(“Doomsday Book.”)
In a geographical account of this city it is given as being locally in “the hundred of Box and Stockbridge, rape of Chichester, county of Sussex.” The origin of this term “rape,” comes from the Icelandic “hreppr,” meaning a village or district. From the Icelandic verb, “hreppa,” to catch, obtain, arose the Anglo-Saxon rendering—“hrepian, hreppan,” to touch. Rape came thus to be one of six divisions of the county of Sussex, possibly by reason of their nearness to each other. It formed the intermediate between the shire and the hundred. A sketch of the shire and the hundred is treated in the description of Wells. After this slight digression, we will immediately enter upon the history of Chichester.
Its foundation dates, with certainty, from the time when England formed a portion of the Roman Empire. About the year 47 A.D., Flavius Vespasian conquered this part of England. He established a camp on the site of the present city, close to the road now known as Stane Street, throwing up an entrenchment three miles long. This is attributed to be the “Regnum” of the Belgæ, mentioned in the “Itinerary” of Antonine.
There is no reason to doubt this, if it be borne in mind that, situated almost on the south seaboard of England as Chichester is, it might quite conceivably be expected to be classed accidentally as forming a part of the territory of the Belgæ, though geographically wrong. The advantage of a site at the foot of a small spur of the South Downs, within easy distance of the sea, though inland, would offer great attractions to the Roman invader.
The early history of England shows us that invasions took effect generally on the south and east coasts of the island. The conquered tribes travelled westwards, retreating before the fierce invader.
Little seems to have been known about the Roman occupation of Chichester till the accidental turning up of a Sussex marble slab on the site of the present council chamber. This discovery took place about the year 1713. From this a little information is gleaned about the Roman buildings. The slab bears a defaced inscription in Latin, the missing letters of which having been supplied, give a conjectural reading. It appears that Chichester was the seat of a British king, Cogidubnus; and that under the auspices of a certain Pudens, a temple of Neptune and Minerva was erected out of compliment to Claudius. The evidence of this stone seems also to have been borne out by Tacitus, who mentions in his writings the existence of Cogidubnus as a native king possessed of independent authority. This king, also, is said to be the father of Claudia, who figures in the Second Epistle to Timothy. The conjectural reading again leads us to suppose that the city was occupied by a large number of craftsmen, who, in fact, were responsible for the erection of the temple mentioned above, besides the walls and other buildings.
During the early Saxon period in the fifth century the city was destroyed by Œlla. He was succeeded by his son Cissa, who rebuilt it and called it Cissa’s Ceaster—Cissa after his own name, and Ceaster in recognition of the Romans having occupied it. The city afterwards became the seat of the South Saxon kings, and remained thus till about the middle of the seventh century. Wulfhere, the Mercian, then invaded it and made Athelwald, its king, prisoner. Upon his conversion to Christianity the king was reinstated. He was afterwards killed in battle by Ceadwalla of Wessex, who conquered the kingdom of the South Saxons. In 803 Egbert managed to make a union of the several Saxon kingdoms. This event caused considerable prosperity to Chichester. From ancient penny-pieces discovered, we learn that King Edgar, in the year 967, had established a mint here, thus clearly indicating the importance of the city.
It suffered a terrible decline through the devastations of the Danes; so much so, that scarcely two hundred houses and only one church existed at the time of the Norman Conquest. However, from 1070 the fortunes of the city began to mend rapidly. This wholesome change was caused primarily by the removal of the See from Selsea, where it had remained for over three hundred years, to Chichester. As first bishop of Chichester, Stigand, the chaplain to William the Conqueror, was appointed. In the reign of Henry I. a cathedral was built and consecrated by Bishop Ralph. It was soon destroyed by fire. On its site the same prelate erected a second structure of far greater magnificence, a considerable portion of which is still extant.
