Rochester

ii i i i - ■ s Hi JB| 'J a 2 O 300 (0 1 1 1 # -* 1 _ < -M _£ W o> -° >£> 3 j -o "OS < 8 • n 1 "g ^ C 4J 3 ° <0 W 1 H 5 J) ^ ^ x: <0 o X 0) o CQ ft, ft; o ; § o O *» 5 •£ « 1 I 2 Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2015 https://archive.org/details/rochesterOOpear 43, queen victoria street, ec. Brighton : 129, north street New York : E. & J. B. YOUNG & CO. ]39r DIOCESAN HISTORIES ROCHESTER THE Rev. A. I. PEARMAN, M.A. PEMBROKE COLLEGE) OXFORD J LATE RECTOR OF MERSTH 7/777/ MAP PUBUSHED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE TRACT COMMITTEE LONDON SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE NORTHUMBERLAND AVENUE, W. C. 43, queen victoria street, ec. Brighton: 129, north street New York : E. & J. B. YOUNG & CO. 1897 Richard Clav & Sons, Limited, London & Bungay, PREFACE In the following pages I have recorded the chief facts relating to the diocese of Rochester. Most of them have been already published by one or another of the topographers in whom, from the days of Lambarde's Perambulation to those of the Archaologia Cdntiana, Kent has abounded beyond other counties. This little volume, however, contains something, though not so much as I had hoped, which cannot be found elsewhere. Frequent reference, it will be seen, is made in it to the Anglla Sacra and the Registrum Roffense. The former consists of a series of biographies and chronicles written in Latin, chiefly by monks, and printed, with notes, by Henry Wharton, Librarian at Lambeth Palace from 1688 to 1694. The latter is a collection of charters, bulls, and memoranda, in Latin, Anglo-Saxon, and English, " necessary for illustrating the ecclesiastical history and antiquities of the diocese and cathedral church of Rochester," compiled by John Thorpe, a well- known antiquary of the last century. In these books, embedded in a mass of mediaeval PREFACE verbiage, are many interesting facts and not a few lifelike dialogues. Some of them I have tried to reproduce in an English form. My thanks are due to the Dean and Chapter of Rochester for access to the Cathedral Library ; to G. H. Knight, Esq. for allowing me freely to inspect the documents in the Diocesan Registry ; and to Archdeacon Cheetham for many useful hints during the prosecution of my task. A. I. P. ERRATA Page 91, third line from bottom, for of read or Page 239, ninth line from bottom, for continence read con- tinuance Page 253. Omit the last paragraph. The remarks therein made apply not to the First Prayer Book of Edward VI. but to a Communion Office put forth as a temporary measure in 1548. ROCHESTER INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER The diocese of Rochester is made up at present of parts of the two counties of Kent and Surrey, and therefore, in the words of the late Bishop Thorold, to whom it owes so much, " has many points of interest, combining, as it docs, the lovely chalk hills of Surrey with the cherry-orchards and hop-gardens of Kent ; Woolwich Arsenal and Chatham Dockyard ; Kew Gardens and Greenwich Hospital ; Ham House and Cobham Hall; Rochester and Cooling Castles; the Thames and the Medway ; the Collegiate Church of St. Saviour's, Southwark, Gundulph's Cathedral, and locally, though not ecclesiastically, the grey towers and august traditions of Lambeth." {Pastoral Letter, 1878, p. 9.) " Taking the four points of the compass, Grayne at the extreme cast of the diocese looks out on the Nore and the German Ocean ; Long Ditton, at the west, is washed by the Thames, but not the Thames 6 ROCHESTER of Rotherhithe or Battersea ; Felbridge, on the south, is on the edge of Chichester diocese; St. Olave's Tower, with its cheery flag drooping over the crowded river, bounds our territory on the north. What separate worlds are to be found within those four corners of squalid existence, feverish energy, splendid opulence, delicious rural life!" {Charge, 1881, pp. 22, 23.) The area thus denned may be compared in shape to the figure 8, " with an island floating in space." " Two tracts of land quite separate from one another, without a single bond of common interest, municipal, geographical, or historic, called one diocese"— a diocese " which has in some ways had more curious vicissitudes of change than any in England; which has now the high and sacred privilege of occupying, in the Church's battle array against ignorance and wrong, a foremost place of stress and toil and- difficulty, in such areas of anxious and perplexing poverty as surround us to-day." {Charge of Bishop Davidson, 1894.) It consists of what, until the last Reform Bill, were the eastern and middle parlia- mentary divisions of Surrey, except the parishes of Newdigate and Thames Ditton, with the Kent portion of the old diocese south of the Thames, and is divided into three archdeaconries — Rochester, Southwark, and Kingston-upon-Thames; and nine- teen deaneries, viz. Rochester, Cobham, Gravesend, Woolwich, Lewisham, Greenwich, Newington, South- wark, Lambeth, Kennington, Camberwell, Clapham, Battersea, Barnes, Kingston, Streatham, Beddington, Godstone, and Reigate, comprising 291 parishes ROCHESTER with a population at the census of 1891 of 1,938,787 souls. The diocese of Rochester, therefore, is, after London and Manchester, the most populous in the kingdom, and with its growing needs and ever- increasing duties more than enough to task to the utmost the mental and physical powers of the bishop, even with the indispensable aid of a suffragan. But it was not always so. For centuries the area and the population were alike small, the diocese consisting of the deaneries of Dartford, Mailing, Rochester, and Shoreham in Kent, and that of Fordham in the counties of Suffolk and Cambridge. The deanery of Shoreham, however, although within the diocese, was a " peculiar " of the Archbishop of Canterbury, so that the total number of parishes under the bishop's jurisdiction was but 99, and it was by far the smallest diocese in England. This was one of its three distinguishing features ; a second being that, unlike Chichester, Salisbury, Exeter, Norwich and Lincoln, the seat of the bishoprick has not been changed since the foundation ; and a third that its prelates stood for centuries in an exceptional position to the Archbishops of Canterbury, by whom they were originally nominated, of whom they long- held their temporalities, and on whose behalf they continually discharged episcopal duties, not in courtesy, but of obligation. To trace the history of the diocese from the beginning, and to show how it became what it now is, is the object of the following pages. The first diocese of the English Church, as dis- ROCHESTER tinguished from the British, was, as every one knows, that of Canterbury. The second was founded at Rochester, situated upon the great military road which, fed by the three chief ports, Dover, Richborough and Lymne, led in a straight line to London, and thence to the north of Britain,— "a very remarkable place, in some respects the most remarkable place in the south of England, which in each of its triple capacities of Fortress, Cathedral, and City, claims a high antiquity.' Its ecclesiastical history," as we shall find, "commences with Augustine and ^Ethelbyrht, the founders of its see, over which Justus, the friend of Augustine, was the first to preside, and to the endowments of which a long succession of Kentish and Mercian princes contributed. Its secular history, though often obscure, ascends to a yet more remote period, and its material evidences are still to be read in the form of works either in earth or masonry, showing Roman, Saxon, Danish, and Norman occupations." (Clark, Medieval Military Architecture, vol. ii., p. 405.) The foundation of the see is thus related by Bede : " In the year of our Lord's Incarnation 604, Augus- tine, Archbishop of Britain, ordained two bishops, viz. Mellitus and Justus ; Mellitus to preach to' the province of the East Saxons, who are divided from Kent by the river Thames and border on the Eastern Sea. Their metropolis is the city of London, which is situated on the bank of the aforesaid river, and is the mart of many nations resorting to it by sea and land. At that time, Saberct, nephew to .Edilberct through his sister Ricula, reigned over this nation, though he was under subjection to ^dilberct, who had command ROCHESTER 9 over all the nations of the Angles as far as the river Humber. But when this province also received the word of truth by the preaching of Mellitus, King yEdilberct built the church of Paul the Apostle, in the city of London, in which he and his successors should have their episcopal see. As for Justus, Augustine ordained him Bishop in Kent, in the city of Dora- brevum j which the nation of the Angles named Hrofaescaestaer, from one who was formerly the chief man of it, called Hrof. It is almost twenty-four miles distant