however, concerned townsmen did form local units of infantry and cavalry, and, it has to be said, trouble did occur between the various officers.  In 1800 the defences of the East Riding were virtually complete, there were some 15,000 troops, of which 3,000 to 4,000 were billeted either at the citadel, or in the town.  Further concern about impending invasion led the Admiralty to send three ships, the Nonsuch originally 64 guns, but in 1794 she was fitted with twenty 68-pounder carronades as a floating battery at Spithead prior to taking her station at Hull,  in 1795 Capt. Henry Blackwood in command, [floating battery at Hull]; and 1796 Capt. R. D. Oliver, [floating battery at Hull] http://www.cronab.demon.co.uk/NO.htm ], was anchored in White Booth Roads, the Redoubt and the Nautilus in support in the Humber [the same source disputes the very existence of the other two vessels]  it is possible that they were especially chartered for the service, more needs to be done on this.   

With the final defeat of Napoleon Bonaparte at the Battle of Waterloo, on the 18^th June 1815, heralding in a new era of the “Pax Britannica”, and with the Royal Navy the unquestioned and unchallenged masters of the seas and oceans, static fortifications such as the Hull Citadel became virtually redundant. However a garrison continued to be maintained which included between 1816 and 1825:

54^th (West Norfolk) Regiment of Foot
80^th (Staffordshire Volunteer) Regiment of Foot
88^th (Connaught Rangers) Regiment of Foot
52^nd Oxfordshire Light Infantry Regiment
22^nd (Cheshire) Regiment of Foot
66^th (Berkshire) Regiment of Foot
15^th (Yorkshire East Riding) Regiment of Foot
73^rd (Highland) Regiment of Foot
56^th (West Essex) Regiment of Foot
Queen’s Dragoon Guards (2 troops) cavalry

Depot Battalions were set up or based at the Citadel for recruitment purposes, and in 1827 there were units of the:

5^th (Northumberland) Regiment of Foot
40^th (2^nd Sumersetshire) Regiment of Foot and the
71^st Highland Light Infantry Regiment

During the following two years the citadel was garrisoned by between 2 to 3 companies of the:

83^rd (from 1859 the County of Dublin) Regiment of Foot
7^th (Royal Fusiliers) Regiment of Foot, and the
80^th (Staffordshire Volunteer) Regiment of Foot

From 1830 until 1850 a further thirteen regiments were represented as the Hull Garrison, they were:

33^rd (1^st Yorkshire West Riding) Regiment of Foot
53^rd (Shropshire) Regiment of Foot
22^nd (Cheshire) Regiment of Foot, again
37^th (North Hampshire) Regiment of Foot
60^th Rifle Corps (formerly the Royal American Regiment of Foot)
73^rd (Highland) Regiment of Foot
87^th Prince of Wales Irish Fusiliers
38^th (1^st Staffordshire) Regiment of Foot
48^th (Northamptonshire) Regiment of Foot
40^th (2^nd Somersetshire) Regiment of Foot
90^th Perthshire Light Infantry
57^th (West Middlesex) Regiment of Foot and the
81^st (sometimes Loyal Lincolnshire) Regiment of Foot.

[My thanks to “Town and Gun” by Audrey Howes and Martin Foreman for the numerical designations of the above named regiments.]

The Royal Navy located a guard ship; H.M.S. Cornwallis a converted steam screw powered 60-gun third rate, immediately off shore of the garrison in October 1856, where she, or one of her successors remained until 1903.   

A novel means of transport was being demonstrated around the country at especially organised events, for the delight of the people, and the advancement of those who took the risk, and survived:

Hull Advertiser
May 28, 1824
P. 2, Col. 4, 1st adv.

BALLOON.

Mr. SADLER having obtained the use of the Citadel has the honour to announce his intention of ASCENDING in his Grand Balloon from thence on MONDAY the 19th of July, 1824, the Anniversary fo the Kings Coronation
                Rep.:Roc.,Aug. 7, 1824, P. 2, Col. 2, 4th adv.

See also:  P. 3, Col. 4, 11th para. - Letters complaining about the occasion that it is at an inconvenient time.
 

