A HISTORY OF DURHAM 



Lothians — a struggle in which the Northumbrian position was materially 

 weakened by the cession in 945 of Cumbria to the Scots.' Before this 

 cession Bamburgh could be regarded as a suitable fortified centre from which 

 to govern a territory which extended to the Forth, but with Cumb*erland 

 in the hands of the Scots the earl may well have felt the want of some more 

 southern fortress to check their inroads by the Pennine Passes. Strong in 

 itself, Durham, situated at the junction of the valleys of the Wear, Dearness, 

 and Browney, was admirably placed to watch the western marches and to 

 protect the more populous and cultivated eastern districts. As the direction 

 of the flight from Chester-le-Street suggests that the danger lay to the north, 

 so Uchtred's activity and the employment of the entire population of the 

 district between the Coquet and Tees indicate that the foundation of the 

 city of Durham was due, not to a supernatural cause, but to the military 

 requirements of the Northumbrian earldom. However this may be, the 

 transfer of the see provided the earl with a new fortress and a garrison to 

 man it.'' Durham soon attracted the attention of the Scots, and in 1006 King 

 Malcolm, with the entire military force of Scotland, after devastating the 

 province of the Northumbrians, laid siege to Durham. Waltheof, the earl, 

 too old for active service, shut himself up in Bamburgh. His want of 

 energy was amply compensated for by that of his son Uchtred, the bishop's 

 son-in-law, who, with the men of Northumbria and Yorkshire, raised the 

 siege and decisively defeated the Scottish forces.'' Malcolm and a few others 

 escaped with difficulty. From the numerous slain Uchtred selected some of 

 the best-looking heads to decorate the city walls, and a cow apiece was 

 given to the four women who washed the heads. For his initiative and 

 gallantry on this occasion Uchtred superseded his father as earl. Twelve 

 years' peace ensued, but in 1018 the Northumbrian forces suffered a disastrous 

 defeat at Carham, whereby the Lothians were added to the kingdom of the 

 Scots, and the boundary of Northumbria was permanently forced back to 

 the Tweed. Nearly the whole population, Simeon states,* from the Tyne to 

 the Tees, were cut off in the conflict, and Bishop Aldhun survived but a few 

 days the news of the slaughter of his people — ' the first, but not the last, 

 bishop of Durham to have his life made burdensome by the incursions of the 

 Scots.' 



A few years later (1039)' the Northumbrians had their revenge. 

 Duncan the First, who had succeeded his grandfather Malcolm in 1034, with 

 a large force of cavalry and foot invaded the earldom and laid siege to 

 Durham. On this occasion the besieging force was defeated with heavy loss 

 by the unaided efforts of the inhabitants of the city. Again the heads of 

 the slain were collected to decorate the town. Before this siege took place 

 Cnut, probably in 103 i when on his way to Scotland,^" visited Durham and 

 made certain grants of land to St. Cuthbert." 



' As to the effect and extent of this cession see F.C.H. Cumb. ii, 228. 



* The tract on the siege of Durham, Simeon, op. cit. (Rolls Ser.), i, 216, proves the existence of walls 

 round Durham, but whether of earth or stone is uncertain. 



' Simeon, op. cit. i, 216 ; as to the date see Annals of Ulster sub anno 1006, and Skene's Celtic Scotland, 

 i, 385. ' Ibid, i, 84. 



'The date 1035 given by Simeon, op. cit. (Rolls Ser.), i, 90, is wrong. He states that the invasion 

 took place in the 20th year of the pontificate of Bishop Eadmund, who was enthroned in 102 I. The correct 

 date appears from the ' Annales Dunelmenses' in Pertz, Monumenta Germ. Hist. Scriptorei, xix, 506. 



'" Angl.-Sax. Chron. sub anno 1 03 1. " Simeon, op. cit. (Rolls Ser.), i, 90. 