from the city of Doruvernum (Canterbury) to the westward, and contains a church dedicated to St. Andrew the Apostle. King /Edilberct, who built it, bestowed many gifts on the bishops of both those churches, as well as on that of Doruvernum, adding lands and possessions for the use of those who were with the bishops.'' {Ecclesiastical History, book II., chap, iii., Stevenson's edition.) We may, perhaps, regard as an independent state- ment the entry in the Saxon Chronicle, which runs as follows — "a.d. 604. This year Augustine consecrated two bishops, Mellitus and Justus. And ^Ethelberht gave Mellitus a bishop's see in London, and to Justus he gave Rochester." It may seem at first sight extraordinary that a second bishop's see should have been founded at this early period at so short a distance from Canter- bury. The reason, no doubt, was that Rochester was the capital of a subordinate kingdom. Among the Saxons the conversion of the king was generally followed by the establishment of a see, and we find a bishoprick at first co-extensive with a kingdom. ROCHESTER The first bishops' sees south of the Humber usually correspond with the earliest known kingdoms, as Selsey to the South Saxons, Winchester to the West Saxons, Canterbury and Rochester to East and West Kent. The distinction between " East and West Kentings " appears to have been maintained until the downfall of the Saxon monarchy. Kings of portions of Kent certainly reigned together at some periods. Sigeward calls himself "King of half Kent"; and Mr. Kemble suggests that a third Kentish state existed, for at a somewhat later time we find a duchy of the Merscware, or inhabitants of Romney Marsh. Mr. Furley, how- ever, adds, after making in substance the foregoing remarks : " I can come to no other conclusion than that the division between East and West Kent was originally purely ecclesiastical, and that the see of Rochester was carved out from the western division of the kingdom by St. Augustine with the sanction of King Ethelbert. This theory is supported by the fact that until a very recent period the whole of the little diocese of Rochester was situate in West Kent. That such an ecclesiastical was not an equal division of the county, but differed from the civil division published by Kilburne in 1659, and still recognized, is not surprising. The possessions of the Metropolitan were naturally the most important and extensive, and they spread over the still unreclaimed forest and other portions of the kingdom of Kent now consti- tuting parts of the western division ; and where these possessions existed there he would exercise juris- diction. In addition to this, the patronage of the see of Rochester was originally wholly annexed to the ROCHESTER see of Canterbury." (Furley's Weald of Kent, vol. i., pp. in, 112.) Mr. Furley also suggests that the unusual course of creating two sees in one kingdom probably gave rise to the old proverb, " Kent and Christendom," meaning not that Kent was distinct from Christendom, but that it was famous as Kent and famous as Christendom. Perhaps here a word may be fitly said as to the name of the diocese ; taken, of course, from that of the cathedral city. There can be little, if any, doubt that the place we call " Rochester " was known to the Romans as Durobrevis or Durobrivse. The termination " Chester," the shape of the area con- tained within the walls, the walls themselves, bear testimony to Roman occupation. In the Peutin- gerian table the place is described as "Roibis," a fact which seems to show that the earlier form had undergone a change before the Romans left our island. We find in the Saxon charters "The castle of Hrobi," " in civitate Hrofi," " in civitate Hrofi- brevi," " Hrofescresler." Whence came the present form ? There are three theories on the subject which seem entitled to consideration. The first, that of Bede, has hitherto been more generally ac- cepted. He says (referring to the former part of the word, for that the latter represents " castrum " or "castra" there can be no question), that the city derived its name from one Hrof, who was the chief man in it. In making this assertion he may be recording the tradition current in his day, or he may be speaking from personal knowledge, as of something that had lately happened ; for we are ROCHESTER nowhere told when the new name was given, or, like many a later antiquary, he may be suggesting what commended itself to his own mind as the probable derivation, without any historical basis on which to found his conjecture. We know nothing of Hrof, apart from Bede's statement, and there are apparently philological difficulties in the way of our accepting the explanation he gives. But the fact remains that he makes a positive assertion, and makes it when Anglo-Saxon was a living language, when its possi- bilities of combination were matter not of theory but of daily experience. The second view, which has lately been advocated by Mr. Livett in Archccologia Cantiana (vol. xxi.), may be distinguished as that of Camden, who says, " To me it seems to retain within itself something of that former name Durobrovis " (Britannia, p. 235, edition 1607). Nor is it very difficult, as Mr. Livett points out, to conceive the stages by which the present form may have been gradually reached : Durobrivis-cester, D'robiscester, Hrobiscester, Hrofescester. Camden considers Duro- brovis to be the equivalent of Durobryf, which he explains to mean " swift waters," with a reference, of course, to the rapid stream of the Medway at the spot on which Rochester stands. The Latin name, no doubt, was intended to represent the Celtic. What that Celtic name was, and what it signified, is another question. For the third opinion, in favour of which high authority might be quoted, is, that while Camden is right in connecting the "Ro" in "Rochester" with " Durobrivis," he is wrong in the meaning he assigns to that word. Brevis, or breva, ROCHESTER 13 is said to be Celtic for "bridge," and dnr-o for "stronghold," so that "the castle of the stronghold by the bridge," rather than "the castle by the swift waters," or " the castle of Hrof" is, in this view, the signification of the term with which we are so familiar as designating our city and diocese.1 1 "It should be noticed that pont, the Welsh word for a bridge, is derived from the Latin, probably through the monks, who were great bridge builders. Nevertheless, it has been thought that the art of bridge-building was known at a very early period to the Celtic nations (cf. Drochct in Place Names, meaning 'bridge')) and was subsequently lost. In the most purely Celtic parts of Spain and France, a number of the names of riverain cities terminate in briva, which, in the opinion of many Celtic scholars, must have meant a bridge. They think it is an ancient Aryan word, older than the epoch of the separation of the Teutonic and Celtic stems, and which disappeared from the Celtic speech at the time when the art of bridge-building was lost. In Spain we have Turobriga, JBego- briga, and others, thirty-five in all." (Isaac Taylor, Words and Places.) The identification of briga and briva, it should be remarked, is by no means universally accepted. "Duro, so often met with in Celtic names of places in Britain and Gaul, appears to mean door, gate, or porch, and to be of the same origin as the Welsh dor and dnos, Irish dorus, a door. But though the etymology of duro in Celtic names is tolerably clear, it is not very evident what it exactly meant ; did it refer mostly to the gates or entrances of strongholds, or to those of temples? Briv meant abridge." (Celtic Britain, by J. Rhys, p. 296.) With our present knowledge there is difficulty in believing that the Celtic dwellers in Britain were capable of constructing a bridge across such a stream as the Mcdway is at Rochester, though the discoveries al Aylcsford prove that they had made a considerable advance in the arts of civilization. There is evidence that the word "bridge" was applied to a landing- stage, and did not always mean what we understand by it. It may be noted that as the Saxon scribes have been thought 14 ROCHESTER At this place, formerly occupied by the Romans, and presumably by the Britons, always, from its position, of importance in a military point of view, /Ethelbyrht founded an establishment of secular canons, and built a stone church as the seat of the new bishoprick. The church was dedicated to Saint Andrew the Apostle; out of respect, we may well believe, to the great monastery of St. Andrew on the Caslian Hill, to which Augustine and his companions had belonged previous to their English mission. And the dedication was not inappropriate. For the first called Apostle, who himself evinced a missionary spirit by " first finding his own brother Simon and bringing him to Jesus," was no unsuitable patron of the first mission of the English Church. ^Ethelbyrht's charter bears date 28th April, 604. In language which points to the personal character of the gift, as of property which was at his own disposal, he says, after addressing his son yEadbald, probably the sub- king and resident at Rochester, — " I give to thee, St. Andrew, and to thy church which is constituted in the city of Hrofibrevis, where Justus rules as bishop, a small quantity of my land, for the support of the servants of God, from the south gate west, and along the walls to north lane, to the street, and so east from the street to Doddingherne lane,1 and then to Broad to have made the first part of Reculver (Rcgulbium) into a personal name, Raculf (Raculfs Ceaster), so they might have made RofiVs-ceaster out of the Latin-Celtic original. 