Hull Advertiser
July 16, 1824
P. 3, Col. 1, 3rd adv.

BALLOON

W.W. SADLER

[William Windham Sadler] 

Date of ascent July 19.
usual adv.

Hull Advertiser
July 30, 1824
P. 2, Col. 4, 1st adv.

Pic. of Balloon.

 W. W. SADLER

 RESPECTFULLY informs the Inhabitants of Hull and its Vicinity, that he purposes making his ASCENT on WEDNESDAY, 11th August, at One o’Clock, from Citadel.
                Tickets of Admission to view the Inflation, Ascent, &c. 2s. 6d., Children 1s. 6d., to be had of Mr. SADLER, at the Rodney Lodge, Myton-gate, and at the Newspaper Offices.
                It is particularly requested Persons will provide themselves with Tickets, previous to the Day of Ascent, to prevent confusion at the Entrances.
                Flags will be hoisted, and a Gun discharged, to announce the commencement of Inflation, at Ten o’Clock.

                                2^nd  Gun  - The Pilot Balloon.
                                3^rd - Attaching the Car.
                                4^th - Presentation of Banner.
                                5^th - The Ascent.
                The BALLOON and CAR, with its Appendages, are now exhibiting in the Rodney Lodge, every Day, from Nine in the Morning until Eight in the Evening; and will remain open until the Day of Ascent.  Admission, 1s. each; Children and Servants, 6d.
                The Balloon, when fully inflated, is 34 feet in diameter, by 42 in height, and contains about 28, 000 Feet.

                Hull, July 30, 1824.

                See:         H/A Aug.   6, 1824 - P. 2, Col. 3, 2nd adv.       - Pic. of Balloon. Ed. comment, no launch, poor weather.
                                        Aug. 13, 1824 - P. 3, Col. 3-6, 20th para. - Mr. Sadler’s ascent from Hull.  Moat of Citadel filled with water as a crowd control measure.  Balloon inflated with hydrogen, made on the site in a lead tank.
                                        Oct.     8, 1824 - P. 3, Col. 3-4, 1st para.   - Mr. Sadlers death at Bolton, used coal gas to inflate balloon.
                                        Oct.   15, 1824 - P. 2, Col. 4, 2nd adv.      - THE LATE Mr. SADLER - appeal for subscription.
                                        Oct.   23, 1823 - P. 2, Col. 5, 1st adv.       - Subscription, money raised so far.

 There are two main points of interest here, firstly the fact that the Citadel moat, usually kept dry, apparently, was flooded in order to control the presumably over excited crowd.  Second, though by no means least, is the death of Mr. Sadler, a few short weeks after his visit to Hull, at Bolton during another and similar demonstration.  Another willing proponent of the balloon was soon offering further entertainment:

Hull Advertiser
Aug. 26, 1825
P. 2, Col. 3, 12th adv.

Pic. of Balloon

AEROSTATION

MR. C. BROWN (the Aeronaut), begs leave respectfully to apprise the Nobility, Gentry, and Inhabitants of Hull and its Environs, that he purposes making an Aerial Voyage with his

BALLOON HERSCHELL,

ON WEDNESDAY the 31st August, 1825.

At Two o’Clock in the Afternoon precisely (providing the
weather be propitious),

FROM THE CITADEL,

The use of which has been most handsomely conceded to him; and it particularly requested that Ladies and Gentlemen will provide themselves with Tickets, as by this means the ingress to the Garrison will be much facilitated.

In addition to the ascent, Mr. C. BROWN will have the pleasure of displaying a PARACHUTE, composed of alternate colours of crimson and white silk, which will be attached to the Car he intends to ascent with.  After having attained a certain altitude, he will set the Parachute at liberty, with an Animal accompanying it, to return to the earth; and Mr. B. would beg, as a favour, that the person who secures it will forthwith convey it to the ground of ascent, for which trouble the owner will remunerate him.
                Admission to view the Inflation, Ascent, &c., Two Shillings.

Finger Tickets to be had at the Newspaper Offices.

The Doors will be opened for the reception of Company at Nine o’Clock in the Morning.