In 1189 the city again suffered from a terrible fire, which also caused great damage to the Cathedral. This building, however, was repaired and greatly enlarged by Bishop Siffed. His efforts, with those of Ralph, form the basis of the present cathedral. It was dedicated to St. Peter. The architecture embraces the Norman and the Early English and Decorated styles.
A beautiful tower arose from the centre, surmounted by an octagonal spire three hundred feet high, with two towers on the west, of which the upper courses of one were destroyed during the parliamentary war. On the north is seen a fine bell-tower and lantern, connected by flying buttresses with octagonal turrets springing from the angles.
In the reign of Charles I., after a stubborn defence by the Royalist citizens, the city was compelled to surrender to Cromwell’s troops. In the course of this reign the north-west tower was battered down, and in 1648 Cromwell ordered the destruction of the cathedral cloisters, the Bishop’s Palace, the Deanery, and the Canons’ houses. The Bishop’s Palace was repaired in 1725, and contains a chapel built in the thirteenth century. A general and great restoration of the Cathedral was commenced in 1830, but in spite of every precaution the tower and spire fell down in 1861. Under the guidance of Sir Gilbert Scott the necessary repairs were undertaken. The cloisters were restored about the year 1890.
Besides his grand contribution to the church’s architecture, Storey’s memory is perpetuated by the very fine octagonal cross in the Decorated English style. It stands fifty feet high, in the centre of the town, from which the four principal streets run out at right angles towards the country. These streets, in olden days, led to four gates in the embattled walls which surrounded the city. The last of these gates was taken down in 1773. Besides the cross, Storey founded in 1497 the Grammar School, where Archbishop Juxon, the learned Seldon, the poet Collins, and Dr. Hurdis, Professor of Poetry at the University of Oxford, received their elementary education.
Amongst other schools founded was one by Oliver Whitby, in 1702, to afford free nautical education to twelve boys; namely, four from Chichester, and four from each of the villages of West Wettering and Harting. Though Chichester is connected by a short canal with the sea, and a certain amount of shipping is done, it can hardly be considered as an important port. It lies fourteen miles north-east of England’s greatest naval port, Portsmouth. Curiously enough, Chichester is only five miles south of Goodwood, the famous city for horse-races.
The municipal and parliamentary borough of Chichester, incorporated as city in the year 1213, is almost surrounded by a small stream called the Lavant, and is pleasantly situated at the end of a small spur of the South Down Hills. It is considered as one of the principal cattle markets in the South of England. Accommodation for several thousands of cattle was arranged in 1871 by the Corporation.
There are also the Guildhall, which was formerly the chapel of a convent of Grey Friars; the corn-exchange, the market-house, museum, and infirmary.
Bradwardine and Juxon, both archbishops of Canterbury; Lawrence Somercote, a great canonist and writer; the poets Collins and Hayley, whose memory has been perpetuated by a tablet designed by Flaxman in the Cathedral, were all born in this city. The Diocese of Chichester covers nearly the whole extent of Sussex.
In conclusion we would draw the attention to the quaint design on the Bishop’s armorial shield. It depicts the curious device of a mitred prelate holding a sword in his mouth. He is seated, presumably, on a throne, which much resembles a square block of marble, looked at perspectively. Perhaps it is meant for the Holy Stone. Both the Bishop’s arms are outstretched. In his left hand an open book is held, whilst his right is palm upwards. Why the Bishop holds the sword in his mouth, when his right hand is free, it is hard to say. Possibly the arms were first drawn up for a warlike bishop, or it may mean that the sword is the sword of Justice. In all probability the correct meaning is conveyed by the twelfth verse in Hebrews iv., wherein it sets forth that the sword in the Bishop’s mouth is symbolical of “The Word of the Lord,” which is “sharper than any two-edged sword,” and the Book of the Law is in his left hand, whilst the right hand is extended in blessing or in supplicating prayer.
THIS famous place occupies a singular position. It is a city and county of itself, a municipal county since 1888, and a parliamentary borough, besides being an episcopal city, a seaport, and county town of Cheshire.