1 Dodding-hyrne means "nook of the Doddings," a corner of land in their occupation. It occurs in the dative case Doddinc-hyrnan {sic) in a Rochester charter printed at page 332 of Earle's Land-charters, date 761 — /Ethelbyrht II. Ex inf. ROCHESTER J5 Gate." It is also recorded that he gave " Priest- field, and land where the castle is, and four acres of meadow beyond the wall, and a marsh on the north side, which lies between two ditches called Pirifliet and Sipfliet ; also all the land on which the church stands, and the manor of Wouldham," some of which remain at this day, after the lapse of almost thirteen centuries, in the possession of the Dean and Chapter of Rochester. {Registrum Roffense, pp. 13, 116; Text us Roffensis, fol. 119.) Seventy years later, when the Mercians invaded Kent, the city was sacked and the church spoiled ; but the fabric seems to have survived both this and later invasions, for no statement necessarily implying the contrary is to be found, nor is there any account of a re-building prior to that in Norman days. This view is confirmed by the fact that the graves of Paulinus and Ithamar, who had been buried within it, were known up to the close of the eleventh century, at which time Gundulf removed their relics into his new cathedral. There is every reason to believe that some of the foundations of this, one of the earliest stone churches built in our country, were discovered in the autumn of 1888, during the under-pinning of the west front of the cathedral preparatory to its Professor Skeat. Mr. George Tayne draws attention to the fact that as Doddington and Eastling are neighbouring parishes in East Kent, so Dodding-hyine and CEslingham occur here at Rochester and Frindsbuiy in West Kent. There is a difficulty as to topographical names ending in "ing." In many cases they do not belong to patronymics but to some previously existing local name. i6 ROCHESTER restoration, and in the summer of 1894, when a trench was dug for the purpose of lowering a gas main along the middle of the road. "Running under and through the foundations of the early Norman west front, were found the foundations and walls of a building of far earlier date than the earliest of the Norman works. These older foundations underlie the northern half of the present west front, and run westward under the opposite strip of grave-yard. The discoveries made indicate a building terminating towards the east in an apse, the width of the apse- being almost as great as that of the building itself. The nave seems to have measured, in round figures, 42 feet by 28. The foundations of the west wall seemed to lie very nearly with the west side of the burial-ground. No signs of aisles, quasi-transepts, or porch were revealed. If a porch existed at the west end of the church its foundations must be under the road, and could only be discovered by excavation. The character of the masonry is what one would expect to see in work of that period, and the plan of the building could hardly belong to anything else than a church. It was doubtless reared by Saxon hands, though it shows some Roman influence, either traditional or direct. The materials probably came from destroyed Roman buildings," 1 of which traces have at various times been found in the immediate vicinity. Here, then, to the west of the existing edifice, and therefore nearer to the castle, stood for some five centuries the original Cathedral 1 From a paper in Arch. Cant., vols, xviii. and xxi., by Rev. G. M. Livett. ROCHESTER 17 Church of the diocese of Rochester. The whole of the little city, however, within the fortifications, and not merely the space now so called, was, I believe, regarded as "the Castle" previous to the Norman Conquest, or, to put it more correctly, the word castellum was employed, like "caester," to designate the city, a fact which would explain some of the expressions used in the Saxon charters. Bede, speaking of the synod of Hertford, says that " it was attended by Putta, Bishop of the Castle of the Kcntishmen, which is called Hrofesoestir." King Offa, in a charter of 789 to Bishop Weremund, mentions the "Church situated in the Castle of Hrofesceaster ; " and in that granted in the previous year states that he has given "six plough lands at Trottescliffe to the church of the Blessed Andrew the Apostle, and to the episcopality of the Castle which is called Hrofes- cester." These expressions lead to the conclusion that the term "castle," as applied to Rochester before the Norman period, must be understood in a wider sense than that in which it is commonly used. I am not aware that we have any information as to the spot on which the Saxon Bishops of Rochester lived. Mr. Clark thinks it probable that the mount at Boley Hill was thrown up for the purpose of pro- viding them with a strong residence, and such personal security as was found necessary at Sherborne ; but there is no proof that this was actually the case. Having thus discussed these preliminary matters, and as it were started the Diocese of Rochester on its way, we will, in the next chapter, throw such light as can be obtained on its condition in the Saxon period. CHAPTER II The first Bishop of Rochester, as we have seen, was Justus, who had accompanied Laurentius, Paulinus, Rufinianus, and Mellitus, when, in 601, they left Italy to join Augustine at Canterbury, with a supply not only of men for the conversion of England, but of "sacred vessels" also, and "vestments for the altars and priests," " ornaments for the churches," and, what were then esteemed of the highest value, "relics of the apostles and martyrs"; besides many books. Doubt- less some of these precious gifts reached Rochester when Justus arrived as bishop in 604, and with his canons took possession of the buildings reared for them by their royal patron. The work in West Kent was, of course, to a large extent of a missionary character, radiating from the city as its centre. During the life of iEthelbyrht, it appears to have prospered, but after his death, in 616, a reaction in favour of heathenism set in. Some persecution arose in Rochester, as in London, and Justus withdrew into Gaul. We are not sufficiently acquainted with the circumstances to be justified in pronouncing a decided opinion on his conduct, though we can scarcely avoid ROCHESTER 19 the impression that lie must have been somewhat deficient at this time in the courage and constancy befitting his position. In the following year, however, events took a favourable turn, and Justus was recalled to Rochester, where, until his advancement to the Archbishoprick of Canterbury in 624, he laboured with great success, if we may judge from the letter of Pope Boniface, given in Bede, eulogizing "the per- fection to which his work had attained," and his "most faithful management of the talents committed to him." On his removal to Canterbury, Justus con- secrated Romanus as his successor at Rochester. We know nothing more of this prelate, the second bishop, than what is told us by Bede (book II., chap, xx.), that " being sent to Pope Honorius by the Archbishop, as his legate, he was drowned in the waves of the Italian Sea." This accident is said to have occurred in 630. It had certainly happened before 633, when his successor was consecrated. One of the band, as we have already mentioned, who in 601 left Italy at the bidding of Gregory to assist Augustine, Paulinus, laboured for many years in the south of England ; and in 625, having been consecrated by Justus to be Bishop of the Northumbrians, accompanied yEthelburga, daughter of /Ethelbyrht, on her marriage with zEadwin, king of Northumbria, and succeeded in converting him with his leading chiefs to Christianity. The king- dom of yEadwin embraced the whole country from the Humber to the Clyde and the Forth, and traces of the work of Taulinus are to be found in many parts of this vast district. What he effected in those regions belongs rather to the history of the dioceses of York 20 ROCHESTER and Lincoln than to that of Rochester, with which we are immediately