Should the day be deemed favourable, a Flag will be displayed, and a Gun fired at Eight o’Clock in the Morning; otherwise it will be postponed till the next day.  A second Gun and Pilot Balloon will announce the commencement of Inflation; third, Pilot Balloon; fourth, attaching the Car; and fifth, the Ascent.

                A Band of Music will attend, and Seats and other Accommodations will be provided.

                 See: P. 3, Col. 2, 3rd adv. - THE BALLOON - Cistern has been constructed. 

Hull Advertiser
Sept. 2, 1825
P. 2, Col. 2, 3rd adv.

 BALLOON

ALL Persons having Demands against Mr. BROWN, are particularly desired to send them in for Payment, to Mr. DAVIES, at the Dog and Duck Hotel, on Saturday Afternoon, between Four and six o’Clock.
 

            See:  P. 3, Col. 3&4, 13th para. - Ascent of Mr. Brown.

 It might seem trivial these days to wander half way across the town to watch such an event, but then, it really was an event, something to tell the ‘Grand-baines’ about.  Another such took place several years later, in 1841:

Hull Advertiser
Sept. 24, 1841
P. 3, Col. 1, 4th adv.

 See photo, Ed.

MR. GREEN, the CELEBRATED AERONAUT, and Proprietor of the ROYAL NASSAU BALLOON, who performed the wonderful and astonishing Journey from LONDON to WELLINGBOROUGH, a Distance of 580 Miles, in 18 Hours, purposes, by the kind permission of Col. SIMSON, and the Officers of the Citadel, making his 289th ASCENT in his GRAND ROYAL BALLOON, from the GARRISON, on MONDAY NEXT, the 27th instant; and through the kindness of the Major MAGGENNIS and Capt. CAMPBELL, the Bands of the 87th Royal Irish Fusiliers and the 38th Depot will be in attendance, and play several popular airs.
                Admittance to View the Inflation, 1s. each - Children, 6d.
                N.B. - The Public are particularly desired no to go on the Ramparts within the Garrison. 

Hull Advertiser

Oct. 1, 1841

P. 3, Col. 5, 16th Para.

Mr. GREEN’S BALLOON. - On Monday afternoon, thousands of our townspeople had congregated to witness Mr. Green’s ascent from the citadel, but an unforeseen event doomed them to disappointment.  A special supply of gas had been manufactured by Mr. Malam, and was ready bottled up in one of his capacious gasometers, and temporary mains were laid from Thornton-street to the citadel.  As the time for ascent approached it was found that the emission of gas from the mains which crossed the river, was much too slow (in consequence of a deposit of salt from the gas) to complete the inflation by the time appointed; the ascent was consequently postponed until Tuesday, when, it was stated in placards, it would "positively" take place at four o’clock.  To defeat the possibility of any further disappointment, the inflation of the balloon, to a considerable extent, was effected, in the night; at half-past one o’clock in the morning, however, a storm of heavy rain, accompanied by high winds, came on.  The balloon began to rock, and the united efforts of thirty men proved equal to the task of keeping it on the ground.  It tore away from their grasp, and from the cords of the net, and being riven to atoms, the gas, about 30, 000 cubic feet, escaped, and a portion of the tattered silk fell into Messrs. Harrison’s timber pond.  This rendered it utterly impossible for Mr. G. to make any ascent from Hull at the present, and a further notice being distributed in the town early in the morning, the fact was quickly known throughout the town, and prevented the re-assembling of expectant spectators.

Ballooning, it would appear, was not yet quite what the believers in it hoped for.  It would also indicate, that at this time, the 87^th, Royal Irish Fusiliers were garrisoned at the Citadel.   The author makes no apologies for inserting the above press notices in full, as they are indicative of their time, they express far better the expectation and excitement of that time, nothing else would serve. [Thanks to Andre Brannan of the Local History Unit, Hull, for the above]  

During the ensuing years, buildings were erected that impeded the function of the Citadel as a defensive fortification, timber ponds were constructed in close proximity to the extent that in 1820, overfilling of a pond just north, resulted in a collapse of part of the counter-scarp wall in that location, with further similar incidents occurring in 1833 and 1838.  What is more, there were almost constant requests to utilise the very defensive ditch of the Citadel as extra timber pond space, which led eventually to the decision to sell the Citadel site for the purposes of further dock and trade related uses.  The first planned dock on the site was drawn up, and dated 1829, but it was not until 1843 that the proposed dock and its tidal basins immediately east of the Citadel were plotted.  Excavation of the new dock commenced in 1845, called on completion Victoria Dock, it was opened to shipping traffic in 1850.  There were two means of access for shipping, one via the Humber using two tidal basins, the other in the River Hull, in the location of the northern ditch of the Citadel, the dock then continuing south-east and east.

