Norham Castle (Norham)
Norham Castle (Copyright © Don Brownlow)
Norham Castle from the air. Copyright Tim Gates, 2003.
[NT 906475] Norham Castle. (1)
See attached M.P.B.W. Guide. (2)
As described and in good condition. Open to the public. Published survey 1/2500 revised. (3)
Excavated between 1923-1925 (4).
Castle built early in 12th century. Founded, restored and maintained by Flambard, Pudsey and Beke, three of the most powerful prelates who sat in the chair of St Cuthbert.
Plan of castle is irregular, its form is a sort of quadrant. The north-east portion is occupied by the upper or inner ward. Rectangular keep 64ft north-south x 86ft east-west and is or has been about 90ft high. Walls from 12ft to 15ft thick. [Detailed architectural description].
Bishop Flambard is recorded as starting the castle in 1121. [Detailed history]. (5)
In the 15th century Richard Fox, keeper of the Privy Seal, designed an aqueduct at Norham Castle. It had doors and openings for flooding the moat with water from the mill burn. (6)
NT 9067 4756; NT 9064 4745. Norham Castle tower keep castle.
Scheduled RSM No 23229. The mound of the earliest castle is protected on the S side by a 20m wide ditch up to 10m deep and on the N by its own steep gradient and the River Tweed. The keep was complete by 1174. Full archaeological and historical account. (7)
Detailed description of the Great Tower with elevations drawn stone by stone. Photogrammetric plot carried out by Dixon and Marshall for English Heritage c.1980. (8)
Additional references. (9)(10)(11)
Survey work has shown the medieval castle to have been far larger than previously thought. An additional bailey, outside the inner and outer baileys, had existed to the south and was much more lightly defended. It is now partly overlain by the modern road past the castle. A new line of 16th century defences was also found to the west of the castle in the form of three triangular-shaped musket and artillery emplacements. To the south of the castle, a massive rampart cutting off the weakest side of the hill may be part of an Iron Age fortified enclosure on the hill. (12)
A trench was excavated across an upstanding bank SSE of the castle in February 2005, which had been tentatively dated to the Iron Age. Although the stratigraphy of the bank's construction was revealed, no features were found set into the crest of the bank, nor any buried land surface that could provide dating samples. Results suggest it is not a prehistoric structure and is more likely to be associated with the medieval phases of activity on the site. A fragment of medieval pottery was found and a thin branch of wood, from which it is hoped to obtain a date. (13)
Archaeological field investigation (carried out in March 2002 by English Heritage) was carried out to assist with the management and interpretation of the castle and to understand the relationship between the castle and a series of earthworks in fields to the south. Fieldwork revealed that the medieval castle is situated within an earlier, possibly Iron Age, fortification defined by a rampart on the east side of the promontory.
Evidence of a pre-medieval fortification was found along the weakest, east side of the promontory. A massive rampart in the field south-east of the castle is interpreted as a remnant of this fortification, whilst the remainder was incorporated into the later castle defences. Two possible entrances were identified. The date of this defensive works remains unclear, but is likely to be Iron Age.
The early medieval castle comprised an inner and outer bailey, with masonry curtain walls, fronted by substantial ditches, and a much more lightly-defended third bailey on the south-east side. The inner bailey probably belongs to the first castle and the outer bailey is probably contemporary with it. The third bailey is more difficult to date, but is probably an early component of the castle. The gate on the south side of the outer bailey was approached from the west through a hollow way, and from the east via a route through the third bailey. The modern road from Norham village perpetuates the medieval line of approach from the west; the road was extended in the 18th century along the base of the outer bailey ditch to form a continuous east-west route across the promontory. A substantial boundary bank divided the castle from the south side of the promontory in the early medieval period, creating a field that could have been used to secure livestock from the town.
In the later medieval period there were few changes to the plan of the castle. The creation of the so-called Bishop Fox's aqueduct may have led to the canalisation of the stream in the north-east valley. The field south of the castle was probably cultivated at this time.
In the 16th century a line of rudimentary defences was built on the west side of the promontory. They were probably part of the general strengthening of the castle defences following the siege of 1513. The remains of a small linear settlement overlie these defences and they may be a row of cottages shown on Rowland Johnson's plan of 1561. The next major change to the castle was the building of the road across the promontory, possibly in the mid 18th century. In the 19th century, the castle was opened to visitors and several formal footpaths on the eastern side of the site probably date to this period. (14)
Further investigation of the aqueduct, brewery, well and washing floor south-west of the inner bailey has examined the possible flow of water in the area. It also suggests that the brewery was part of an early industrial complex for processing sheep wool whereby the previously described brewery was in fact a boiler room for heating water to wash wool. (15)
The area of visible earthworks south of the modern road was the subject of topographic and geophysical surveys (resistivity and gradiometry) in 2012. Geophysical survey recorded: two linear features interpreted as a bank and ditch; the 'intrenchment' depicted on the first edition Ordnance Survey map (1860) was recorded as three sections of lower resistance and slight magnetic disturbance; the 16th century buildings mentioned by Source 14 (above) were recorded as areas of higher resistance and magentic disturbance; the location of an earthwork bastion; as well as a number of other negative-cut features, small structures and anomalies were also recorded.