concerned. The Saxon Chronicle informs us that Paulinus, after the defeat and death of /Eadwin, and the consequent collapse of the mission, took /Ethelburga, ^Eadwin's widow, "and departed by ship to Kent, where ^adbald and Honorius," king and primate, "received him very honourably, and gave him bishop's see in Rochester, and he dwelt there till his end." Bede (book II., chap, xx.) adds that " he brought with him many rich vessels of King /Eadwin, among which were a large gold cross, and a golden chalice dedicated to the use of the altar, which are still preserved and shown in the church of Canterbury. At that time the church of Rochester had no bishop. . . and thereupon Paulinus, at the invitation of Archbishop Honorius and King /Eadbald, took upon him the charge of the same, and held it till he ascended up to heaven, with the glorious fruits of his labours ; and dying in the church he left there the pall which he had received from the Pope of Rome." In Kent his memory is preserved in the dedication of the parish churches of Crayford and Paul's Cray.1 He died ioth October, 644. In 1087 he was canonized, and his remains, removed from the original cathedral in which he was buried, and placed in a silver shrine at the eastern end of the new edifice, long continued the chief object of attraction in Gun- 1 In two Fines, 7 Edward II., this parish is spoken of as Paulynescraye. It is mentioned as Cicypaulin in the taxation of Pope Nicholas IV., 1291, and in the assessment by Henry VIII. is called Powle's Cray, alias Paul's Cray, with the dedication of St. Paulinus. ROCHESTER dulf's fabric. A rhyming Latin inscription was still to be read on his tomb in Weever's time (1631) : — "Siste gradum clama qui perlegis hoc Epigramma Paulinum ploia, qvicm substraxit brevis hora Nobis per funus : de praesulibus fuit unus Pmdens, vcridicus, constans, et firmus amicus, Anni sunt nati Domini super astra regentis, Quadraginla dati quatuor cum sex quoquc ccnlis." The personal appearance of Paulinus is thus described by Bede from the information of an old man who had been baptized by him : " He was tall of stature, a little stooping, his hair black, his visage meagre, his nose very slender and aquiline, his aspect both venerable and majestic." (Book II., chap, xvi.) The successor of Paulinus, Ithamar, deserves mention, if for no other reason, as being the first Englishman raised to the episcopate, and so a living -proof of the reality of the work carried on by Augustine and his companions. He sprang from a Kentish family, and is expressly said to have equalled his predecessors in learning as well as in piety. His death occurred in 655. He was buried in the nave of his cathedral, but translated by Gundulf to an honourable position in the new building, opposite the shrine of St. Paulinus, where at a later period his tomb was decorated by Bishop John. " Many miracles are said to be wrought by this religious Ithamar, and great concourse of people frequented the place of his burial, which was at the first in the body of the church, but afterwards his reliques were removed by Bishop Gundulf and enshrined, and after him by John Bishop of this church : who by his prayers at his shrine was 22 ROCHESTER cured of a grievous paine in his eyes. For these and many other signs and tokens of his sanctitie hee was canonized, and the fourth of the ides of June solemnized to his memory." (Weever, Funeral Monu- ments, p. 311.) Himself a native, there was a fitness in his consecrating the first native archbishop, Deus- dedit, which he did at Canterbury, 26th March, 655 Damian, his successor, is remarkable as being a South Saxon, and so the "first-fruits to Christ" of a part of the country (Sussex) not yet generally in- fluenced by the Gospel. In 664 the dreadful disease called the Yellow Pest, on account of the ghastly hue of its victims' bodies, visited our shores, and carried off in one day (July 14) the Kentish King Earcon- bc-rht and the Archbishop of Canterbury. Damian too succumbed to the epidemic. There was then a vacancy until the appointment of Putta in 669 by- Archbishop Theodore. Putta, we are told, was ".ex- traordinarily skilful in church music according to the custom of the Romans, which he had learned from the disciples of the holy pope Gregory ; a person better skilled in ecclesiastical discipline and more addicted to simplicity of life than active in worldly affairs." {Bede, book IV., chap, ii.) His occupancy of the see was brought to a close by the Mercian invasion of 676, when "/Eadilred ravaged Kent with a cruel army, and polluted churches and monasteries without regard to religion or the fear of God, destroying the city of Rochester in the common ruin. Putta was absent at the lime, but when he understood that his church was ravaged, and all things taken away, he went to Sexulf, bishop of the Mercians, and having ROCHESTER 23 received of him a certain church and a small parcel of land, ended his days there in peace ; in no way endeavouring to restore his bishoprick, because he was more industrious in spiritual than in worldly affairs ; serving God only in that church, and going wherever he was desired to teach church music." (Bede, book IV., chap, xii.) It has been thought that "he may for a few years have administered the district of Hecana, or Hereford, as the deputy of Sexulf." (Haddan and Stubbs, vol. hi., p. 130.) " From the first, of course, he would not refuse to perform episcopal functions in the neighbourhood ; and he might easily pass from this position into that of a recognized chief pastor of the country. In that tranquil home beside the Wye, perhaps where now the venerable cathedral and its dependent buildings give a special charm to the Hereford ' precinct,' Putta spent the rest of his life, 'never thinking at all'" of a return to the eastern county he had left. (Bright, Early English Church History, 2nd cd., P- 273-) William of Malmesbury says that he had contemplated resigning his bishoprick even in a time of profound peace. The see of Rochester was at this period in a sad condition ; the cathedral had been much injured by fire : the bishop had fled. Theodore provided a successor to Putta in the person of Quichclm, but he, finding his church destitute and the country plundered by the kings of Sussex and Wessex, withdrew after about five years' tenure of office, being succeeded by Gebmurid, who, dying in 669, was followed by Tobias. This prelate, an English- man by birth, trained in the great school of Canterbury, 24 ROCHESTER occupied the bishoprick for the lifetime of a generation (696—726). He is described as a most learned man, "for he was disciple to those teachers of blessed memory, — Theodore the archbishop, and Abbot Hadrian ; by whose means, besides his erudition in ecclesiastical and general literature, he had learned both the Greek and Latin tongues to such perfection that they were as well known and familiar to him as his native language. He was buried in the chapel (portiais) 1 of St. Paul the Apostle, which he had built within the church of St. Andrew for his own place of burial." (Bede, book V., chap, xxiii.) It would be tedious, and serve no useful purpose, to enumerate the bishops who succeeded Tobias during the remainder of the Saxon period. They do not appear to have been men of marked individuality of character, nor do we know more of them than that they attended councils, witnessed charters, and were from time to time reci- pients of privileges and grants of lands from successive kings of Kent and of England : grants obtained, revoked, and regained, according to the varying fortunes of those troublous days. We may mention, however, that Bishop Swithulf, who died of the plague about 897, was appointed one of the guardians of the realm against the Danes, who then infested the coast and besieged the city of Rochester, and that Bishop Alfstane suffered from their exactions, while the second Bishop Godwyn found an enemy in King Ethelred II., by whom his church was deprived of some of its 1 Our word "porch" is used only for the structure outside*. doorway ; " porticus " is any roof or shelter supported by pillars ; this "porticus" was inside the church. ROCHESTER domains, and not less than a hundred pounds of silver was wrung from the unfortunate prelate. The third Bishop Godwyn seems to have shared the captivity of Archbishop Alphege when Canterbury was sur- rendered to the Danes in ion; and the see was further impoverished by the unworthy conduct of Bishop Sivvard, consecrated in 1058, and accused of acting at Rochester as he had previously acted in a subordinate capacity at Canterbury, and applying the revenues of the Church to his own purposes rather than to the public good. At the close of the Saxon period the diocese of Rochester bore unmistakable marks of the troubles through which the country had been passing. The