Moreover, being Norman and thus 'Romanesque', the building recalls Roman architecture because of its round-headed arches and vaults. However, in the early 20th century, the matter was settled with honour on both sides when it was found that the so-called 'vaults' in the basement of the castle were Roman. It turned out that the castle had been built around and over the podium or base of a massive Roman temple which we now know was the Temple of Claudius . Since then, the main area of controversy has focused on the original height of the castle. The problem stems from the fact that the castle was partly demolished in the 17th century, and there are no unambiguous drawings or records showing what the castle was like before the demolition started.
Opinion is divided about how much has been removed from the top of the castle.
Each view can be justified, and none can claim proof. Of all the possibilities, this is the most likely. However, a big objection to this idea is to do with the resultant size of the castle. However, the size of the 'footprint' of the building is easy to explain. The decision to build the castle round the podium of the Roman temple dictated the size of the building and meant that the ground plan had to be much bigger than even that of the White Tower of London.