A HISTORY OF DURHAM 



Although historical detail is not included in the scope of this 

 section, we cannot leave Bishopton without recalling that Roger Conyers, 

 hereditary constable of Durham, is referred to as having fortified his 

 castle against Comyn, the usurper of the bishopric, about i 143.' Whether 

 there was here, as seems possible, a previously existing fortress cannot 

 be said. 



Blackwell. — ^John Cade, writing at the end of the eighteenth century, 

 says that ' at Blackwell has been a very considerable artificial mount, called 

 Castle Hill . . . but within my own memory nearly absorbed by the 

 river' [Tees].* The present remains consist of only about half the mount, 

 and it is said the destruction of the other portion was due to a great flood 

 which devastated the valley in 1771. The mount is similar to that at 

 Middleton St. George, and as, like that example, it had probably a base-court 

 attached, we include Blackwell under Class E. 



Durham. — The castle occupies the north end of the rocky promontory 

 round which the river Wear runs on the east, south, and west, and completely 

 commands the approach from the north. The earthwork defences, except 

 the great mount or motte, are mostly levelled or obliterated by later building. 

 The motte, which is now some 47 ft. high above the mean level of the inner 

 bailey, now the court of University College, occupies the north-east angle of 

 the position, commanding the original approach to the high ground, which 

 was from the north-east. Its slopes are now 

 terraced, but were no doubt unbroken at first. 

 It was defended on the south, and perhaps else- 

 where, by a ditch, which continued in a westerly 

 direction across the promontory, cutting off the 

 site of the mount and inner bailey from the level 

 ground to the south, which must have formed 

 the outer bailey. On the west the high rocky 



slope of the river bank afforded complete pro- Durham Castle. 



tection, and on the north the ground falls steeply 



towards the town, and though a good deal heightened by masonry rubbish 

 from the castle buildings, follows what must have been the outline of the 

 original scarp. At this end of the site there is a considerable depth of soil 

 over the underlying rock, which has a fall from south to north. Whether 

 the inner bailey was at first defended by earthworks is not clear ; if so they 

 have been entirely removed, except perhaps on the north side, where the 

 bank may remain in part under the range of buildings. There are no 

 traces of other earthworks anywhere on the site. 



Durham : Old Durham. — In 1785 John Cade wrote* of a work here 

 which he called Maiden Castle, and quoted Stukeley's description ;* but the 

 latter appears to relate to the early promontory camp on the opposite side of 

 the Wear. It must be admitted that Stukeley is obscure, and apparently 

 confuses east with west. The point of interest to us is that Cade's paper is 

 accompanied by an engraving of the earthwork showing it to have been 

 distinctly of the mount and court type. We cannot learn that anything is 

 now left to record. 



' Surtccj ///■//. an/i Ant. of the Co. Pal. of Dm: 1816. » Arch. ix. 1789. 



» ytrch. vii. 1785. ♦ Stukeley, I tineraiium Curiosum, 1776. 



354 



