by Taco Hermans and Jan Kamphuis

INTRODUCTION. (figures not included yet)

The ruins of Brederode in Santpoort, Holland, consists of the remnants of a rectangular inner ward and a rambling outer ward (fig. 1 A & B). East of the outer ward there is a moated site: the former fore-court (fig. 1 C). West of the inner ward there is a circular retaining-wall (fig. 1 D)
The regular form of the inner ward does suspect a simple building history. Nothing of the kind however: the many publications produce as many interpretations.
The different parts of the ruins have been given a name (or a number) with reference to fig. 1.

A part of the ruins of Brederode were excavated in the last century and during the restoration many of the walls have been reconstructed. The inspection of the castle was therefore very difficult, also because the ruins weren't documented just before and shortly after the excavation. The repairs that followed made it even worse. Lots of traces have been added to give the castle a strong medieval appearance. Because of the weathering these traces now look very original and have mislead many investigators. In chapter 1: ‘Building history of the castle of Brederode’ the latest opinions will be discussed.

The castle of Brederode is one of the first buildings in Holland which have been restored by the government. The restoration, which began in 1862, was completely done from the point of view of that time, that means a reconstruction of a supposed medieval situation. The lack of knowledge and the constant lack of money made it a very debatable restoration. But in spite of the constructive defects and historical mistakes, which at this moment obstruct the maintenance as well as the inspection, the castle has been kept. This first restoration of a castle in Holland will be discussed in chapter 2: ‘The restoration’.

The ruins of Brederode contain a lot of traces from the middle ages and the 19th century which are unique. These traces, not mentioned in the two first chapters, will be discussed in chapter 3.


1.1       Situation

The castle of Brederode is built in the middle ages on a runner of a coastal dune. The runner is oriented south-west north-east and disappears into the moor at the spot of the castle (fig. 2). The castle was built on solid grounds, but on three sides surrounded by the moor: a well considered buildingsite.

1.2       The first building activities seen from a historical point of view

In the 13th century the surroundings of the castle were wooded. The woods were cleared after 1221 and the name of the castle can be reduced from ‘brede rode’, which means a wide (brede) piece of a wood being transformed into arable land. The lords of Brederode are first mentioned in 1244 (1). In 1282 the free manor of Brederode was set up and it is therefore possible that the first castle of Brederode was built in the last quarter of the 13th century (2).

1.3       Building history

Fase 1: 1282 - 1318
The original shape of the castle is unknown. From the results of the inspection we know that the present masonry is from the second half of the 14th century. There are indications that there has been a quadrangular tower, but the possible foundation of this tower is only found at one side (fig. 3 top left). This tower can't therefore be accepted as a fase.

About 1300 a new castle was built: rectangular with - presumable - along two sides living accommodations, a tower on each corner and a gateway (fig. 3 fase 1). The ground-plan was a modern one; the simultaneous built castles Medemblik and Muiderslot have an identical plan (3). The inner court was caused by raising the 13th century ground-level.

Fase 2: 1354 - ca. 1360
The castle was besieged about three month in 1351 by Gijsbrecht van Nijenrode, marshal of Count William V of Holland. Siege instruments were used and 23 October 1351 the castle was surrendered by pact. The remnants were demolished from 1351-1354.
Only in December 1354 the castle was returned to its owner Dirk III of Brederode and he rebuilt the castle on its original foundations (fig. 3 fase 2).
The Donjon and Midtower were fully completed, that means a height of ca. 20 m. and two floors above a cellar, the rest of the castle only reached a height of 5,7 m. above the ground-level.

Fase 3: ca. 1360 - 1426
After the Donjon and Midtower were completed the gateway or Innergate was replaced (fig. 3 fase 3).

Fase 4: ca. 1360 - 1426
In this period the rest of the castle reached its ultimate height: the so-called Kitchenwing with the kitchen in the cellar and the chapel on the ground-floor, the Knight's Hall at right angles to it and the three towers. The floors of the Kitchenwing and the Knight's Hall could be reached from a staircasetower in the inner corner of these buildings; the north-west and south-west tower from wallstairs.

Fase 5: ca. 1360 - 1426
After the Knight's Hall was completed, the Calefactory was built (fig. 3 fase 5). Later on an entrance hall was built between the Innergate and the staircasetower in the inner corner of the Kitchenwing and the Knight's Hall, the so-called ‘huis op het perron’ (house on the platform). Next to the Innergate a small house was built, probably the gatehouse. The castle now had reached its largest shape.