The building of jetties, and a large shipbuilding yard by 1857 also seriously affected the usefulness of the Citadel as a military structure.  A final revue of the military effectiveness of the Citadel was made in 1846, when it was noted that there were 17 18 pounders mounted for use, with a further 13 gun platforms available but in poor condition.  The use of “wooden walls”, old style war ships of Nelsonic vintage, it was propounded, could be lashed to steam tugs, and manoeuvred from Spurn to the Town, regardless of tides, in a mere three hours, providing the town with a more mobile and effective defence than could be provided by the virtually redundant Citadel’s static defences.  A proposal to upgrade the armaments of the fort was put forward, but such were the disadvantages that it was rejected.  Most sources will say that military occupation of the Citadel ceased in 1848, but this is an oversimplification.  The decline of the garrison was a slow and gradual affair, taking several years, with, even in 1851, a token garrison of three gunners of the Royal Invalid Artillery, whose last recorded muster was in 1857.  Half yearly inspections of troops quartered at the Citadel continued up to October 1853 when a detachment of the 28^th Foot were replaced by another of the 34^th in February 1854.  The Hull Advertiser of the 17^th February 1854, and the 27^th January 1855 tells of the company of artillery, for some time stationed in Hull, left for Woolwich, and thence to the Crimea.  On the 12^th March 1859, a 12 gun salute was fired to celibate the wedding of the Prince of Wales, it was the last and final time the guns of the Citadel at Hull were fired, they had never fired a shot in ‘anger’.   

In 1858, the Board of Ordnance made over the Citadel to the Commissioners of Woods and Forests during which time the future of the site was considered, and to some degree fought over, with two parties jostling for the usage of the site.   

In June 1858, a small booklet was printed for the Public Park and Recreation Grounds Committee of the city, claiming:

“Although it cannot be denied that from long continued possession, and by the provisions of the General Act for vesting lands for the services of the Ordnance Department, the crown has a title at law to the land [upon which the Citadel and surrounding outworks then stood], yet from the foregoing statement it appears that in fact it was purchased and paid for by the inhabitants of Hull, and that they were dispossessed of it under an unconstitutional order of the House of Commons.  The grants of the walls and ramparts of the town for commercial purposes deprived the townspeople of their ‘pleasant walks on summer evenings.’  The Butt Close near Hessle gate, the last of the playgrounds was swallowed up in the Humber Dock – the railway has destroyed the Humber-bank – all the open grounds are gone – the citadel site is the only one left.  The dock works to the eastward are, by the population, which is growing up rapidly round them, daily making the site more and more central, and the people of Hull, without attempting to claim any right but petitioning as for an act of favour, yet of fairness, may venture to hope that the crown, acting on truly philanthropic principles, will permit the citadel site, or some sufficient portion of it, to revert to, or to be used by them, as a place of recreation, until again required for defensive or government purposes.” 

The how’s and why’s of the above statement seem in light of 20^th and 21^st century politics, quite normal, to sell back to people what they already own, is not an unfamiliar concept.  To attempt to plea-bargain, on the grounds of the ‘needs of the people’ for a recreational space or park, seems particularly naïve.  Most of the endeavours to acquire the site for recreational purposes were recorded in the local press, such as this from the Hull Times, 17^th July, 1858:

