The oldest part is the right hand section. The newer part, is the left hand section.
In 1708\1709 the bridge was judged to have been in a poor state of repairs, and documents show that the Chief Constable, Mr Will Shepherd was instructed to inspect the bridge and arrange any necessary repairs.
In January 1748, the bridge was once again judged to be out of repair, although this time, records don't state what remedial action was taken.
In April 1756, the bridge's state of disrepair was judged to have been so bad, that repairs were once again demanded. It wasn't until 1759 that the repairs were once again reported on, when the bridge was found to be in excellent condition.
In October 1868, it was remarked that the Iron bolts holding the two 'composite' bridges together were in a poor state of repair. It was feared that should the bolts fail, the bridge may split and become unusable.
In 1920, the brige was once again inspected, and found to be in need of yet more work. A quotation was received for the work, advising that the repairs would cost around £920. The advice was not acted upon, and only the bolts were inspected.
The remains are easily accessable from the road to the south of the bailey. You can park on the other side of the bridge, and walk back towards the remains. Entry is through a thin gap in the wall, a short walk up the field, and the entrance to the bailey is marked by a modern stone causeway over the ditches.
The remains are thought to be from the 13th century, and overlay the remains of an iron age hill fort. From this, it's plain to see that the river crossing here was very important from the earliest of times. The motte is approached through the bailey, which is laid out to the left and right as you cross over the causeway. The earthwork ditches and banks are still very much in evidence, providing good defensive barriers against any attack. The oval shaped bailey is around 70 by 60 metres, and is surrounded by a ditch and raised bank reaching an additional height of around 2 metres in places. The North and West sides of the bailey are also protected by the high sided natural embankment, with the North side falling away sharply towards the river, some 4o feet below.
So important was the crossing here just outside Hornby, that a pill box was constructed during the second world war, no doubt designed to offer protection of the river crossing in the event of a German invasion.
I'm again unable to find any datings for this site, who built it or what it was used for, and there is some suggestion that it may even be a spoil heap from the nearby railway.
There are even a few sites within Kendal, and one or two on the outskirts of town that are known or at least thought to have been very early medieval mottes, perhaps sites of local administration rather than full blown motte and bailey castle such as Kendal's Castle Howe.
Just outside Kendal, there is a motte, visited last year, that lends some weight to the "is it - or isn't it" argument. Situated about two miles West of Kendal on Hawes Lane just outside Natland, Hawes Bridge Motte is mostly hidden from view from the road. The earthwork remains sit just above the river Kent, appearing to defend the river crossing. The motte stands in an area generally thought to contain the remains of a deserted medieval settlement called Bothelford, which was mentioned in the Domesday Book.
The remains stand to around six metres high and would have afforded a good view of the river crossing and the surrounding country side. There do not appear to be any remains of banks and\or ditches. There is a question hanging over the validity of this motte, in that it's very near to the route of the Lancaster to Kendal canal, so there is every possibilty that it's actually a spoil heap. Still the location looks good for a defensive site at the river crossing, and so near to the possibly deserted village.