Fase 6: 1464 - 1491
In 1426 the castle was besieged by the citizens of Haarlem and the southern part of the castle was almost fully destroyed. Only after 1464 the northern part was restored. Because a part of the living accommodations wasn't rebuilt there was a lack of room: the height of the floors in the Donjon as well as the Midtower was reduced and a floor was added in both towers. In the Kitchenwing one also added a floor and the chappel was removed to the north-west tower (and therefore is now called Chapeltower). According to an old ground-plan the session-room of the High Court was situated on the groundfloor of the Kitchenwing (pl. 1, room 20).
De demolished parts must have caused an enormous heap of rubbish. The westwall of The Knight's Hall, which had fallen into the ditch, was surrounded by a circular retaining-wall and the heap was smoothened and there arose a large square south of the restored buildings (fig. 4).
This retaining-wall has made some people think that the original castle was a circular one (4).
The restoration in 1464 meant the end of the able-bodied castle because it could not be defended anymore at the southside: instead it had turned into the house of a nobleman.

Fase 7: 1491 - 1862
In 1491 the castle was plundered by German soldiers and after that it fell into decay (5). In 1499 Jolande de Lalaing tried to prove that the lords of Brederode were descended directly from the Counts of Holland. She made Jan van Leyden make an impressive genealogy and to make it even more credible a ground-plan and a general view of the old ancestral house were made (pl.1 ). This plan shows us in detail the in 1464 restored northern part of the castle. The southern part is less detailed and it seems that they didn't even quite knew how it ever looked like, because the south-west tower has been drawn circular instead of squarely.
About 1573 the castle was again plundered and set on fire, this time by Spanish soldiers, and that must have been the death-blow for the castle. An anonymous drawing shows us the situation shortly after 1600 (pl. 2).
After that the castle fell more and more into decay; the ditches and cellars are being filled with sand (fig. 3 fase 7 and pl. 3).

Fase 8: 1862 - 1903
From 1862 the ruins were being excavated, the remaining buildings restored and the southern part reconstructed to ca. 2,5 m. above ground-level (fig. 3 fase 8). This was done as a private enterprise, with financial support from the government. In chapter 2 this ‘fase’ will be discussed.


From about 1600 the ruins were slowly buried under the sand. Only in 1862 the government provisioned money to prevent it from total destruction. During the restoration there has been, totally in the spirit of the times, created a medieval sphere by the reconstruction of e.g. loop-holes. Because of this some authentic traces didn't fit and were removed. Therefore the castle of Brederode is, because of the misinterpretation of fases in the building history, the only watercastle with an inner court on two levels. Only two out of the 23 present loop-holes have fairly reliable details. But in spite of all this: the restoration in the last century has contributed to the preservation and reputation of the ruins.

Brederode were the first ruins in State control in the 19th century being restored. The repairs were done under the leadership of the keeper of the records of Haarlem, mr. A.J. Enschedé. The condition of the ruins in 1862 was very bad and the money provisioned (about 125 pound) was spent on repairs, excavation and reconstruction. Sometimes, because of the constant lack of money, the decay went faster than the repairs: in 1864 a part of the cellarvault collapsed. Excavated foundations waited years for their repair. The foundation of the circular tower was exposed between 1862 and 1870 and was completely destroyed by the frost.
Even the safety precautions for the public, that visited the ruins in great numbers, couldn't be made because of want of money: the budget from 1865 contained an item for an iron rail along the wallwalk. It probably didn't make it because the same item appeared on the budget from 1876.

In 1863 the excavation reached the south-side of the ruins. A total excavation was impossible, because the roots of two ashes had grown very deeply into the masonry of the south-west tower. Only in 1872 the rest of the tower could be excavated. Knowing the ground-plan made in 1499, it must have been a surprise to see that the south-west tower was squarely instead of circular. It must have been a surprise too when they found massive foundations on the westside (of the Knight's Hall and Calefactory) where there was supposed to be only ‘die kooike’ (a barn).