“THE GARRISON GROUND DEPUTATION, - A communication was last week made of the result of the interview of the garrison ground deputation with Lord Derby, with a view of obtaining the Citadel for a public park.  The day after they had visited the premier the deputation went to the Commissioners of the Woods and Forests*, being introduced by the Earl of Shaftsbury.  There was also present Mr. Clay, Lord Ashley, Lord Hotham, the Hon. Admiral Duncombe, and the Hon. Mr. Denison, Mr. E. S. Wilson, of the Hull Trinity House, stated the object of the visit, but it was explained that the Citadel site had not yet been conveyed from the Ordnance department to the Woods and Forests.  However, the deputation was requested to mark out the quantity of the ground for a place of recreation, with an offer to rent it from the Crown.  Both Mr. Wilson and Mr. Clay urged the right of the town to the site of the Citadel without purchase, as [it,] having been originally the property of the town, from which it was unjustly taken by the Long Parliament [1640 – 1660].  We are told that to the arguments then used Mr. Gore opposed the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown, and also the representations of former deputations that the site of the Citadel was required for docks and timber ponds.  The deputation have, we understand, reason for believing that the Woods and Forests’ Commissioners are prepared to reserve fifteen or twenty acres of the Citadel ground to be rented from the Crown, as a place of recreation for the people, but the arguments of Mr. Gore at the interview, and the opinions of the Law Officers of the crown being, as is believed, founded on a mistaken state of facts, a further memorial, with an extended statement was, on Wednesday last, submitted to the government, and is now under consideration.  The present Berwick-upon-Tweed, where the old fortifications – upwards of three-quarters of a mile in length and sixty yards in breadth – have recently been granted for a promenade and place of recreation for the people of Berwick, at a nominal rent for 99 years, leads us to the belief that the government will not be inclined to view the claims of Hull less favourably, and we are satisfied that the gentlemen who originated this movement will continue to prosecute it with that energy with which they commenced and have hitherto carried it on.” 

A few short weeks after the above, there was printed the following, again reproduced here in full, as it conveys far better than any précis of mine, the circumstanced so reported.  Hull Times, 23^rd October, 1858:

“THE CITADEL OFFERED TO THE HULL DOCK COMPANY.  Yesterday the town was startled by the announcement that the Government had offered the Citadel – that most important of all sites for dock purposes – to the HULL DOCK COMPANY.  On Inquiry it was found that this was strictly true, although then offer is saddled with certain conditions which render it more thane ever important that the town should earnestly, immediately, and vigorously set to work to place the whole question of the relationship between the Dock Company and the town and the port of Hull on a proper footing.  The following is the offer made by the Woods and Forests to the Dock Company, a copy of it having been addressed to the Town Clerk as an answer to his letter of the 4^th inst., and courtiously [sic] communicated by him the press:-

“Office of Woods and Forests, 21^st October, 1858.

Sir, -- I have to acquaint you that I have given my best considerations to the several representations which have been made to me by the Hull Dock Company, the Corporation of Hull, and the Chamber of Commerce, with respect to the Citadel; and the following are the conclusions at which I have arrived:-

Firstly, -- that enlarged dock accommodation is now urgently required to meet the increasing wants of the trade of Hull, and as the Citadel affords the most convenient, if not the only site on which new docks can be constructed, it is desirable, as far as the commerce of the town is concerned, that the land should be made available for those purposes as speedily as circumstances will admit.

Secondly, -- That an appropriation of the Citadel will also be the most beneficial to the land revenues of the crown whose interests it is my first duty to consider, by realizing, in the most expeditious and least expensive manner, the value of the property in question.

Thirdly: -- That looking to the fact that the Hull Dock Company had been in negotiation with the War Office and this department for the purchase of the Citadel long before any counter-proposal was made, to the existing rights of that company with reference to the Docks and Harbour dues at Hull, and the intention which they have announced of introducing a bill next session [of parliament], which will give parliament an opportunity of considering the whole question as to their position, it is proper that any offer which may now be made for the sale of the Citadel, with a view to its being dedicated to dock purposes, should be addressed by the company.

Fourthly: -- But that in making such offer it should be distinctly understood that it is entirely conditional upon the Dock Company obtaining, in the next session, an Act of Parliament authorising then to acquire the Citadel.  That it is not within my province to express, and that I do not express any opinion as to the constitution or rights of the Dock Company, or as to the propriety of any enlargement or prolongation of such rights.  That the present offer is made to the company solely with reference to their existing position, and as being the promoters of the intended bill to which I have referred, the introduction of which will give to all parties interested a favourable opportunity of obtaining the decision of parliament upon their several views.