see and the city had suffered much from the devas- tations of the Danes. Even in the time of the Confessor, after order had been restored, while the city of Canterbury was valued at fifty-one pounds, Rochester was not worth more than a hundred shillings. Only four canons remained, who derived a precarious support from the alms of the well-disposed. The cathedral raised by /Ethelbyrht had been greatly in- jured by fire and neglect ; but the evidence negatives the idea that it had been destroyed. The adjoining buildings were in a ruinous condition. Possibly they were only of wood, though there are indications of walls which may, or may not, have been boundary- walls. So far as can be gathered from the Domesday Survey, the parish, or rather manorial, churches and chapels in the diocese appear to have numbered about sixty-five, including those which, though situated in the diocese, were under the "peculiar" jurisdiction of the 26 ROCHESTER archbishop. Some of these, of course, may have been erected immediately after the Conquest, and the total number may have been greater, since the silence of Domesday Book is not conclusive on this point. The supply seems to have been fairly adequate to the needs of the time, for we must remember that the great Andred forest still covered a large portion of Kent, and the occupation of the western and south-western district of the county, for the purposes of husbandry, was gradual and slow. It is likely that many of these churches, perhaps the majority, were built of slabs of timber, after the fashion of the well-known example at Greenstead in Essex, though more durable materials were often not far to seek, and were unquestionably employed, especially in later years. The churches of Swanscombe and Wouldham present undoubted features of Saxon architecture. Those of Datenth and Trottescliffe also contain work which may probably be referred to a date previous to the arrival of the Normans. Other instances might be found were a thorough examination made. Indeed, " the results of the Danish invasions to the actual fabrics of the churches of Kent cannot but appear to the careful inquirer to have been much less serious than they are described to have been by the monkish historians." (Jenkins, Diocesan History of Ca?iterbury, p. 49.) Speaking of the Danes, I cannot refrain from alluding to two circumstances traditionally connected with their presence at Rochester. There is, as is well known to most people in the county, a small district close to Rochester Castle called Boley Hill, whose inhabitants formed a court of view of frankpledge and ROCHESTER 27 pic-powder, meeting under an elm-tree, a special and very ancient jurisdiction within the municipal. The Hill has been usually identified with the mound thrown up by the Danes in 885, when, as recorded in the Saxon Chronicle, they invested the city. It might be difficult to justify the identification, but Mr. Gomme is of opinion that in another way the spot is certainly associated with the invaders. He believes that during the Danish occupation of England a colony of Danes settled in Rochester. Their head-quarters were fixed on one of the mounds forming part of the ancient earth-works. A community by themselves, they adopted their own mode of meeting in the open air for public purposes, and thus originated the peculiar jurisdiction which descended to modern times. In support of this theory, he adduces the fact that the origin of the court of view of frankpledge is by such an authority as Palgrave referred to the Danes, and that the name Boley may be derived from the Danish " bul," which in the form of "bole," the trunk of a tree, is still in use in the Danish district of Lincoln- shire. (Arch. Cant., vol. xvii., p. 181.) The other circumstance to which I would refer bears more directly on the history of the diocese. Pepys, in his diary, 10th April, 166 1, writes: "To Rochester, and there saw the cathedral . . . observing the great doors of the church, as they say, covered with the skins of Danes." There can be no question that human skin has been found on church doors. Speci- mens taken from Copford and Hadstock in Essex, and from Worcester Cathedral, were submitted to Mr. Quekett, the eminent microscopist, and pronounced 28 ROCHESTER by him to be indisputably what they were supposed to be. Punishments of a dreadful description were, doubtless, sanctioned by law in the Saxon and later ages, and we can understand that in the case of spoliation by barbarian invaders when successive bands had repeatedly laid waste the sacred fabric, the enormity of the crime of sacrilege would readily be admitted as a justification of the most savage chastise- ment. The Danes, we know, went up the Medway in the year 999 to Rochester and made a fearful foray, over-running nearly all West Kent. But the skins seen by Pepys could hardly have belonged to them. For the Saxon cathedral was finally demolished by Gundulf, who became bishop in 1077, and the west front as it now stands, and as it stood in 1661, is not earlier than 1120-30. I can only suppose that the Danes had been the notorious offenders, and that afterwards any one who committed sacrilege, and there- by incurred the doom of excoriation, was popularly called "a Dane." Perhaps it does not necessarily follow, though it is generally assumed to have been the case, that the man from whom the skin was taken was flayed alive. It scarcely need be said that no skins of any kind are to be found on the existing doors of Rochester Cathedral, nor were any visible on the doors lately removed, which were not older than the last century. The church accommodation of the diocese in Saxon times, if so modern an expression may be used, appears, as we have seen, to have been equal to its' needs. The sec had also acquired a considerable amount of property, though this had suffered from the devastations of the Danes and other causes. In ROCHESTER 29 Domesday the following manors, all situated within the limits of his own jurisdiction, are returned as belonging to the Bishop of Rochester :— Southfleet, Stone by Dartford, Fawkham, Longfield, Bromley, Wouldham, West Mailing, Trottescliffe, Snodland, Cuxton, Denton near Gravesend, Hailing, Frindsbury, Borstal, Stoke, and certain houses in the cathedral city. At the foundation of the bishoprick, and for some time afterwards, the whole diocese constituted the " parish," and was served by travelling priests under the general superintendence of the bishop, much as is the case when a mission is started in the present day in a heathen country. Gradually, rich men founded chapels and endowed them with lands and tithes, and the holding of the English landowner became the parish, and his chaplain the parish priest. The Textus Roffensis and the Registrum Roffense contain many such grants made by persons in a private station, as well as by kings and dignitaries. One of the most remarkable instances is the will under which the Church of Rochester, in addition to the Church of Canterbury, was so largely benefited in the latter years of the tenth century. "This is Birt- rick's and Elfswithe's, his wife's, last testament, which they declared at Mepham in their kinsfolk's hearing, that was, Wulstan Ucca and Wulfsie his brother, and Syred, Elfride's son, and Wulfsie the black, and Wyne the priest, and Elfgar of Mepham, and Wulfey, Ordey's son, and Elfey his brother, and Birtwar, Elfrice's widow, and Britric her cousin, and Elfstane the Bishop. First, to his natural lord, one bracelet of fourscore marks of gold and one dagger of as much ; 3° ROCHESTER and four horses, two of them trapped ; and two swords trimmed, and two hawks, and all his hedge- hounds. And to the lady, one bracelet of thirty marks of gold ; and one horse to inlreat that this testament may stand. And for his soul and his ances- tors, to Saint Andrew's (Rochester) two plough-lands at Denton. And they give both for their souls and their ancestors' two plough-lands at Longfield. And to the same place, for them, thirty marks of gold, and one collar of forty marks, and a cup of silver, and head-band covered with gold. And every year, at their year's mind, two days ferme of Heselholte, and two days of Wateringbury, and two days out of Biding, and two days out of Hartesham. And to Christ Church Canterbury, sixty marks of gold, thirty to the bishop and thirty to the convent ; and a neck- bracelet of eighty marks ; and two cups of silver and the land at Mepham. And to St. Augustine (Canter- bury) thirty marks of gold, and two cups of silver, and half a bend gilt. And the land at Darenth, to Byrware for his days , and after his days to St. Andrew's, for us and our ancestors. And Biding to Wulfey, and he shall give a thousand pence to St. Andrew's for us and for our ancestors. And to Wulfsie, Wateringbury within that kinred. And to Syrcd, Haselholte within