During the excavation misinterpretations have been made: the inner court had one level, arisen in about 1300, when the 13th century ground-level was raised. The raise consisted of earth, boulders and unused bricks and Enschedé thought that it wasn't original and tried to persuade the government to have it removed. Only in 1871 permission was given. During the excavation nobody noticed that the medieval ground-level was removed. Probably it wasn't even there because masonry of the walls was only found 2,25 m. beneath this level. When this masonry was found, the ‘ground-level to match’ was found too and nobody noticed that this level belonged to an earlier castle. The walls surrounding the inner court have been reconstructed and loops were added on a level where they never have been.
Because the entrance to the inner ward is on the ‘high’ level from 1300, a small strip, afterwards called ‘platform’, wasn't excavated. Therefore the innercourt of the ruins of Brederode has two levels.

The excavations ended with the discovery of the circular retaining-wall in 1876. This retaining-wall has made some people think that the original castle was a circular one (7).

In 1876 a measurement and a repair design were made. The plan shows the Knight's Hall and the Calefactory with tunnel vaults. Because the architect P.J.H. Cuypers found a corbelstone for a cross ribvaulting in the Calefactory he changed the measurement, because he concluded that both the buildings once had cross ribvaultings (fig. 5). To give an impression of the way one reconstructed in the 19th century: there has only been found one corbelstone, at this moment there are four! At the time of the measurement this corbelstone wasn't noticed because there were no further indications that there had been any ribvaultings. Apart from just one corbelstone there were no savings in the walls for the spring of a vault, at this moment there are 18!

To save money the reconstructed walls were made hollow with a filling of earth and rubbish. On account of freezing these walls have all bursted. The budget from 1883 contained for the first time (but not for the last time !) an item for repairing these walls. In 1890 all the money was spent on unsound repairs. To co-ordinate these problems a new superintendent was appointed. He was of opinion that 130 m. masonry had to be replaced, but it never happened. Only 20 m., the westwall of the Knight's Hall and the Cabelfactory, was restored, because this wall had fallen into the ditch. The rest is still standing thanks to intensive and expensive repairs. In this century one believed the walls to be massive. In 1981 the walls were injected against moisture; a total of 1050 m3 has been treated. But these injections doesn't protect the filling of the walls from lifting moisture and the walls are still bursting.

In 1903 the Donjon was restored and the groundfloor was made suitable for the exhibition of the findings of the excavation. A hipped roof was added and so were cloister windows on the ground floor. Again there were made mistakes by adding these windows: see paragraph 3.2.

With the rebuilding of the Donjon there has come an end to the ‘large restoration’ of the ruins of Brederode. From 1862 till 1903 there has been excavated, restored and reconstructed. In these 40 years this restoration shows a process that's also been demonstrated all through the country: private persons are worried about the decay of monuments; the government is hard to be convinced of the necessity of provisioning money. The first restorations have been more reconstructions. Because of the lack of knowledge things go wrong. But during the restorations one gained experience and more and more specialists were being consulted.
In spite of the mistakes being made during the restoration of the ruins of Brederode, we owe it to some enthusiast pioneers that the ruins still exsist and that is far more important.



In the preceding chapters the main lines of the building history of the ruins of Brederode have been described. With it the relevant building traces have been discussed. Some details have been left out, because they tell us more about the use of the building or the way of constructing. In this chapter some of these details will come up for discussion. Some of them have been unnoticed, others have been interpreted incorrectly.
Successively will be discussed:
3.1 the use of wood in the castle
3.1.1 chainbeams in the Donjon
3.1.2 wooden steps
3.1.3 wooden draught screens
3.1.4 putlogs
3.2 the windows before and after the repair of 1464
3.2.1 a reconstruction of the windows before 1464
3.2.2 a reconstruction of the windows after 1464
3.3 the mysterious chamfered corners of the south-west tower
3.4 the large amount of shoots

3.1 The use of wood in the castle

3.1.1 Chainbeams in the Donjon
During the inspection it turned out to be, that the Donjon was being constructed with the use of wooden ‘chainanchors’ to prevent it from collapsing during the hardening of the mortar (fig. 6). A similar way of constructing was used e.g. at the castles Duurstede and Dever (8). The beams were immured on the original level of the first floor. When the levels were changed in 1464 from two into three and new windows had to be cut out, the beams were saw through, because they found themselves half-way the new windows. The holes in the jambs were closed, but during the decay most of them were opened and here the wood has been rot away. There where the covering remained the beams are mainly kept e.g. in the southwall of the Donjon (length about 3 m.) and a part of the eastwall of the Midtower (length about 12 m.).

The beams were in the corners coupled by means of a cog. It seams as if they didn't trust the connection and therefore secured the cog with an iron nail. In the north-west corner the nail still exists, in the north-east corner probably.