Fifthly: -- The terms upon which I shall be prepared to recommend the sale of the Citadel, subject to the above condition, are as follows:

1/ The contents of the Citadel and foreshore down to low water mark appear from a plan furnished by the War Department to be about 61 acres, viz. 35 acres above high water mark, and 26 acres [not MY maths!!] below it.  But no compensation is to be given or taken in the event of the land being found to contain less or more than 61 acres.

2/ That a portion of the foreshore situated either at the eastern or western end of the Citadel, as may be approved by the War Department, and extending to a length of 250 feet, with a depth of 200 feet, be reserved to her Majesty, together with a roadway thereto 20 feet in width.  That the land so reserved shall be embanked and raised four feet above the level of ordinary high water mark, either by the Crown or by the persons who may purchase from the Crown the adjoining land, at an outlay not exceeding £10,000, or that the purchaser shall pay £10,000 to the War Department, to be extended in such a manner as the Secretary of State may think proper upon those works.

3/ That the several buildings which may be standing upon the ground shall become the property of the purchasers, who shall be bound to remove the same to the satisfaction of the War Department within six months after the passing of the Act, for which application is to be made.

4/ That subject to the above conditions the purchase money shall be £100,000, to be paid to the Crown within three months after the passing of the Act; possession to be given when the purchase money has been paid.

I have to request that you will submit this statement to the directors of the Dock Company, and inform me whether they are prepared to agree to the introduction, in the proposed bill, of clauses to give effect to the arrangement which I have mentioned.

I am, Sir, your obedient servant,

(signed) Charles Gore.”**

** As a brief aside, some may be asking, who was this Charles Gore, the answer is:

He was Commissioner of Woods and Forests between 1839 and 1885.

   The editorial of the Hull Times continues after the above quotation to intimate that even allowing for the apparent victory of the Dock Company to secure the Citadel lands from any would be opposition, there was still hope that the Corporation of the town would be able to bring sufficient pressure to bear on the government, that it would be they who prevailed in the end, and a public recreation place would be created. 

 Discussions in Corporation meetings continued to argue their case amongst themselves, releasing from time to time press announcements of which the following has to be one of the last, dated 2 July 1859:

“An important meeting of the shipping and mercantile community of Kingston upon Hull was held in the Town Hall, on Monday last, at noon, to consider the availability of adopting measures with a view to the purchase of the Docks and the Citadel site for the benefit of the town.  The special object before the meeting was to adopt resolutions founded on a report of the town’s committee issued recently.  A requisition had been presented to the Mayor who thereupon convened the meeting [there then follows a complete listing of all then and there present].  The Mayor, having opened the proceedings, Mr. C. M. Norwood entered into a long historical sketch of the company, shewing [sic] that in their dealings with the trade of Hull they had forgotten the moral obligation that rested upon them to develop the trade, and had simply paid attention to their own interests.  He argued at considerable length in favour of the purchase of the docks by the town to be vested in trustees for the benefit of the port generally.  He moved the following resolution:--

“That the report which has been published and sent to the general committee, appointed at the public meeting held on the 4^th November last, to the subscribers of the fund for opposing the Dock Company’s bill in Parliament, and to the requisitionists for this meeting, be received and adopted.   

Needless to say nothing came of it, and in 1859, a Bill of Sale was issued on behalf of the crown that stated:

CROWN LANDS, HULL CITADEL
IMPORTANT AND VALUABLE FREEHOLD PROPERTY
FOR SALE BY TENDER.
To Dock Companies, Building Societies, and the Public
Generally

TO BE SOLD BY TENDER, in one Lot by order of the Commissioner in charge of Her Majesty’s Land Revenue under the authority of the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury, and subject to conditions which will shortly be ready for distribution.

All that Valuable and spacious site called the HULL CITADEL and nearly the whole of the foreshore adjacent thereto situate in the town of Kingston upon Hull, comprising an area of nearly 60 acres [24.28 hectares), and having a frontage to the river Humber of about 1,600 feet [488 metres].