Chester is also the capital of the county of Cheshire. It is situated on a rocky elevation, on the north bank of the River Dee, by which the city is partly encircled. Just seventeen miles north of it lies the great manufacturing and seaport town of Liverpool. At one time Chester was a palatine city, enjoying all the privileges peculiar to that dignity. This practically conferred independent authority on a city far situated from the Metropolis. The head of the city was a little king, and enjoyed discretionary power. In a brief sketch of this, in the account of Durham, is clearly shown the mutual advantages accruing, especially in cases of emergency, such as incursions of the enemy, to both the city thus honoured and the Metropolis London.
The geographical position of Chester in the extreme west of England, and its proximity to the restless Welsh, demanded some such power to cope, at a moment’s notice, with any unexpected event from that quarter. This nearness to Wales contributed in a great measure to the importance of this city, as will be presently shown.
The earliest authentic history of Chester ascribes its origin to the British tribe called the Cornavii. At the time of the Roman invasion they inhabited that part of England which now is known as the counties of Chester, Salop, Stafford, Warwick, and Worcester.
The city they called Cœr Leon Vawr—City of Leon the Great. This name is supposed to have been given out of compliment to Leon, son of Brut Darien, the eighth king of Britain. By some historians this origin is contested. They say that this Welsh name of Cœr Leon Vawr indicated the “city or camp of the Great Legion.” They also supply “Cœr Leon,” or “Dwfyr Dwy,” and render their meaning into “the city of the Legion on the Dee,” from its connection with that people. The city was also called Deunana and Deva, after the same river. However, it is conclusively proved that here the Twentieth Roman Legion established a station after the defeat of Caractacus, who, after having made a mighty effort to withstand this second invasion of England by the Romans, was taken prisoner. He and his wife and family were taken to Rome, and, according to custom, were paraded through the streets for the benefit of the public, but afterwards honourably treated. This second occupation of England lasted from 43 A.D. till the Romans finally departed in 446 A. D. The first was a short stay by Julius Cæsar in B.C., some ninety-seven years previous. In 46 A.D., within three years of the landing of the Romans, Chester was established as a Roman camp, during the reign of Claudius, the Roman Emperor.
From the disposition of the four principal streets,—Northgate Street, Eastgate Street, Bridge Street, and Westgate Street, together with the walls surrounding the city, and the selection of a rocky site on the bank of a fair-sized river, Chester gives a good illustration of the principles upon which the Romans went to work. From a determined centre these roads run out to their respective gates in the boundary walls, in the direction of the four cardinal points. The walls of this city are the only ones in England that are perfect in their entire circuit of two miles, though the gateways have all been rebuilt within the last hundred years. On the departure of the Roman soldiery, England reverted to the Britons, who appeared to have been helpless, so long had they relied upon their late conquerors for protection. From them Chester was taken by Ethelfrith, King of Northumbria, who defeated them under the King of Powysland in 607. The Britons, however, regained possession and maintained it till 828, when Egbert, who was then the sole monarch of England, annexed it to his possessions. The Saxons, during their occupation of the city, named it Legancæster and Legecester.
The Danes, in the ninth century, caused severe damages. On their retreat Ethelfreda, Countess of Mercia, repaired the walls. On her death the Britons once more became the city’s masters, but were driven out again by Edward the Elder. Athelstan, it is said, revived its mint. About the year 972 Edgar assembled a naval force on the river Dee. To demonstrate his supremacy he caused himself to be rowed by eight tributary kings from his palace on the south bank of the river to the Convent Church of St. John’s. To increase the desired effect, we are told that he took the helm,—the symbol of government.
On the division of England, in 1016, between Canute and Edmund Ironside, Canute gained possession of Mercia, in which were included Chester and Northumbria. Chester remained as a city of Mercia, governed by its earl, till the Norman Conquest. William then bestowed it with the earldom on his nephew Hugh Lupus. He was, in view of the proximity of Wales, invested with sovereign or palatine authority over the tract of country now represented by the county of Cheshire and the coast-line of Flintshire as far as Rhuddlan. Chester was made the seat of his government.