that kinred. And to Wulfey and to Elfey his brother, Hartesham within that kinred, to Wulfey the inland and to Elfey the outland. And to Wulfstane Ucca, Walkenstede within that kinred : and a dagger of three pounds. And those ten plough-lands at Streiton to the minster at Walken- stede. And the land at Fawkham, after Byrware's ROCHESTER 31 days, to St. Andrew's, for Elfrice's soul, their lord, and his ancestor's, even as their will was. And Crumley, after Britware's days, to St. Andrew's, as Elfric, their lord, bequeathed it, for him and his ancestors. And Snodland also to St. Andrew's, after their days, even as Elfere bequeathed it, being Elfrice's father, and he afterwards in the hearing of Edgive, the Lady, and of Odo the archbishop, and of Elfey, Elfstane's son, and of Elfric his brother, and of Elfnothe pilia, and of Godwin of Fawkham, and of Eadric of Hoo, and of Elfsie the priest of Croydon. And to Wulfstane sixty marks of gold to deal for us and our ancestors : and other sixty marks to Wulfsie to deal, and between them and God be it if they do it not. And to Wulfsie Titesey and the writing within that kinred : and two spurs of three pound. And I pray, for God's love, my dear lord that he do not suffer that any man do break our testament. And I pray all God's friends that they help thereto. Between them and God be it that do break it, and God be always merciful to them that will keep it." (a.d. 945 — 984. Lambarde's Perambulation of Kent, p. 357. Reg. Eoff., pp. 25, 26.) This was evidently the will of a man of large possessions, and supplies us with a good illustration of the views and customs of the age, as well as of the manner in which the Church property was gradually acquired. Another instance, in the following century, either shortly before or shortly after the Conquest, is that of a person in a somewhat lower position. Henry of Hoo was the wolf-ward of the district ; his duty — the mention of which at once carries us back to a state of things we can hardly realize — being to protect 32 ROCHESTER the country-side from wolves. When his hunting days were over, he was received into the brotherhood at Rochester. On his admission he bestowed on the monastery the tithe of his property at Cobham. This gift he subsequently increased by the donation of half his tithe at Hoo, and the reversion of one-third of his substance, " with the ready concurrence of his wife, and Robert his son, and his brothers Hereward and Siward and Edward." His grand-daughter, "a certain matron named Ordiva," is described as the donor of the tithe of her land at Cobham, called Bethenecurt, which lady was " accustomed to attend at Rochester, with all her family," for the perform- ance of her religious duties — confession, Holy Com- munion, and the like. (Text. Roff., cap. 105; Reg. Roff., 122-87.) The state of religion varied greatly at different periods. So far as we can learn, Christianity was propagated during the life of /Ethelbyrht by a wise toleration. The king encouraged it by his personal example and the liberal endowments he bestowed on its ministers, but no one was forced to embrace its tenets, or to abstain from the worship to which he had been accustomed. The heathen temples re- mained. The groves were not cut down. The new faith was left to win its way by the persuasion of its own merits and the purer lives of its professors. When, however, his grandson, Earconberht, seized the throne of Kent in 640, restrictive measures were at once adopted. The worship of idols was forbidden. The images were ordered to be destroyed. The observance of Lent and other Christian ordinances ROCHESTER was enjoined under the severest penalties. In the days of Archbishop Theodore and Bishop Gebmund, notwithstanding some troubles, that would be true of Rochester, so near to Canterbury, which Bede affirms of the country in general : — " There were never, happier times than these since the English1 came into Britain : for, their kings being very brave men and very good Christians, they were a terror to all barbarous nations, and the minds of all men were bent upon the joys of the heavenly kingdom of which they had just heard : and all who desired to be instructed in sacred reading had masters at hand to teach them." (Bede, book IV., chap, ii.) Slavery was discountenanced, and a visible improvement effected in the views and habits of society. In a later generation piety decayed while superstition increased. We cannot in these pages attempt to draw a picture of the doctrines and practices of the Anglo- Saxon Church, nor is it necessary, since abler hands have done it elsewhere. But in a history of the diocese of Rochester it would be improper not to allude to the ecclesiastical laws of Wihtred, king of Kent, and the "privilege" granted by him. The laws were made in a Witenagemot held at Bearsted, near Maidstone, in 696, at which Bishop Gebmund was present, as well as Archbishop Birhtwald, "and every degree of the church of that province spoke in unison with the obedient people." (Haddan and Stubbs, Councils, vol. iii., p. 233.) While freedom 1 The Kentish men are said to have been Jutes rather than Angles, but Bede probably uses the word " Angli" in the wider sense. C 34 ROCHESTER was assured by them to the Church in revenue and jurisdiction, it was stipulated that the king should be willingly obeyed and that public prayers should be offered on his behalf. Servile labour on Sundays was forbidden under a penalty of fine or stripes. The immoral man who refused to amend his life was to be debarred from Communion. Abstinence from flesh on fasting-days was strongly insisted on, a useful requirement among a people little accustomed to self-control. The lingering attachment to heathenism was sternly repressed, for the man who "offered to devils " was made " liable in all his substance," and the like punishment was denounced against the wife who shared in her husband's offence. By the "privilege" Wihtred, in a Witenagemot convened at Bapchild, near Sittingbourne, and attended by the "Archbishop of Britain," and Tobias, bishop of Rochester, with the clergy and nobles, grants to the Church of Rochester the same privileges of immunity from interference on the part of the secular power and undisturbed enjoy- ment of property which he gives to the Church of Canterbury and the monasteries of Sheppey, Reculver, Lyminge, Dover, Folkestone, Minster, Hoe, and St. Peter's. This " privilege " 1 of Wihtred was confirmed 1 " The form of ' privilege ' which the monasteries enjoyed is said to have been first granted by Wihtred, king of Kent, 694-725 ; and it was continued in the other Saxon kings' charters before the Norman Conquest. The monastery lands were set free from gable or land-tax : and the tenants obliged only to attend the king in war, and to pay burgh-bote and brig-bote, a kind of county-rates levied for the repair of town-walls and bridges. These lands, therefore, were commonly free from the most burdensome kind of tax, which all other lands had to pay to the king." (Churton, Early English Church,^. 112.) ROCHESTER 35 at the Council of Clovesho in 716, the first year of Ethelbald, the most powerful, though perhaps not yet the supreme, ruler of Southern England. It was again confirmed in 742 at a Council held at the same place — the scene of the more famous gathering of 747. On the proceedings of that synod, summoned by Archbishop Cuthbert, and presided over by the King of Mercia, we must bestow a passing notice, not only because it was attended by the "venerable prelate of the Church of Rochester," Dunno, and perhaps met in his diocese, but also on account of the light thrown thereby on the religious condition of the country. The bishops are exhorted to abstain from nSedless interference in worldly matters, to visit their dioceses annually, and preach the Gospel to people of every condition, sex, and age, forbidding the pagan observ- ances, divination, sorcery, charms, and incantations. The clergy are required to look carefully after their churches, to spend their time in reading, in cele- brating the sacred offices and in psalmody, in visiting the sick in the districts assigned them by the bishop, in baptizing and preaching. They are warned against setting seculars or monastics an example of drunken- ness, love of filthy lucre, or obscene talking. They are enjoined especially to -instruct the people in the truths resting upon the doctrine of the Trinity, since without faith it is impossible to please God. They are forbidden to " prate in church," or to dislocate or confound the composure of the sacred words by theatrical pronunciation, and are enjoined to follow the plain song, or holy melody, according to the custom of the Church : " Let him who cannot attain to this, 36 ROCHESTER simply read, pronounce, and rehearse the words." With respect to monasteries : " Care is to