3.1.2 Wooden steps
At three places in the castle the stairs have been kept up to a large height: in the Chappeltower en in both the staircasetowers. Though being restored, one can still see how the steps were originally constructed. The steps have been bricklayed with one or more planks with the thickness of a brick on top as a going of a tread (pl. 4). In the staircasetower of the Midtower remainders of planks have been found and in the Chapeltower there are still two steps with the complete planks.
The purpose of a plank is obvious: because of the constant use the steps will wear out and the replacement of a plank is much more easier than the replacement of a brick. To make it even more effective two planks were used: a small one at the front because this was the one that would wear out very quickly and could be replaced separately.

3.1.3 Wooden drought screens
Between the Donjon and the Midtower, in a little hall, the entrance to the staircasetower is situated. The rooms on both sides of this hall are separated by just one door at the side of the Midtower. Owing to this the rooms in the Donjon were in open communication with the staircasetower. To prevent this rooms from drought wooden drought screens were constructed. The traces of these screens are still visible in the west- and southwalls of the rooms in the Donjon. The doors found themselves in the northside of the screens (pl. 5).
Because the three floors had drought screens one may assume that they were constructed only after 1464 because before 1464 the Donjon had two floors.

3.1.4 Putlogs
On several places in the castle there are putlog holes in the walls. Putlogs are horizontally placed beams, as a part of a temporary scaffolding, on which the deals or hurdles were put (9). In the three outer corners of both the Chappeltower and the Donjon the putlog holes are placed diagonally to make scaffolding on the corners possible (fig. 7). Placing of the putlogs at right angles to the wall is impossible at corners, because they would have to cross each other then inside the walls. Not everyone is acquainted with this principal, witness a painting representing the Tower of Babel from the Flemisch School (pl. 6).
The putlog holes remained open for several years, sometimes even forever, to let air into the walls to make the hardening of the mortar possible (10). Inside the buildings these holes were closed with a piece of wood or, as in the castle of Brederode, with a brick on its side.
The putlogs are 8x8 cm to 11x12 cm on a relative distance of 2 to 3 m. It is striking that the putlogs don't appear regular vertically. The Chappeltower has only one line on cellarlevel with an exception of the southwall, where there is one putlog hole just above this line. The Donjon contains putlog holes on both the cellarlevel and the original first floor. The Knight's Hall contains two lines on cellarlevel, but the authenticity of the upper line can be disputed.

Inside the westwall of both the Knight's Hall and the Chappeltower the way of constructing the putlog holes is still visible. In the Knight's Hall there has been made a shoot with the help of four boards, in which one could place the putlog (fig. 8 below). The shoot was necessary to prevent the putlog to attach to the mortar so that it couldn't be removed.
In the Chappeltower the way of constructing is slightly different. Because the bricks in this tower are thicker than those in the Knight's Hall, the shoot is made of three boards around a bed of mortar (fig. 8 upper). The bed is to bridge the large height and the top is well smoothened to prevent the putlog to attach to the mortar.
In some putlog holes the traces of the boards are stille visible, more often the impression of the grain in the mortar.

3.2 The windows before and after the repair of 1464
After the partial destruction in 1426, the repair of the castle didn't start until 1464. Only the northern part could be rebuilt and therefore one had to contend with lack of space, for two-third of the castle had been destroyed. To solve the problem the amount of floors in the Donjon and Midtower was changed from two into three and new windows had to be cut out of the walls. At the same time the width of the existing windows were adapted to the latest fashion and possibilities of that time. That larger width was possible because of the decline of the defensive character of the castles.
The width of the original windows can't be defined exactly. There are only two windows of which the width might be original: one in the eastwall of the first floor of the Chappeltower (between the jambs 68 cm.) and a second in the westwall on the groundfloor of the same tower (between the jambs about 72 cm.). Why the first window wasn't widened in 1464 will be told below.
The width of the windows after 1464 is also very hard to define. It varies between 98 cm. in the northwall on the groundfloor of the Chappeltower till 108 cm. in the same wall on the first floor. This measure is the, in the walls cut out, stonejamb, that means the jamb inclusive the thickness of the posts. In the Donjon this measure varies on the first floor between 110 and 135 cm.