At that time it is described in “Doomsday Book” as Cestre, and as possessing four hundred and thirty-one houses within its walls. For over two centuries after the Conquest this city formed an important military station for the defence of the English border against the Welsh. The Norman Earl Ranulph I. granted the first charter, though its purport proves that Chester already enjoyed certain municipal rights. On account of its garrison it was frequently visited by reigning monarchs.
Chester was captured by the Earl of Derby, who held it for the Crown during the war between Henry III. and the barons. The contest was ended with the defeat of the barons at the battle of Evesham, close to Worcester. Here, in 1300, it was that the Welsh chieftains paid homage to the first English Prince of Wales, the infant son of Edward I.
Richard II., by Act of Parliament, erected the earldom of Chester into a principality to be held only by the eldest son of the King. This was rescinded in the next reign. In fact, Richard II. was made captive by Henry of Lancaster, and was imprisoned in a tower over the gateway of the Castle. The city suffered greatly during the Wars of the Roses. It was visited by Queen Margaret of Anjou, the wife of Henry VI. This queen played a prominent part with regard to the claim to the English throne. She was daughter to Réné, who was a relation of the King of France. He was titular king of Sicily, but without territories. Though Margaret brought to Henry a rich dower, he was persuaded to consent to the deduction of a large portion of Maine and Anjou to her father Réné. During the Duke of Gloucester’s life, who had strongly opposed the royal marriage, Margaret and her coadjutor, the Duke of Suffolk, had not dared to carry into effect the agreement they had extracted from Henry. The Duke of York, who was regent in France, through his integrity, was also a serious obstacle. She and Suffolk had him recalled, and the regency given to Beaufort, Duke of Somerset, nephew to Cardinal Beaufort. York felt injured, and took revenge by asserting his claim to the Crown.
By his father he was descended from Edward III.’s fourth son. From his mother, the last of the Mortimers, he inherited that family’s claim from Lionel, the second son of the same king. On the other hand, John of Gaunt, from whom Henry VI. was descended, was Edward’s third son. Thus York, through his mother, had a prior claim. These rival claims caused confusion and tumult throughout England. In the meantime the English possessions in France were lost one after the other, till in 1451 only Calais remained. The misgovernment of the regency in France under Somerset contrasted most unfavourably with that of York.
In these troublous times England looked towards York as the only one to be trusted, who then became Protector during the King’s mental weakness. He imprisoned the Duke of Somerset. The latter as soon as he was free assembled an army, and was killed at the battle of St. Albans, the first War of the Roses. His followers, the Lancastrians, were defeated by the Duke of York, and the King made prisoner. Eventually York declared himself. By Act of Parliament he and his heirs were constituted successors to the throne of England after the death of Henry VI. Margaret, however, defeated the Yorkists in battle, in which York was slain. He left behind him three sons,—Edward, George, and Richard,—the first of whom later on deposed Henry VI. and became Edward IV. We have ventured to give this brief sketch of the origin of these rival claims, in that most of the cathedral cities were affected by the fortunes or misfortunes of their favoured party.
Chester, in the years 1507, 1517, and 1550, suffered from a terrible visitation of the sweating sickness. From 1602 to 1605 the plague made it necessary to suspend all the city fairs, and to hold the assizes at Nantwich. This epidemic occurred again with great loss of life to the inhabitants, between 1647-48. During the Civil War this city of Chester endured great sacrifices for its loyalty to Charles I.
The King came there in 1642, when the citizens gave him great pecuniary assistance. Not till after a memorable siege, lasting from 1643 to 1646, did the citizens agree to surrender. The garrison were allowed to march out with all the honours of war, the safety of the persons and property of the citizens with liberty of trade were secured, and the sanctity of the sacred buildings and their title-deeds preserved.
Sir Charles Booth, in 1659, with the aid of the citizens, overcame the garrison of Charles II., then an exile, but was afterwards defeated by Lambert, Cromwell’s general.