The results correlate well with the survey by Pearson and Ainsworth (Source 15). All the principal topographic features were detected by geophysical survey techniques, as well as a number of previously unknown features. These include a linear bank which marks the southern extent of yards or pens associated with the 16th century buildings - this feature appears as a solid line on the first edition Ordnance Survey map where it is annotated as 'intrenchment'. A possible structure recorded at the west exterior of the outer bailey appears to comprise stone or similar compacted material. A probable artillery position was recorded as a V-shaped feature and is almost certainly associated with heavy artillery. Three areas of magnetic disturbance have no corresponding restistivity anomalies and may be evidence of military activity, possibly caused by the spread of burning material ejected from a cannon on firing. (16)
A programme of trial trench excavation was carried out by the Archaeological Practice on land to the south-west of Norham Castle as part of the Flodden 500 project in 2013 and 2015. The excavation carried out in 2013 following the geophysical survey identified an undated area of hard standing and other undated features suggestive of metal-working activity and potentially temporary settlement in the central and southern part of the site which may be of 16th-17th century date based on the stratigraphy in this area. Trenching excavated in the western part of the site in 2015 revealed various military and domestic structures of 16th century and later date. Although no direct material associations were found with the Flodden campaign, the report concludes that the position of the 16th century earthworks in the western part of the site next to the village suggests the re-ordering of the castle following the Flodden attack from the west and supports the idea of a large area for temporary billeting of troops with associated small-scale domestic and industrial activity in the area between the south of the castle and the Mill Burn. (17)
Air photographs. (18a-c)
NT 906476 Norham Castle. Scheduled. (18d)
Norham Castle. Grade I. Ruined castle of the bishops of Durham. Originally a motte-and-bailey castle of 1121 for Bishop Flambard.
Rebuilt in stone c.1157 by Richard of Wolviston for Bishop Puiset. Of this period the keep and part of the masonry of walls and W gateway. C13 additions include the S wall of the outer ward and the great hall in the inner ward. The keep was extensively remodelled in 1422-25; finally much rebuilding, especially of the N wall, in 1513-15 for Bishop Ruthal. One of the turrets of S wall encased in Gothick cottage in the late C18 or early C19. Inner ward with keep forming SE corner. Outer ward with West Gate, the site of Sheep Gate in S curtain wall. Inner and outer moats. (18e)
In August 1999, English Heritage carried out a Level 1 field observation on Norham Castle (18f)
A detailed architectural study of the castle, which proved that the keep was begun by Bishop Flambard as early as 1121, was published by P Dixon and P Marshall in 1993, and this contributed to a guidebook by A Saunders published in 1998 (8)(18g)
The field observation identified what appears to be a defended enclosure in the field to the south of the castle (NT 94 NW 52), its interior filled with well-preserved broad ridge and furrow (NT 94 NW 48). The massive defences bank and ditch crossing the promontory to the SE suggest it to be contemporary with the castle and an integral part of its design and defensive strategy.
The moat of the outer ward has a substantial counterscarp bank; a stretch of c100m to the SE of the castle has been levelled, part of the material apparently going into the moat. The arcading within the adjacent rampart of the outer ward has been exposed by the removal of the earth along the same stretch, some of which is shown on a view of the castle by Samuel and Nathaniel Buck in 1728 (reproduced in 8b, page 4).
Main events in the castle's history listed by Cathcart King. (18h)
Following the Field Observation in August 1999 (Source 8), in March 2002, English Heritage carried out a detailed field investigation and survey of the setting of Norham Castle (NT 94 NW 1) to improve understanding of both the castle itself and various earthworks in its vicinity (Event Record 1363798).
A full report on the Level 3 investigation, which includes full description and analysis, plans at various scales, photographs and interpretative drawings, is available through the NMR. The remainder of the archive material is also available (18i).