3.2.1 A reconstruction of the windows before 1464
During the restoration of the Donjon in 1903 the small windows have been wrongly reconstructed (fig. 9). The present height of the floors and the fenestration date from after 1464 en the small windows from before 1464. The windows are, again wrongly, made of bricks with an arched transom and lintel in the shape of a halfstretcher soldier course (sometimes the lintel is a double soldier course). Here the lintel is at the same time used as a relieving arch.
During the inspection there have been found pieces of red sandstone on various places. They find themselves partly on original places as a remnant of thresholds and partly as recycled material. The latter aren't used during the restoration in the last century, but will have been processed during the repair in 1464. A clue to this we find in the south-east corner of the Innergate. At the inner side of the gateway there is a piece of red sandstone bricklayed into the wall. It appears to be a piece of a cill (probably of a transom, but then the groove has been cut off) (fig. 10 and 11). Above this piece of stone we find a hinge of the gatedoors, placed during the repair in 1464. It isn't unusual to place a piece of (sand)stone under a hinge, at various places in the castle this working method is still visible and when the door between the Innnergate and the Midtower was reconstructed, the hinges were built in on the same way.
Remnants of red sandstone thresholds find themselves also in the north- and westwall of the Knight's Hall and the westwall of the Innergate (pl. 7). The windows in the westwall of the Knight's Hall had a height of 3,9 m. In the remnant of one of the windowniches in this wall two hinges for inner shutters were kept, but unfortunately during the repair in 1968 they have been renewed and built in to close to the surface of the wall so now there is no room for the chymol.

Finally there is a piece of red sandstone in the Chappeltower. The window in the eastwall that was mentioned before, contains a cill that finds itself still in its original place. The print of two bars is still visible (pl. 8), the print of a cross-intertie is still visible in the right post (pl. 9). This post is made out of bricks and makes a reconstruction of a original ‘pre-1464' window possible (fig. 12 and 13). It is remarkable that neither the post nor the cill contains a shutter- or glassgroove.

With the reconstruction of this window as a base, one can assume that a similar type has been used in the rest of the castle: a bricklayed window with stone thresholds, probably cross-bar or cloister windows.

3.2.2 A reconstruction of the windows after 1464
The best kept remnants of windows made after 1464 are also to be found in the Chappeltower. Here it is clearly visible that the walls have been cut out to make a wider window possible (fig. 14). In the cut out parts one has placed a frame. The remnants of mortar against which this frame was placed are still visible. How these windows looked like or out of which material they were made is unknown, because remnants are absent. Even the shape of the windows is unknown; a width of 1 m. makes cloister windows almost impossible, whereas it is too small for cross-bar windows.

Some of the original windows were probably still intact after 1426 or they were maintained for saving money: as said before, the northwall of the Knight's Hall and the westwall of the Innergate still contain the remnants of thresholds made of red sandstone. The window in the northwall of the Knight's Hall has a transom consisting of three pieces sandstone, lying above each other, all three of them with a shuttergroove on the outside.

The present openings in the walls are vaulted with a stretch or double halfstretch soldier course. Right under it the opening begins as if the lintel was originally placed there. As far as we know the windows, at least those in the Chappeltower, contained three layers of brick under the soldier course of which the lowest was situated a little backwards in front of which the lintel was placed. This detail is visible at the window in the eastwall of the Chappeltower on a postcard from 1910, but has vanished since.

The windowniche in the eastwall of the first floor of the Chappeltower contained originally a hearth in the southside. There is only one brick left of the relieving arch above the fireplace. Apparently the hearth didn't satisfy because it wasn't repaired in 1464. Instead both the niche and the window were closed and a new fireplace was created in the front of the niche (fig. 15). This is the reason why this window kept its original width. Before the repair of 1968 16 layers of masonry of the backside were left, at this moment only 4! It is remarkable that before 1426 the whole room was heated by just one hearth in a windowniche.

3.3 The mysterious chamfered corners of the south-west tower
The south-west tower of the castle was partly excavated in 1863. A total excavation was impossible, because the roots of two ashes had grown very deeply into the masonry. Only in 1872 the rest of the tower could be excavated. The roots must have had a destructive effecton the masonry. A photo has been made after the clearance of the walls, on which one can see, that the remnants of the eastwall didn't reach the ground-level (pl. 10). During the inspection we found out that the other walls of this tower also didn't reach the ground-level and that the walls we see today are a reconstruction from the last century. It is therefore incomprehensible that one has found any evidence 1 m. above this level, that the tower had chamfered corners. It is remarkable that in the beginning the tower was restored without all corners being chamfered: since the excavation the tower has had five metamorphosises untill it reached its present shape (fig. 16).
The first information about a corner is visible on the already mentioned photo from about 1871. Exactly on the south-east corner one of the ashes can be seen (pl. 10) and it is very difficult to believe that there has been found evidence here that this corner was chamfered. According to a plan from 1876 the tower has three chamfered corners (pl. 11), but a drawing from 1879 shows only the south-east corner being chamfered (pl. 12). On a plan from V. de Stuers however the corners have been chamfered with the exception of the south-east corners (11)! According to old postcards the chamfering of the north-west corner had vanished since 1903 (12). At this moment the south-east and south-west corners are chamfered.