This property is admirably adapted for the formation of extensive Docks, Wharves,

Ship-building yards, Timber ponds, and Bonding yards, and for the erection of bonding and other warehouses, or for general building purposes.

The Hull Citadel is bounded on the south by the River Humber, on the north and east by the property of the Hull Dock Company, and on the west by a public street called Tower Street, by the shipyard of Messrs. Samuelson, and by other property.  The whole of the extensive range of buildings and erections new standing upon the site will be included in the sale upon condition of their being pulled down within a period to be specified.  They are substantially erected and of sound materials.  In addition the buildings there are the whole of the

fence, ----, counterscarp, walls, (being in length about 4,000 yards [3640 metres], and containing a very large quantity of good bricks), with the landings, gun platforms, and 21 capital pumps and cisterns.

Attention is invited to this Important Property, which, being Freehold offers an opportunity for the employment of capital in the construction of docks or mercantile premises rarely to be met with.

Sealed Tenders addressed to the Hon. Charles Gore, 1 Whitehall Place, London, will be received not later than Twelve o’clock on Monday, the 15^th day of August, 1859, but the crown will not be bound to accept the highest or any tender, nor will any Tender be considered that is not in strict conformity with the conditions of sale.

Plans, particulars, and conditions with forms of Tender are in course of preparation, and may shortly be obtained at the Office of Her Majesty’s Woods, Forests, and Land Revenues,

1 Whitehall Place, London; and the Railway Hotel, Hull.  

The site was sold as a single lot, the southern portion then became a shipbuilding yard owned by Martin Samuelson, from whence the familiar sobriquet, “Sammy’s Point” derives.  Timber yards, and the Foreign Cattle Depot took up much of the remaining space.  The buildings of the Citadel were taken down in 1863 and the following year, and the foreshore was largely reclaimed during the same period.

A stone watchtower called a bartizan was set into the southwest bastion facing the confluence of the rivers Hull and Humber.  This bartizan is the soul remaining standing part of the Citadel known to have survived intact, and after similarly surviving a time in East Park in the city, it has now been relocated close to it’s original location, within the Victoria Dock village.

The building of a new dual carriage way through the heart of Hull’s Old Town in the 1970’s, which continued east across what had been the Citadel, provided archaeologists with the opportunity to investigate the area, but it was not until 1987 that the extent of archaeological survival of the structure became evident, and that earlier attempts to remove them had failed, at least beneath the land surface. 

With the advent of the 21^st century, the third millennium, came the special lottery grants for commemorative projects.  Hull decided upon what is called a submarium called the DEEP www.thedeep.co.uk  this imaginative and eye-catching building was erected almost, but not quite upon the site of the old Citadel, the archaeological remains of which, are largely buried under the attending car park.  Such remains have been designated as an historic monument, the only one in Hull, and archaeologists still, from time to time, excavate further sections of the place; after ‘THE GUN’, anything might yet turn up!! 

My thanks have to go to:

Mrs I. Hayton for the loan of the watercolour painting of the Citadel;
The Brynmor Jones Library, the University of Hull;
The Local History Unit, Chris. Ketchell in particular for his support and advice;
Andre Brannan of the Local History Unit for some of the Hull Advertiser articles, especially those concerning balloons;
Various anonymous sources for some aspects concerning the GUN and its excavation;
Hull City Library, the Local Studies Library;
Dave Evans of the Humber Archaeological Partnership;
Various web sites, which are linked in the body of the text.
 

Consulted sources:

“Town and Gun” by Audrey Howes and Martin Foreman, Kingston Press, 1999, ISBN 1 902039 02 5; from which I have borrowed heavily for some sections, though by no means all. 

“A History of Hull” by E. Gillett and K. A. MacMahon, Hull University Press, 1989, ISBN 0 85958 481X.

 Various and numerous Archaeological reports.

 The “History of County of Yorkshire” – the VCH.

 “The Walls and Gates of Hull” by W. Foot Walker, for the Malet Lambert Local History reprints, Extra Volume No. 28.

 The pages of the Hull Advertiser.