Historian A: John Smith – Economic Perspective "John Smith argues that Norman castles, particularly Motte and Bailey structures, were primarily built as economic tools. They served to control land, extract taxes, and facilitate trade. Smith emphasizes the strategic placement of castles to dominate local economies, noting that their construction reflected the Norman rulers' focus on economic gain rather than solely military purposes. He suggests that the growth of castle-building was driven by economic motives to consolidate Norman wealth and power in England."

Historian B: Emily Johnson – Social Perspective "Emily Johnson contends that Norman castles were primarily symbols of Norman dominance and social control. She highlights their role in intimidating the local population and establishing Norman authority. Johnson points out the social impact of castles on local communities, including displacement and increased social stratification. For her, the physical presence of castles was as much about social control as it was about military or economic reasons, representing Norman dominance over the Anglo-Saxons."