A Medieval/post Medieval castle, centred at NT 9063 4758, is visible as a ruined building on air photographs. It is enclosed by two moats that are visible as earthworks on air photographs. The castle (situated on top of a Medieval motte) is as described by previous authorities. The innermost moat measures between 20m and 30m wide. It is, however, only visible on the south and west sides. Any further earthworks are obscured by trees. After the inner moat there is an outer bailey that measures 40m wide. This is enclosed by an outer moat that also measures 30m wide and is only visible to the south-east (on the air photographs available). (18j)
The castle was described as ruinous in 1571 when Elizabeth I granted it to Lord Hunsdon. Full history of the castle. (18k)
Norham Castle was in the Palatinate of Durham. The original castle of Bishop Flambard was destroyed by the Scots. It was rebuilt in stone by Bishop Hugh de Puiset soon after 1153 on the orders of Henry II. In 1173-4, Henry suspected the Bishop's loyalty and took the castle into his own hands until 1189, and during the vacancy of the Bishopric of 1208-1217 it was again taken into Crown hands. (18l)
Despite several 16th century surveys commenting on the continual deterioration of Norham Castle, and its excellent defensive position, nothing was done to halt the decay and bring Norham back to defensive readiness. By 1596 it was totally indefensible. (18m)
There are several gunports at Norham dating from 1509-13. (18n)
Saunders thinks that the casemates in the curtain wall post-date the destruction done to the castle in 1513, rather than 1509-1513. There are three low level casemates for guns mounted on flat beds. The wall is sufficiently wide to have supported guns on it. (18o)
General association with HER 2241, HER 21237, HER 21238, HER 21239, HER 21240 and HER 21241. (18)
See attached M.P.B.W. Guide. (2)
As described and in good condition. Open to the public. Published survey 1/2500 revised. (3)
Excavated between 1923-1925 (4).
Castle built early in 12th century. Founded, restored and maintained by Flambard, Pudsey and Beke, three of the most powerful prelates who sat in the chair of St Cuthbert.
Plan of castle is irregular, its form is a sort of quadrant. The north-east portion is occupied by the upper or inner ward. Rectangular keep 64ft north-south x 86ft east-west and is or has been about 90ft high. Walls from 12ft to 15ft thick. [Detailed architectural description].
Bishop Flambard is recorded as starting the castle in 1121. [Detailed history]. (5)
In the 15th century Richard Fox, keeper of the Privy Seal, designed an aqueduct at Norham Castle. It had doors and openings for flooding the moat with water from the mill burn. (6)
NT 9067 4756; NT 9064 4745. Norham Castle tower keep castle.
Scheduled RSM No 23229. The mound of the earliest castle is protected on the S side by a 20m wide ditch up to 10m deep and on the N by its own steep gradient and the River Tweed. The keep was complete by 1174. Full archaeological and historical account. (7)
Detailed description of the Great Tower with elevations drawn stone by stone. Photogrammetric plot carried out by Dixon and Marshall for English Heritage c.1980. (8)
Additional references. (9)(10)(11)
Survey work has shown the medieval castle to have been far larger than previously thought. An additional bailey, outside the inner and outer baileys, had existed to the south and was much more lightly defended. It is now partly overlain by the modern road past the castle. A new line of 16th century defences was also found to the west of the castle in the form of three triangular-shaped musket and artillery emplacements. To the south of the castle, a massive rampart cutting off the weakest side of the hill may be part of an Iron Age fortified enclosure on the hill. (12)
A trench was excavated across an upstanding bank SSE of the castle in February 2005, which had been tentatively dated to the Iron Age. Although the stratigraphy of the bank's construction was revealed, no features were found set into the crest of the bank, nor any buried land surface that could provide dating samples. Results suggest it is not a prehistoric structure and is more likely to be associated with the medieval phases of activity on the site. A fragment of medieval pottery was found and a thin branch of wood, from which it is hoped to obtain a date. (13)
Archaeological field investigation (carried out in March 2002 by English Heritage) was carried out to assist with the management and interpretation of the castle and to understand the relationship between the castle and a series of earthworks in fields to the south. Fieldwork revealed that the medieval castle is situated within an earlier, possibly Iron Age, fortification defined by a rampart on the east side of the promontory.
Evidence of a pre-medieval fortification was found along the weakest, east side of the promontory. A massive rampart in the field south-east of the castle is interpreted as a remnant of this fortification, whilst the remainder was incorporated into the later castle defences. Two possible entrances were identified. The date of this defensive works remains unclear, but is likely to be Iron Age.
