MORPETH-NEWCASTLE

171

worth 6 to the earl, and 34. 35. to the knights who hold under him.

MORPETH, Northumberland (Fig. 21).-There is only one mention known to us of Morpeth Castle in the 11th century, and that is in the poem of Geoffrey Gaimar.1 He says that William Rufus, when marching to Bamborough, to repress the rebellion of Mowbray, Earl of Northumberland, "took the strong castle of Morpeth, which was seated on a little mount," and belonged to William de Morlei. Thus there can be no doubt that the Ha' Hill, about 100 yards to the N. of the present castle, was the motte of the first castle of Morpeth, though the remains of the motte, which are mentioned by Hodgson, have been destroyed. A natural ridge has been used to form a castle by cutting off its higher end to form a motte, and making a court on the lower part of the ridge. The great steepness of the slopes rendered ordinary ditches unnecessary, nor are there any traces now of banks or foundations. In the court some Norman capitals and carved stones were found in 1830. This early castle was admirably placed for commanding the river and the bridge. The present castle of Morpeth was built in 1342-1349.*

NEWCASTLE, Northumberland. The first castle here was built by Robert, son of William I., on his return from his expedition to Scotland in 1080.5 It was of the

1 Gaimar, 214, Wright's edition. Gaimar wrote in the first half of the 12th century; Wright states that his work is mainly copied from the AngloSaxon Chronicle, but its chief value lies in the old historical traditions of the north and east of England which he has preserved.

Hodgson's History of Northumberland, Part II., ii., 384, 389.

3 This account is taken from a description kindly furnished by Mr

D. H. Montgomerie.

4 Bates' Border Holds, p. II.

Simeon of Durham, 1080. condidit."

"Castellum Novum super flumen Tyne

usual motte-and-bailey kind, the motte standing in a small bailey which was rectilinear and roughly oblong.1 This motte was in existence when Brand wrote his History of Newcastle, but was removed in 1811. The castle was placed outside the Roman station at Monkchester, and commanded a Roman bridge over the Tyne, "and to the north-east overlooked a ravine that under the name of The Side formed for centuries a main artery of communication between England and Scotland." Henry II., when he built the fine keep of this castle, did not place it on the motte, but in the outer and larger ward, which was roughly triangular. The outer curtain appears to have stood on the banks of the former earthen castle, as the Parliamentary Survey of 1649 speaks of the castle as "bounded with strong works of stone and mud." The area of the whole castle was 3 acres and I rood.

NORHAM, Northumberland (Fig. 22).-The first castle here was built by Ranulf Flambard, Bishop of Durham, in the reign of William Rufus. It was built to defend Northumberland against the incursions of the Scots, and we are expressly told that no castle had existed there previously. This first castle, which we may certainly assume to have been of earth and wood, was destroyed by the Scots in 1138, and there does not seem to have been any stone castle until the time of

1 See the map in an important paper on Newcastle by Longstaffe, Arch. Æliana, iv., 45.

2 Guide to the Castle of Newcastle, published by Society of Antiquaries of Newcastle, 1901.

› Longstaffe, as above.

♦ "Condidit castellum in excelso preruptæ rupis super Twedam flumen, ut inde latronum incursus inhiberet, et Scottorum irruptiones. Ibi enim utpote in confinia regni Anglorum et Scottorum creber prædantibus ante patebat excursus, nullo enim quo hujusmodi impetus repelleretur præsidio locato." Symeon of Durham, R. S., i., 140.

SNIE

OF

NORHAM-NORWICH

"2

173

Bishop Puiset or Pudsey, who built the present keep by command of King Henry II.' Mr Clark tried hard to find some work of Flambard's in this tower, but found it difficult, and was driven back on the rather lame assumption that "the lapse of forty [really fifty at least] years had not materially changed the style of architecture then in use. In fact, the Norman parts of this keep show no work so early as the 11th century, but are advanced in style, for not only was the basement vaulted, but the first floor also. The simple explanation is that Flambard threw up the large square motte on which the keep now stands, and provided it with the usual wooden defences. It also had a strong tower, but almost certainly a wooden one; hence it was easily destroyed by the Scots when once taken. The motte was probably lowered to some extent when the stone keep was built. It stands on a high bank overlooking the Tweed, and is separated from its bailey by a deep ditch. The bailey may be described as a segment of a circle; its area is about 2 acres.

3

NORWICH (Fig. 23).-We find from Domesday Book that no less than 113 houses were destroyed for the site of this castle, a certain proof that the castle was new. It is highly probable that it was outside the primitive defences of the town, at any rate in part. Norwich was built, partly on a peninsula formed by a

1 "Castellum di Northam, quod munitionibus infirmum reperit, turre validissima forte reddidit." Geoffrey of Coldingham, 12 (Surtees Society). Symeon says it was built "precepto regis." The keep was extensively altered in the Decorated period.

2 M. M. A., ii., 331.

3 Richard of Hexham, 319 (Twysden).

"In illa terra de quâ Herold habebat socam sunt 15 burgenses et 17 mansuræ vastæ, quæ sunt in occupatione castelli; et in burgo 190 mansuræ vacuæ in hoc quod erat in soca regis et comitis, et 81 in occupatione castelli." D. B., ii., 116. This shows that the castle and its ditches occupied ground partly within and partly without the ancient burh.