Earliest reference is 1242 in the Book of Fees. There were ? 6 taxpayers in 1296. The i.p.m. of Robert fitzRoger in 1309 showed he died seised of 12 bondage holdings, each containing one messuage, 16 acres of arable and a cottage. The village was certainly shrinking while held by the Percy family, and by 1620 there was one farm at Butterlaw, one each at East and West Whorlton. Today at Butterlaw there is just one farm, and much of the surrounding land has been / is being opencasted. Dated C13th.

The earliest documentary evidence to a church is 1067. The earliest part of the fabric of the existing church is the probable early Norman west tower with quasi-Saxon features, though it has been suggested that the megalithic quoining at the south-east angle of the nave might be pre-Conquest. The nave is aisled, with two 4-bay arcades, the north one with round piers and waterleaf capitals of c. 1175, and the south one with double-chamfered arches and alternating round and octagonal piers of the C13. The chancel is largely C13, and the transepts were added in the C14 or C15. The aisle walls, clerestory, vestry north of the chancel and south porch are all C19. Dated C11-12th.

A chapel existed at Denton before c. 1194 when the land belonging to it was annexed to the vicarage of Newburn. Roger de Widdrington, before 1334/5, gave property to Newburn church to find a chaplain to celebrate in Denton chapel. A "Free Chappell" in the parish of Newburn is mentioned in the chantry certificates of 1548, and thereafter there is silence. The chapel is supposed to have stood in the garden south-west of Denton Hall. This is based on the discovery some time before 1887 of a font, some sculptured stones, two incised grave-covers and some large stone coffins. Tomlinson also noted some possible foundations. There is no recent information. Dated C12th.

In 1897 quarrying near Newburn revealed bones of, it was said, both men and horses, iron musket balls, and cannon balls and small projectiles of stone. The bones were described as lying "in situ immediately below the surface of the ground, at the extreme top of the quarry...". C.J. Bates pointed out that the bones and cannon balls were not necessarily associated, and that the bones were likely to be much earlier than the C17, "Picts rather than Scots" as he put it. In spite of this the NCH suggested they were casualties from the Battle of Newburn. The site of the quarry is not known, and the above grid reference is a guess by the OS.

King Charles I's attempt to impose a new prayer book on the Scots led to military conflict in the summer of 1640. To avoid assaulting the strong defences on the north side of Newcastle, a Scottish army of up to 20,000 men under the command of Alexander Leslie decided to cross the Tyne and attack from the weaker southern side. Lord Conway opposed the crossing from the south bank of the Tyne, constructing fortifications to defend both of the fords. The English were driven from one fortification by the weight of the Scots' artillery bombardment. Of the 29 17th century English battles, Newburn is the only one which was fought primarily around fortified positions (the two sconces). The Scottish cavalry crossed the ford but were countered by English cavalry. The Scots forced the English to retreat to higher ground where they made a last stand but were beaten off by the Scots' advance, who afterwards occupied Newcastle. The Battle of Newburn Ford was the only battle of the Second Bishops' War. Politically it was of the greatest importance. The cost to King Charles of raising the army and the need to buy off the Scots after their occupation of Newcastle forced the King to install the Long Parliament which sat through the Civil Wars until the Restoration. The landscape of 1640 was profoundly different from that of today. The river has been straightened and the floodplain largely developed. Even so, the topography allows an understanding of the course of events during the battle which took place over pastureland with woods on the steep river cliffs. {7} In 1640 a Scottish invasion was expected, and "two sconces, or breastworks, were raised by the English against the two fords where the Scots might pass at low water, and into each sconce were put 400 musketeers and four pieces of ordnance". The Scots gathered in the village of Newburn, the English assembled on Newburn/Stella Haugh. The English started the battle on 28 August 1640 by shooting at and wounding a Scots officer, and the two sides began firing at each other across the river. The greater of the English sconces was breached, and the Scots crossed the river. They were also firing from a new sconce to the east, and the English withdrew. Speak (1997, Figure 14) provides a number of likely troop positions within the battlefield site. Prior to the redevelopment of the Stella Power Station, an archaeological evaluation in 1999 (Tyne and Wear Museums) consisted of four trenches to evaluate part of the registered battlefield and to investigate the 1640 ground profile. Made ground was encountered containing C19 glass and pottery. In 2004 a geophysical survey (Timescape Surveys) was undertaken on part of the battlefield on the Ryton side of the river. The geophysicist suggested that one of the anomalies may indicate the presence of a defensive structure perhaps comprising of a number of posts and embankment [unlikely given the depth of alluvial material dumped on either side of the river when it was re-routed?]. Many musket balls and cannon balls have been found on both sides of the river. A collection is held in the Tyne Country Park Office at Newburn. There have been many other evaluations and watching briefs and nothing battlefield-related has ever been found. Augering on the site of Salmon Cottage in 2007 (Durham University) recorded a metre of rubble and 3 metres of a medium to fine light brown sand, probably formed from flooding of the River Tyne.

