POLITICAL HISTORY 



the redoubtable Ralph Flambard. From a political point of view Durham 

 was fortunate in being ruled by a man whose ability, whatever his other 

 failings may have been, was undoubted. Under his firm rule Durham pros- 

 pered materially, and many public works of importance were carried out, the 

 most notable of which was the castle of Norham guarding one of the principal 

 fords over the Tweed against Scottish aggression."^* Shortly after the accession 

 of Henry I, Flambard was seized at London (15 August, i 100) and com- 

 mitted to the Tower, whence he escaped on 3 February, i loi, to Normandy.^" 

 He was one of those who obtained an amnesty under the treaty between 

 Duke Robert and the king ; but though restored to his see he could not obtain 

 the king's favour, and the inhabitants of Durham suffered much from his 

 exactions for the purpose of buying his way into the king's good graces.**' 

 His attempts were unsuccessful, and Henry is said to have cancelled the 

 charters granted by the Conqueror. 



At Flambard's death great progress had been made in the reorganization 

 of Durham. Delayed by the incompetency of Walcher, under his two able 

 successors the development of the resources of the county had proceeded 

 rapidly, and at Flambard's death the defensive strength of the northern 

 border had been materially increased by the building of Norham Castle and 

 the strengthening of the defences of Durham. 



With the accession of Bishop Geoffrey, chancellor to King Henry I, 

 Durham enters on another stage, that of her struggles as a frontier county 

 against the Scots. Till the king's death, 1135, the bishop had two years of 

 peace, but the unrest which followed Stephen's accession was soon felt in the 

 north. David of Scotland, in support of his niece, the Empress Maud, and 

 mindful of his oath to the late king, invaded England in 1 136, took Norham 

 Castle amongst other strongholds, and overran the county as far as Durham, 

 which he intended to attack. Stephen, however, with a large force, arrived 

 there on 5 February, and David, foiled in his attempt, retired to Newcastle. ^^ 

 Stephen remained fifteen days at Durham, and during that period came to terms 

 with David, who gave up Norham and the other castles he had taken in 

 Northumberland. Hostilities ceased, but not for long ; the next year David 

 again threatened to invade, but was checked by the rapid concentration of the 

 English forces at Newcastle.'^ Early in the following year, 1138, David 

 reached Hexham, and a portion of his army crossing the Tyne, laid waste a 

 great portion of the western part of the county.'* In Lent, however, 

 Stephen's offensive operations against Scotland relieved the county for a short 

 time, but owing to lack of supplies ^^ he had to retire, leaving the county 

 exposed. After Easter (3 April, 11 38) the Scottish king again advanced, and 

 ravaged the eastern portion of the county.'^ David with his retinue took 

 up his abode near Durham, but being disturbed by a mutiny of Picts and a 

 false report of the approach of a large English force, he retreated and laid 

 siege to Norham. At first the castle, owing to the gallantry of the towns- 

 men, was defended with vigour ; ^^ but many having been wounded, and 

 despairing of aid from the bishop, the garrison surrendered, the nine knights 

 and their men who formed the regular garrison being permitted to retire to 



"» Simeon, op. cit. (Rolls Scr.), 140. '" Ibid. 138. " Ibid. 139. 



^" Richard of Hexham, Gata Stcphani, sub anno 1 136. " Ibid, sub anno 11 37. 



'< Ibid, sub anno 1 138. " Ibid. ^'' Ibid. " Ibid. 



139 