The presence of the Duke of Monmouth, in 1683, stirred the populace to a tumult. Amongst other excesses the mob spent its fury in forcing the cathedral doors, breaking the painted glass, destroying the font, and other regrettable damage to this building. In 1688 the city was taken by the Roman Catholic lords, Molyneux and Ashton, for James II., who, after all, rendered further efforts useless by his abdication. Under William III. Chester was included in the six cities for the residence of an assay master, and was permitted to issue silver coinage. The last important military event that took place in this city was in the Rebellion of 1745, when it was fortified against the Pretender.
In architecture the great characteristic is the quaint way the houses have been built. The streets have been cut out of the rock below the general surface of the land. The houses appear to have been built into the rock, or rather to have been piled up against it. The shops are level with the streets, and over them runs a balustraded gallery. Steps at certain intervals lead the way down into the streets. These galleries are called by the inhabitants “The Rows.” These Rows are houses with shops. Overhanging the shops, like the eaves of a house, are the upper stories, to which additional flights of steps give access.
Two explanations are given for this unusual construction of houses: one, that the Rows, or promenades, are the remnants of the ancient vestibules of the Roman houses; the other that they were probably originated to afford ready defence against the sudden raids of the Welsh. The latter appears the more likely. The Rows, from their position to the streets, would afford the besieged greater facilities of shelter and attack.
In Bridge Street and Eastgate Street the Rows are made pleasant promenades. Though many of the houses have been rebuilt, they still retain the old character. In addition to these interesting buildings there was the castle built by the Conqueror, of which there remains only a large square tower, called “Julius Agricola’s Tower.” The front has been entirely renewed. This tower served probably as a place of confinement of the Earl of Derby. Here were imprisoned Richard II. and Margaret, Countess of Richmond. Just shortly before the Revolution James II. heard Mass in the second chamber.
Though the Cathedral has been left to the last, its history is no less interesting than the other features of Chester. The Cathedral was originally the church attached to the convent of St. Werburgh, under which name its ecclesiastical site is mentioned in “Doomsday Book.” It was first dedicated to St. Peter and St. Paul, but Ethelfrida afterwards transferred their patronage to that of the Saxon saint, Walmgha, the daughter of Wulphen, King of Mercia. Besides this princess the great benefactors were Leofric, Earl of Mercia, and Hugh Lupus, who substituted Benedictine monks for secular canons.
On the dissolution of the abbey, in lieu of the abbot and monks, a dean, prebendaries, and minor canons were appointed, the last abbot being made dean. Here it is as well to remember that a church was called an abbey, whatever its former denomination might have been, if an abbot became its head. In much the same way the name “minster” is derived from a monastery, and cathedral is due to the fact that the bishop had his cathedra, or throne, placed in the sacred building for his own use. At the dissolution the Cathedral of Chester was dedicated to “Christ and the Blessed Virgin.” Though there are some interesting remains of the abbey, the present building was built in the reigns of Henry VII. and Henry VIII. The diocese of Chester dates at the period of the kingdom of Mercia. It was afterwards incorporated with that of Lichfield, but in 1075, Peter, Bishop of Lichfield restored the See to Chester. His successor, however, removed it for the second time to Lichfield. Henry VIII., in 1541, created six new sees, in which he included Chester. With a portion of the possessions of the Abbey of St. Werburgh, which was dissolved, he endowed the new see. The first bishop after the dissolution was John Bird. In 1752 the palace of the bishop was rebuilt by Bishop Keene.
The cathedral site is on the eastern side of Northgate Street. Excepting the western end, it presents the appearance of a heavy, irregular pile, when viewed externally. The interior is very impressive, and contains portions in the Norman, and in the Early and Decorated styles of English architecture. It possesses a clerestory in the Later style. Some chapels in the Early English style, are to the east of the north transept. The south transept, separated from the Cathedral by a wooden screen, forms the parish church of St. Oswald. The style of the Bishop’s throne, sometimes known as St. Werburgh’s Shrine, belongs to the Early period of the fourteenth century. In the eastern walk of the cloister stands the Chapter House, of Early English style, built by Earl Randulph the First. It served as the burial-place of the earls of the original Norman line, except Richard, who perished by shipwreck.