be taken that they be honest retreats for the silent and quiet, and for such as labour for God's sake : not re- ceptacles of ludicrous arts, of versifiers, harpers, and buffoons, but houses for them who pray, and read, and praise God : that leave be not given to every secular to walk up and down in the private apart- ments of the monastery, lest they take an occasion of reproach, if they see or hear any indecency in the cloisters of a monastery, for the customary familiarity of laymen, especially in the monasteries of nuns who are not very strict in their conversation, is hurtful and vicious; because by these means, occasions of suspicion do not only arise among adversaries, but are in fact committed and spread abroad to the infamy of our profession." Monastics and ecclesiastics are warned against drunkenness : " Nor let them," it is added, "force others to drink intemperately, but let their entertainments be cleanly and sober." The people are to be taught to say the Creed and the Lord's Prayer in the vulgar tongue. Mention is made of a newly-invented conceit, as it is called, by which men think that penance can be commuted by alms- deeds. The recitation of the Psalms is highly recom- mended, for "though a man knows not the Latin words that are sung, yet he may devoutly apply the intentions of his own heart to the things which are at present to be asked of God, and fix them there to the best of his power." Prayer for the departed is recognized — " Lord, according to the greatness of Thy mercy, grant rest to his soul ; and for Thine ROCHESTER 37 infinite pity vouchsafe to him the joys of eternal light with Thy saints." The much-debated question as to the situation of Clovesho is not likely to be solved. Something may be said against, and something in favour of, each place with which it has been identified — Cliffe-at-Hoo, Abingdon, Tewkesbury, London, an undetermined spot near London, a spot equally undetermined near Rochester. The older opinion, undoubtedly, gave our diocese the honour of being the scene of the great gatherings associated in the eighth and ninth centuries with the name of Clovesho, and pointed to Cliffe as the place. The earliest instance known of this identification is a marginal note, thought to have been made by Dr. Nicholas Wotton, in a manuscript copy of the Saxon Chronicle, where, at the year 822, against the word " Clofesho " is written, " doctor Hethe's benefyce." This Dr. Heath, successively Bishop of Rochester and of Worcester, and Arch- bishop of York, was a friend of Wotton, and Rector of Cliffe from 1535 to 1549. Lambarde (1576) says that he should have expected to find the seat of the councils in Mercia and therefore in middle England, but, in the absence of any place within those limits bearing the exact name, he is willing for the present to acquiesce in the gloss of " Talbot, a prebendarie of Norwiche, and a diligent travayler in the English hystorie, upon the margine of an auncient copie of William Malmesburies booke, Dc Pontificalibus, in which e he expounded Clouesho to be Cliffe at Hoo neare Rochester" {Perambulation of Kent, p. 353). Camden, having in his earlier edition apparently 3« ROCHESTER accepted this opinion, in a later rejected it, because Cliffe was never in Mercia, and is inconvenient in point of situation. Since Camden the majority of antiquaries have pronounced against the proposed identification. Haddan and Stubbs suggest that "St. Boniface's expression in 742, ' synodus Londinensis,' and all the probabilities of the case, indicate London, or its immediate neighbourhood " {Councils, vol. iii., p. 122). It may be readily allowed that Cliffe is not a place at which any one in the present day would think of convening a great assembly, but it does not follow that in Saxon times it was relatively so inacces- sible, or so unimportant, as it now is. In the eighth century Cliffe was the property of the archbishops, who might not be disinclined to require the presence of their suffragans in Kent. It certainly possessed a church in the time of the Conqueror, and in 1520 was almost destroyed by a fire, from the effects of which it never recovered. By water it could always have been reached, and there is evidence of the existence of a well-used track through the hundred of Hoo, which passes Higham, and points to a spot near Tilbury, on the other side of the river, and so into Essex and other parts of England. There are, too, the still visible remains of a raised causeway, nearly thirty feet wide, leading from the side of the Thames, through the marshes in the adjoining parish of Higham, across the London high- road, to Shorne Ridgway, and thus to the Roman Watling Street at Cobham. So that there would be access to Cliffe from Canterbury, from Mercia, and from East Anglia, by means of Watling Street and ROCHESTER 39 the ferry near Tilbury. Nor does the objection that Cliffe was never locally in Mercia appear fatal to its claims. " The Church of England had an earlier approximation to political unity than the kingdom of England. Hence it was the policy of the kings who aimed at supremacy to identify their interests with those of the Primate, and to figure as the heads of those synods, which undoubtedly they did. This explains, or at least gives point to, the importance of Kent in the politics of the time " (Kerslake).1 During the period in question we find the Mercian kings presiding at these synods, but this does not prove that they were held in Mercia. The Mercian conqueror made a point, it would appear, of seizing estuaries, and the Hoo peninsula would 1 See Vestiges of the Supremacy of Mercia in the South of England during the Eighth Century, by Thomas Kerslake (reprinted from the Transactions of the Bristol and Gloucester- shire Archaeological Society, 1879), to which my attention was called by the Rev. E. J. Nash ; and a paper in vol. xiii. of Archaologia Cantiana, p. 494, on "The Shorne, Higham, and Cliffe Marshes," by C. Roach Smith, which thus concludes : "He" (Mr. Kerslake) "has also collected a large mass of valuable materials respecting the state of the entire district from Higham to Hoo, including the long-disputed position of Clove- shoe. This he, with some of our best modern authorities, shows to be Cliffe-at-Hoo. He adduces, also, auxiliary evidence in the records of these convocations to prove that the places designated 'Cealchythe' and 'Acle' are now represented by 'Chalk' and 'Oakley,' near Higham. We examined the church of Cliffe and its environs, but failed to find any ruins of buildings assignable to the times of the great Councils. The foundation of the long wall, on the north of the church, appears to be of the same date as that edifice, and both contain broken gravestones used as building materials ; but they are not, perhaps, above a century or two anterior." 4o ROCHESTER be valuable for commanding the mouths of both the Thames and the Medway. It is likely, therefore, that he would obtain possession of the locality if he could, and there are some facts which, so far as they go, seem to show that he did. The chief church in the hundred of Hoo is dedicated to St. Werburgh. She was the daughter of Wulfhere, king of Mercia, was related also to the kings of Kent, and probably was at one time abbess at Minster in Sheppey, which ?/iay account for the dedication of Hoo. Mr. Kers- lake, however, thinks that ^Ethelbald marked his conquests by founding churches with this dedication. In support of this theory he adduces these facts. Of thirteen known instances of churches called after St. Werburgh, seven are within Mercia proper. Of the remaining six, the positions are noteworthy. Three are at Bristol, Bath, and Henbury, and would mark the Mercian frontier towards Wessex after the struggle of 741. Two are at Warbstow, near Launceston, and Wembury, near Plymouth, and are supposed to be the result of an invasion of Daranonia by ^Ethelbald and Cuthred, inferred from Saxon Chronicle, 743. The sixth is that in Hoo, the Kentish Chersonese. Mr. Kerslake further remarks that in 774, Offa, the Mercian king, granted land in the immediate neigh- bourhood of Cliffe to Archbishop Jaenberht. He also tells us that the sale of some property by Ceol- wulf in 823 to Archbishop Wilfred is dated " In villo (sic) regali qui dicitur Werburging-wic," and that a charter of ^Ethelbald in 734, bestowing a gift on Aldulf, Bishop of Rochester, bears a confirmation, added in 844, by Beortwulf, " rege Merciorum in vico ROCHESTER 41 regali Werburgewic." 