The early medieval castle comprised an inner and outer bailey, with masonry curtain walls, fronted by substantial ditches, and a much more lightly-defended third bailey on the south-east side. The inner bailey probably belongs to the first castle and the outer bailey is probably contemporary with it. The third bailey is more difficult to date, but is probably an early component of the castle. The gate on the south side of the outer bailey was approached from the west through a hollow way, and from the east via a route through the third bailey. The modern road from Norham village perpetuates the medieval line of approach from the west; the road was extended in the 18th century along the base of the outer bailey ditch to form a continuous east-west route across the promontory. A substantial boundary bank divided the castle from the south side of the promontory in the early medieval period, creating a field that could have been used to secure livestock from the town.
In the later medieval period there were few changes to the plan of the castle. The creation of the so-called Bishop Fox's aqueduct may have led to the canalisation of the stream in the north-east valley. The field south of the castle was probably cultivated at this time.
In the 16th century a line of rudimentary defences was built on the west side of the promontory. They were probably part of the general strengthening of the castle defences following the siege of 1513. The remains of a small linear settlement overlie these defences and they may be a row of cottages shown on Rowland Johnson's plan of 1561. The next major change to the castle was the building of the road across the promontory, possibly in the mid 18th century. In the 19th century, the castle was opened to visitors and several formal footpaths on the eastern side of the site probably date to this period. (14)
Further investigation of the aqueduct, brewery, well and washing floor south-west of the inner bailey has examined the possible flow of water in the area. It also suggests that the brewery was part of an early industrial complex for processing sheep wool whereby the previously described brewery was in fact a boiler room for heating water to wash wool. (15)
The area of visible earthworks south of the modern road was the subject of topographic and geophysical surveys (resistivity and gradiometry) in 2012. Geophysical survey recorded: two linear features interpreted as a bank and ditch; the 'intrenchment' depicted on the first edition Ordnance Survey map (1860) was recorded as three sections of lower resistance and slight magnetic disturbance; the 16th century buildings mentioned by Source 14 (above) were recorded as areas of higher resistance and magentic disturbance; the location of an earthwork bastion; as well as a number of other negative-cut features, small structures and anomalies were also recorded.
The results correlate well with the survey by Pearson and Ainsworth (Source 15). All the principal topographic features were detected by geophysical survey techniques, as well as a number of previously unknown features. These include a linear bank which marks the southern extent of yards or pens associated with the 16th century buildings - this feature appears as a solid line on the first edition Ordnance Survey map where it is annotated as 'intrenchment'. A possible structure recorded at the west exterior of the outer bailey appears to comprise stone or similar compacted material. A probable artillery position was recorded as a V-shaped feature and is almost certainly associated with heavy artillery. Three areas of magnetic disturbance have no corresponding restistivity anomalies and may be evidence of military activity, possibly caused by the spread of burning material ejected from a cannon on firing. (16)
A programme of trial trench excavation was carried out by the Archaeological Practice on land to the south-west of Norham Castle as part of the Flodden 500 project in 2013 and 2015. The excavation carried out in 2013 following the geophysical survey identified an undated area of hard standing and other undated features suggestive of metal-working activity and potentially temporary settlement in the central and southern part of the site which may be of 16th-17th century date based on the stratigraphy in this area. Trenching excavated in the western part of the site in 2015 revealed various military and domestic structures of 16th century and later date. Although no direct material associations were found with the Flodden campaign, the report concludes that the position of the 16th century earthworks in the western part of the site next to the village suggests the re-ordering of the castle following the Flodden attack from the west and supports the idea of a large area for temporary billeting of troops with associated small-scale domestic and industrial activity in the area between the south of the castle and the Mill Burn. (17)
Air photographs. (18a-c)
NT 906476 Norham Castle. Scheduled. (18d)
Norham Castle. Grade I. Ruined castle of the bishops of Durham. Originally a motte-and-bailey castle of 1121 for Bishop Flambard.
Rebuilt in stone c.1157 by Richard of Wolviston for Bishop Puiset. Of this period the keep and part of the masonry of walls and W gateway. C13 additions include the S wall of the outer ward and the great hall in the inner ward. The keep was extensively remodelled in 1422-25; finally much rebuilding, especially of the N wall, in 1513-15 for Bishop Ruthal. One of the turrets of S wall encased in Gothick cottage in the late C18 or early C19. Inner ward with keep forming SE corner. Outer ward with West Gate, the site of Sheep Gate in S curtain wall. Inner and outer moats. (18e)
In August 1999, English Heritage carried out a Level 1 field observation on Norham Castle (18f)
A detailed architectural study of the castle, which proved that the keep was begun by Bishop Flambard as early as 1121, was published by P Dixon and P Marshall in 1993, and this contributed to a guidebook by A Saunders published in 1998 (8)(18g)
The field observation identified what appears to be a defended enclosure in the field to the south of the castle (NT 94 NW 52), its interior filled with well-preserved broad ridge and furrow (NT 94 NW 48). The massive defences bank and ditch crossing the promontory to the SE suggest it to be contemporary with the castle and an integral part of its design and defensive strategy.