The sacred edifice has from time to time undergone extensive reparations.
As a port Chester was at one time most important, but through the silting up of the Channel in the fifteenth century, it lost a considerable amount of its shipping trade. In spite of the Channel being deepened in 1824, its shipping prosperity cannot be said to have advanced hand in hand with the progress of the city, though it possibly may be greater than it was in the fifteenth century.
The great Chester Canal comes from Nantwich, passes through Chester, and merges into the Ellesmere Canal, which winds up northwards to the river Mersey. Thus the city is connected with Liverpool.
As the crow flies, the country traversed from London to Chester is most interesting. The track passes through the counties of Middlesex, Buckinghamshire, Northamptonshire, Warwickshire, with its famous towns, Stratford-on-Avon, the birthplace of Shakespeare, and Coventry, through Staffordshire, famous for its beautiful old china and its Cathedral at Lichfield, and finally into Cheshire, the county containing Chester and Northwich.
Among the many eminent men born at Chester was Randolph Caldecott, in 1846. He is handed down to posterity as the famous illustrator of the works of Washington Irving. But the achievement that gained him the greatest acclame was a series of coloured books for children. They began in 1878 with “John Gilpin” and “The House that Jack Built,” and ended the year before his death, in 1886, with the “Elegy on Madame Blaize” and “The Great Panjandrum Himself.” In the crypt of St. Paul’s, London, his memory is perpetuated through the great artistic expression of a brother artist, Alfred Gilbert, R. A.
Thus, in this brief sketch, an attempt has been made to give a categorical history of one of England’s most ancient cities from its earliest occupation by the British Cornavii, and its subsequent events down to the royal visit in 1869 by the then Prince of Wales, now our King Edward VII., on which occasion he opened the new townhall. It would require far greater space to record every feature of interest in connection with Chester than can be allotted within the present limitations. To the antiquarian Chester furnishes a most interesting and absorbing study, and will in all likelihood continue to do so for many years to come yet.
To those interested in horse-racing the fine race-course attracts annually a great concourse to Chester.
IN the illustration is seen to great advantage the temporal and spiritual power of Rochester: the State, as represented by the Norman keep; the Church, as symbolised by the cathedral. Ever since Christianity came to England, these two mighty levers of power have marched, if not always hand in hand, more or less in accord. Though the two have frequently struggled for supremacy, yet their feuds have done more towards the enlightenment of the people than any harmonious concert could have effected. In marked contrast to mediæval times the State and Church of the present day formulate and carry out the will of the people. They are the channels of purpose as determined by the nation. Great as the power of the Church still is, it has nevertheless lost that tremendous authority it once wielded under the popes.
Henry II. set up a strenuous opposition, whilst Henry VIII. dealt it a crushing blow. The dissolution of the monasteries was a terrible check to Roman Catholicism in England, as well as Luther’s reforms in Germany. Yet in spite of all this the Church of Rome has more adherents in Europe than any other religion. The menace to the Church of England lies in the lack of absolute obedience to the spiritual head, and the many different sects. The Church of Rome exacts absolute obedience and faith, and by these means is steadily increasing its influence. The Roman Catholic Cathedral recently erected in London is a convincing proof of the untiring energy of the followers of that wonderful religion. It is also curious to notice that the Latin races are the staunchest supporters of the Papacy.
As its name implies, Rochester was a Roman camp. This place formed one of the stipendiary towns of this Latin race, and was called “Durobrivae.” Not much information has been preserved concerning their occupation of the town. That it was important, and served as a military basis, is clearly demonstrated by the great Roman Watling Street, which passes through the city, and which bears evidence to their great engineering skill.