3.4 The large amount of shoots
When we take a look at the plan of the castle, immediately the large amount of shoots will attract attention. Can the amount of floors of a castle be concluded from the amount of shoots, namely one per floor, this cannot be done at the castle of Brederode.

The Donjon e.g. didn't have more than two floors above a cellar before 1426. Probably a third, being the garret, but there are no indications for it. The eastwall contains the shoot of the groundfloor, the eastern shoot in the northwall belongs to the original first floor and was made attainable from the second floor after 1464. The shoot in the westwall belongs to the present first floor and was made attainable after 1464. For the use of this shoot before 1426 and for the western shoot in the northwall is no explanation. C.J. Willems, who made a model of the castle how it may have looked like in 1300, is the first one who tried to solve the problem (13). He thinks that a part of the shoots was used as a rainpipe, but originally two shoots weren't used before 1426. One of them could have been used for a convenience on the wallwalk and at the same time as a rainpipe, but that does not give an explanation for the other shoot and besides that, the Midtower also has a shoot that goes up to the wallwalk and two conveniences so close to each other doesn't make sense.
A similar problem occurs at the Chappeltower. The groundfloor didn't have a convenience untill 1464 when it was cut out of the northern wall. To this day it is has been taken for granted that this convenience used the shoot from the, in 1426 destroyed, second floor, but this level has never been proved. When this tower never had a second floor, the shoot could have come from the wallwalk but the southwall also contains a shoot coming from the wallwalk.
Willems gives another explanation: the shoots were used for the optical effect, which would make the towers look higher and stronger (14). But why the shoots are hollow if they were used for this purpose? The only reason could be that during the construction people didn't know where the conveniences would come. This seems not logic and besides that, there is no prove that the conveniences have been cut out of the walls afterwards.
A third possibility Willems suggests, is the use of cranes during the construction (15). According to him the construction of these cranes consisted, among other things, of thick beams which were standing in the shoots. The beams rose as the building grew and had to be supported at the bottom. Closing the shoots with masonry was impossible and other forms of strutting haven't been found. This would mean that they had to use beams with the length of the expected height of the building, which would make it impossible to remove them afterwards so that the shoots couldn't be used.
A last explanation might be that more floors were planned. Based on the original height of the floors the Donjon e.g. would have reached a height of more than 30 m.
As yet the existence of the large amount of shoots is a mystery.


1. A.J. Allan, De ruïne van Brederode, in the series 'Nederlandse Kastelen', volume XLVIII, s.l. 1983, 11.         

2. Ibid. 30.

3. P.E. van Reyen, Middeleeuwse kastelen, Bussum 1965, 74.

4. Ibid. 3, 18.

5. A.J. Allan o.c. 25.

6. The data concerning the restoration are derived from the Public Record Office The Hague, archives of the Ministry of Home Affairs.

7. P.E. van Reyen o.c. 3, 18.

8. R.J. Top, >De Donjon van Kasteel Duurstede=, Castellogica 1986, 175 en A.M. Hulkenberg, Dever, Nederlandse kastelen deel XXX, s.l. 1977.

9. E.J. Haslinghuis, Bouwkundige termen, Utrecht/Antwerpen 1986[2], 217.

10. Haslinghuis o.c. 217.

11. V. de Stuers, De Ruïne van Brederode, W.C. de Graaf, Haarlem 1880[2], 7.

12. The postcards can be dated because in 1903 the roof of the Donjon was reconstructed, which can be seen on the cards.

13. C.J. Willems, De ruïne van Brederode, een reconstructie en bouw van een maquette naar de situatie rond 1300, Zutphen 1986, 7-8. Not published account for his reconstruction of the castle.

14. Willems o.c. 7-8.

15. Willems o.c. 7-8.