The moat of the outer ward has a substantial counterscarp bank; a stretch of c100m to the SE of the castle has been levelled, part of the material apparently going into the moat. The arcading within the adjacent rampart of the outer ward has been exposed by the removal of the earth along the same stretch, some of which is shown on a view of the castle by Samuel and Nathaniel Buck in 1728 (reproduced in 8b, page 4).
Main events in the castle's history listed by Cathcart King. (18h)
Following the Field Observation in August 1999 (Source 8), in March 2002, English Heritage carried out a detailed field investigation and survey of the setting of Norham Castle (NT 94 NW 1) to improve understanding of both the castle itself and various earthworks in its vicinity (Event Record 1363798).
A full report on the Level 3 investigation, which includes full description and analysis, plans at various scales, photographs and interpretative drawings, is available through the NMR. The remainder of the archive material is also available (18i).
A Medieval/post Medieval castle, centred at NT 9063 4758, is visible as a ruined building on air photographs. It is enclosed by two moats that are visible as earthworks on air photographs. The castle (situated on top of a Medieval motte) is as described by previous authorities. The innermost moat measures between 20m and 30m wide. It is, however, only visible on the south and west sides. Any further earthworks are obscured by trees. After the inner moat there is an outer bailey that measures 40m wide. This is enclosed by an outer moat that also measures 30m wide and is only visible to the south-east (on the air photographs available). (18j)
The castle was described as ruinous in 1571 when Elizabeth I granted it to Lord Hunsdon. Full history of the castle. (18k)
Norham Castle was in the Palatinate of Durham. The original castle of Bishop Flambard was destroyed by the Scots. It was rebuilt in stone by Bishop Hugh de Puiset soon after 1153 on the orders of Henry II. In 1173-4, Henry suspected the Bishop's loyalty and took the castle into his own hands until 1189, and during the vacancy of the Bishopric of 1208-1217 it was again taken into Crown hands. (18l)
Despite several 16th century surveys commenting on the continual deterioration of Norham Castle, and its excellent defensive position, nothing was done to halt the decay and bring Norham back to defensive readiness. By 1596 it was totally indefensible. (18m)
There are several gunports at Norham dating from 1509-13. (18n)
Saunders thinks that the casemates in the curtain wall post-date the destruction done to the castle in 1513, rather than 1509-1513. There are three low level casemates for guns mounted on flat beds. The wall is sufficiently wide to have supported guns on it. (18o)
General association with HER 2241, HER 21237, HER 21238, HER 21239, HER 21240 and HER 21241. (18)
N2207
EXCAVATION, Norham Castle 1925; ANON
FIELD OBSERVATION, Ordnance Survey Archaeology Division Field Investigation 1967; D Smith
MEASURED SURVEY, Norham Castle 2002; English Heritage
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH INTERPRETATION, English Heritage: Till Tweed NMP 2003; English Heritage
TRIAL TRENCH, Possible prehistoric earthwork at Norham Castle 2005; Archaeological Research Services
GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY, Flodden 500 - Norham Castle 2012; GUARD
WATCHING BRIEF, NORHAM CASTLE SIGNAGE 2012; Archaeological Services Durham University
TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY, Flodden 500 - Norham Castle 2012; GUARD
TRIAL TRENCH, Norham Castle as part of the Flodden 500 Project 2015; The Archaeological Practice
FIELD OBSERVATION, Ordnance Survey Archaeology Division Field Investigation 1967; D Smith
MEASURED SURVEY, Norham Castle 2002; English Heritage
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH INTERPRETATION, English Heritage: Till Tweed NMP 2003; English Heritage
TRIAL TRENCH, Possible prehistoric earthwork at Norham Castle 2005; Archaeological Research Services
GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY, Flodden 500 - Norham Castle 2012; GUARD
WATCHING BRIEF, NORHAM CASTLE SIGNAGE 2012; Archaeological Services Durham University
TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY, Flodden 500 - Norham Castle 2012; GUARD
TRIAL TRENCH, Norham Castle as part of the Flodden 500 Project 2015; The Archaeological Practice
Disclaimer -
Please note that this information has been compiled from a number of different sources. Durham County Council and Northumberland County Council can accept no responsibility for any inaccuracy contained therein. If you wish to use/copy any of the images, please ensure that you read the Copyright information provided.