The great Roman streets were at that time the chief and only means of quick communication from one camp to another. To read the account of the wonderful system of roads organised by Darius the Persian is as interesting to follow as any modern fiction. He realised that quick communication with the outlying quarters of his possessions meant increased power and security. Along the roads, at proper distances, were blockhouses guarded by soldiers. The messenger on horseback drew rein at each of these wayside places to take refreshment and get a remount, or to hand over the dispatches to a fresh messenger.
In much the same way the Romans constructed their roads for their postmen, and, no doubt, to serve as their first line of defence if a retreat should be necessary. We can almost conjure up the sight of a mounted bearer of important dispatches racing along. Suddenly the horse, almost thrown on to his haunches, is pulled up in front of one of these guardhouses dotted at regular intervals along the great road. A hasty meal is snatched, a fresh horse mounted, and off again, with a clatter and a whirlpool of dust, hurries the messenger, as if a kingdom depended upon his quick dispatch. We cannot attach too much importance to this method of communication, if we remember that it is only within the last two centuries or so that the semaphore came into existence. When first introduced, this medium of conveying rapidly a message by the waving of a wooden arm up and down on a post, which was generally planted on a commanding site, was considered a wonderful invention. Even at sea it was left to Admiral Rodney to construct an efficient code of signals. Of course the most primitive method was the lighting of beacons in times of great danger.
Besides Watling Street, the city of Rochester is known to have been defended by walls built in the direction of the cardinal points, according to the Roman custom. They extended for half a mile from east to west, and close upon a quarter of a mile from north to south. After the Romans had departed, this place came into the possession of the Saxons. They renamed it “Hrove Ceaster,” which in process of time became contracted to Rochester.
During the early Saxon period Ethelbert, King of Kent, through the influence of his queen and the preaching of St. Augustine, who had just arrived, became a convert to Christianity. By this king, as we have seen, Canterbury Cathedral was richly endowed. To help carry out the papal instructions given to Augustine, Ethelbert in 600 founded a church in Rochester. By erecting this into a see, he, at the same time, laid the foundation of the future prosperity of the city. The building was dedicated to St. Andrew. A monastery for secular priests was also established, over whom was appointed for their bishop, Justus, who had accompanied St. Augustine and his forty monks into Britain.
This cathedral suffered at many times, in common with the city, from several incursions of the Danes. The city, more especially in 676, was sacked and almost destroyed by Etheldred, the King of Mercia, whilst in 839 the Danes landed at Romney, defeated the troops sent to oppose them, and massacred most of the inhabitants. Again, in 885, they sailed up the Medway under the leadership of Hasting, and laid siege to Rochester. Fortunately for the city it was rescued by the timely assistance of Alfred. Three mints established by Athelstan in 930, two for himself and one for the bishop, and the fact of the city being then recognised as one of the chief ports of England, show with what rapidity it had regained prosperity. This peaceful state was rudely awakened, however, in 999. The Danes reappeared in the Medway, before whom the terror-stricken inhabitants fled and abandoned the city to their fury. At the Conquest, Rochester was given by William to his half-brother, Odo, Bishop of Bayeux, who was also created Earl of Kent. In the reign of William Rufus he was implicated in a conspiracy to dethrone Rufus in favour of Robert Duke of Normandy. Thereby his possessions reverted to the Crown. In this Rochester suffered. In 1130 Henry I. attended at the consecration of the church of St. Andrew by Lanfranc. During the ceremony a fire broke out. The city was almost reduced to ashes.
It was again visited, seven years later, by fire, from which it had hardly recovered when a third conflagration occurred and left traces of devastation for ages. In 1141, Robert Earl of Gloucester was placed in the Castle. He was the chief general and counsellor of Matilda, and had been captured prisoner at Winchester after having effected the Queen’s escape. He was eventually exchanged for King Stephen. In 1215 the barons seized and held the Castle against King John, who gained it. Henry III. repaired the Castle.