Newburn formed part of the royal demesne of the Saxon kingdom of Northumbria, cf. Bamburgh, Warkworth and Corbridge. When the kingdom ceased to exist the land and all the royal privileges passed to the official earls of Northumbria. In 1095 this demesne escheated to the crown of England as a result of the revolt of Robert de Mowbray. In C12 Newburn was one of the six boroughs on royal demesne in Northumberland paying a farm of 30 p.a. "No reference to Newburn as a borough has been found later than 1201". Dodds notes that Newburn is recorded as Niewburc in 1204, implying that "burn" was originally "burgh" meaning a fortified place. Thus Newburn would be called the "New Burgh" in order to distinguish it from the earlier royal residence (Ad Murum) at either Walbottle (HER 7918) or Heddon-on-the-Wall.

One or more fords existed across the Tyne at Newburn, which has been described as "the lowest safe fording point on the Tyne and at (more correctly near) the head of the tideway". The precise location of the fords is not given in the various sources cited below. Bruce claims, without proof, that "an ancient paved ford existed at Newburn which may well have been of Roman date". In the Middle Ages and later the Scots tended to invade England by crossing the Tyne at Newburn. King David led an army of 15,000 to Durham to fight at Neville's Cross in 1346; the Scots army crossed here during the battle of Newburn in 1640.

Cropmarks on Knop Law were first noted in 1959 by J.K. St Joseph: there has been no photography since then. As plotted from his photos by Graham Lee the cropmarks fall at the above grid reference. They were first published in 1975 (2); and subsequently described by Miket thus: "Circular feature and ? rectilinear enclosure although very faint". As Lee's plot and Miket's description do not agree, and I can see nothing on the APs anyway, it is best left thus - vague. Note that earthworks have been reported in the past from Knop Law (SMR 1293): is there one site here or two?

In 1732 Horsley noted the existence "near the Chapel houses about a furlong south from Severus's wall, and less from Hadrian's,...the ruins of a rampart. It is usually called the Castle-steeds...it is about four chains long, with an interval in the middle, that looks like a gate...like the south rampart of a small fort". He saw no traces of ramparts on the other sides. While Hodgson suggested these "ruined ramparts" were temporary Roman earthworks, implying he could see them, MacLauchlan declared they were quite destroyed and their outline scarcely visible. The NCH also favoured a Roman date. Note that cropmarks have been seen in this area and, because they do not appear to accord with the above description, have been given a separate number. It is nevertheless possible that there is really only one site, not two.

In 1969 a sandstone head was found in the garden of 10 The Burnside, West Denton, less than 100 m south of Hadrian's Wall, near the site of Milecastle 8. The topsoil for the gardens of The Burnside came from work on the A69. The head is roughly cubic in shape, 21.5 cm high x 22.2 cm wide x 26 cm deep, and only the face and forward part of the left side are carved. The other surfaces are formed by natural breaks, and these predate the carving which was thus done on a random stone. For this "... particularly fine example of the so- called Romano-Celtic cult head..." Dr Anne Ross suggested a date in C1-C2.