The Castle was again, in 1254, successfully defended for the King by Edward Earl Warren, against Simon de Montford and the barons. In the reign of Richard II. the insurrectionists under Wat Tyler released one of their comrades imprisoned in the Castle.
Rochester has been at different times visited by reigning princes. Henry VIII., with Emperor Charles V., came there in 1521, whilst in 1573 Queen Elizabeth honoured it with her presence. Charles II., on his restoration, passed through the city en route from the Continent to London. In fact Rochester, being also a port, was a convenient place for James II. to embark secretly on board of a trading-vessel lying in the Medway, by which he was conveyed to France.
This Norman castle, which has played such an important part in the history of the city, deserves some notice. Its extensive remains, situated on a commanding site, overlook the right bank of the river. The Castle is supposed to have been built by Gundulph, when Bishop of Rochester, in the latter part of the eleventh century. It preceded by a few years the building of the Cathedral by the same prelate. The architecture of this castle is a striking example of the simplicity of plans generally employed by the Normans. By preference the castle was a rectangular keep in form. The sides varied from twenty-five to a hundred feet in length, and equally so in height. At the corners the walls advanced so as to form square towers, the faces of which were usually relieved by flat pilaster-like buttresses. The walls at the base measure sometimes as much as thirty feet in thickness, and diminish to as much as ten feet at the summit.
The internal arrangements consisted of a store-room, from which a narrow staircase, made into the thickness of the walls, gave access to the rooms of the garrison and those of the owners above, wood being employed for the floor and roof. A well was always dug. The entire building was surrounded by a deep moat filled, if possible, with water. The entrance was small, and was defended by a draw-bridge and portcullis. It was on the thickness of their walls and the moat that the Normans chiefly relied for their impregnability. They seldom departed from this simple form of architecture. Their defence was rarely constructed on a series of fortifications. Local advantages and a lofty site were invariably the Norman idea of a safe stronghold.
Great interest is attached to the Cathedral of Rochester. Its see is the smallest in the kingdom and the most ancient after Canterbury. The two were established, as we have seen, within a few years of each other, under the auspices of St. Augustine and King Ethelbert of Kent.
The present cathedral dates from the commencement of the twelfth century, when it was built by Gundulph. If what we are told about this structure be correct, its importance cannot be too greatly enhanced, for it is claimed that its architecture, though much altered and repaired since, is in the main a copy of Canterbury Cathedral at that time. Thus, in describing the plan of the one in Rochester, a general idea can be gained about the other at Canterbury.
Gundulph’s contribution is a spacious and venerable building in the form of a cross, with a central tower surmounted by a spire. The Norman style forms the basis of the architecture, to which the Later English style was added chiefly in the many windows of the nave and other parts of the church. The west front was entirely restored between 1888 and 1889, the Norman style being strictly adhered to. The doorway is a most decorative bit of Norman workmanship. Let into the clustered columns on either side there is, on the right, an effigy of Queen Maud, and on the left another of Henry I. The door is covered with a rich mass of geometrical design in metal.
The crypt, invariably a great feature in a cathedral, is partly the work of Gundulph; that is, the western portion is. The eastern part consists of cylindrical and octagonal shafts with a light vaulting springing from them, and belongs to the same period as the superstructure of the thirteenth century.
There are several chapels, a finely groined roof, and ancient tombs, which all lend interest to this fine cathedral.
The red-veined marble statue of Walter de Merton cannot fail to attract attention. He was the founder of the great scholastic college at Oxford called Merton College. Though small in size, the entrée to it demands high classical attainments.
With regard to commerce, Rochester has a favourable position on the river Medway, in the creeks and branches of which are the oyster fisheries. The Corporation, assisted by a jury of free dredgers, hold a Court of Admiralty, in which they make regulations for the opening, stocking, and closing of the oyster beds.
In conclusion, we cannot help saying that Kent should be a proud county, possessing, as it does, the two most ancient sees in the kingdom, the dioceses of which are separated only by the Medway.