1 It would be rash to assert positively that the royal residence here mentioned was at Hoo St. Werburgh, but the circumstances to which we have referred favour the idea that the Mercian kings, as well as the Archbishops of Canter- bury, were connected with the locality, and thus strengthen the opinion that, after all, the old identifi- cation of Clovesho with Cliffe-at-Hoo may be correct, and that we may be justified in regarding the diocese of Rochester as the scene of so many important gather- ings in the earliest days of the Church of England. At any rate, no surprise need be felt at the kings of Mercia calling councils in Kent, since a small gift of land by the Kentish king Cuthred to Christ Church, Canterbury, in 796, required the sanction of the Mercian Kenulf, so thoroughly was the independence of Kent as a separate kingdom a thing of the past. The identification, however, is confessedly doubtful. In the opinion of many the form Cliffe-at-Hoo cannot be equivalent to C/oves-ho, which probably goes back to Cleofes-ho, — ?the tumulus thrown up over some person named Ceol-leof. 1 Hid.— The fine church of Cliffe-at-Hoo, dedicated to St. Helen, mother of Constantine the Great, and standing on the site of an older building, is mainly Early English. It contains a remarkable wall painting of the martyrdom of St. Edmund the king. At the east end of the churchyard were, until last year, some ancient timber houses, formerly occupied by the priests of the chantries within the church. One of them had an interesting window visible from the street. The rectory- house retains the hall built in the fourteenth century, and the original doorways which then led to the kitchen and butteries are even now in daily use. CHAPTER III With the Norman Conquest a fresh era dawned on the diocese of Rochester. The change was not, indeed, immediate ; for Bishop Siward, who partici- pated in the consecration of Lanfranc, the new Pri- mate, was allowed to continue in possession of his see for the remainder of his life. The bishoprick was then bestowed on Arnost, formerly a monk of Bee, of whose abilities the archbishop had formed a high opinion, but who died before he had the opportunity of distinguishing himself in this more exalted sphere of action. One event, however, occurred during his brief episcopate, too remarkable in itself, and too closely connected with the fortunes of the diocese, to be passed over in silence. I refer to the famous trial on Penenden Heath. Lanfranc, on his arrival in England, found that Odo, the king's half-brother, Bishop of Baieux and Earl of Kent, had appropriated to himself, and conferred on his friends, many valuable manors belonging to the sees of Canterbury and Rochester, and had also encroached on the rights of the Primacy and even of the Crown. He appealed to the king for justice. William therefore issued a ROCHESTER 43 summons to the Sheriff of Kent to convene a " schire- gemot." The place of meeting was to be Penenden Heath, near Maidstone, a spot very suitable in point of situation for an assembly of the whole county. Thither the magnates of the land came together — Norman and Saxon prelates, Norman barons and knights, Saxon earls and thanes. The king was fitly represented by Geoffrey de Mowbray, Bishop of Coutances, and now Justiciar of England, a man of great wealth as well as high authority. By his side sat /Ethelric, raised by Edward the Confessor, in 1057, to the South Saxon bishoprick of Selsey, and, not- withstanding his unjust deposition and imprisonment soon after the Conquest, specially summoned on account of the reputation he enjoyed for an unusual acquaintance with English laws and customs. So anxious was the king to secure the presence of the old man, broken down by age and trouble, and un- able to bear the fatigue of riding on his palfrey, or even the jolting of an ordinary vehicle, that he provided a car drawn by four horses for his use. With these were seen Arnost, the new Bishop of Rochester, Richard Fitz-Gilbert, one of the Conqueror's special comrades, Lord of Tonbridge and afterwards of Clare, and Haimo de Crevequer, Sheriff of Kent, the owner of Leeds Castle and joint conservator of Dover Castle, one of the highest posts of trust in the kingdom. For three days Lanfranc argued cause after cause, and established claim after claim, with such profound learning and cogent reasoning as to call forth the astonishment and admiration of the assembled nobles. Some five-and-twenty manors, with advowsons attached, 44 ROCHESTER did he recover for the See and Priory of Canterbury : and for the daughter church of Rochester, Stoke, Denton, and Fawkham. The proceedings were sub- sequently reported to the king, and finally sanctioned by the Great Council of the nation.1 As a further illustration of the legal methods of the times, we may put by the side of this famous contro- versy at Penenden, the suit by which, soon after, Gundulf recovered certain land belonging to the episcopal property at Freckenham. The Sheriff of Cambridge (Pichot) had claimed it on behalf of the king, and placed Olchite, a person in the royal service, in possession. The bishop appealed to William, who ordered a " schiregemot " to be convened under the presidency of Odo. Through fear of the sheriff, the land is declared to belong to the king. Odo is not satisfied, and requires that twelve members of the assembly shall be chosen to confirm the verdict upon oath. Six men whose names are given, with six others, retire for consultation, and under fresh pressure 1 In fairness to Odo, we add that, with all his rapacity, he could not only sometimes take pains to do justice, but was also capable of generous acts, as is shown by his gift to the monks of Rochester of the piece of ground lying under the windows of the house in which these pages are written, known as " The Vines," and now laid out as a public garden under the care of the Corporation, where grapes were grown in abundance. The vineyard at Hailing produced wine which Bishop Hamo of Hythe thought worthy of presentation to King Edward II. It is said that mention is made in some old leases of considerable quantities of blackberries being delivered to the Bishop of Rochester, from sundry of his tenants, which it appears were used to colour the wine made from the grapes grown in his vineyard. ROCHESTER 45 from Pichot swear, on their return, to the justice of the sentence. The land therefore remains in tire king's hands. But in the course of the year, a monk named Grim, who had been bailiff at Freckenham, and in that capacity had received the same dues from that part of the estate as from the rest, furnishes Gundulf with information which leads him to make a further application to Odo. Odo listens to Grim's tale. One of the jurors is sent for. Falling at Odo's feet, he owns himself perjured. A second, the first who had sworn at the inquest, makes the like con- fession. Then Odo commands the sheriff to send the remaining ten to London, and with them twelve of the better sort of the shire who had confirmed what the others had sworn. An assembly of many of the chief barons of the realm is held in London. They decide, Normans and English alike, that the twenty-four have been, all, guilty of perjury, inasmuch as the first, whom they followed, has confessed it in his own case, and adjudge the land to the rightful owner, the Bishop of Rochester. The second twelve thereupon declare that they had not consented to what was sworn. Odo tells them they must prove that by the ordeal of the sword. They agree, but failing to appear, or being worsted in the encounter, are condemned by the men of their own county to forfeit three hundred pounds to the king. (Textus Roffensis, cap. 91 ; Reg. Roff., p. 31.) The importance to the diocese of Rochester of the proceedings at Penenden Heath must not be measured solely by the value of the property re- stored to the bishop, though that was considerable, 46 ROCHESTER but by the wealth thereby placed at the disposal of the Primate, which enabled him, as we shall see, to render great assistance in building a new cathedral and monastery. Arnost himself died before he could derive any advantage from the decision of the assembly in which he had taken part. Forthwith the archbishop, having secured the royal sanction, nominated a successor who has left his mark on the diocese to the present day, and is, with the possible exception of St. Paulinus, Walter of Merton, and John Fisher, the best known of the hundred Bishops of Rochester. Born in Normandy in 1023 or 1024, Gundulf, after he had received the minor' orders, was distinguished for the conscientious regularity with which he performed his duties in the church of St. Mary at Rouen. In that city he acquired the friendship of William, the archdeacon, and found a patron in Maurilius, the archbishop, who admitted him to his table, and encouraged him to join in the conversation, which turned, we are told, on the topics frequently under discussion — contempt of the world and the glories of eternity, on the hard- ships which righteousness has to encounter in the present state of trial, on the self-denial to be endured in our earthly warfare, and on the fulness of the recompense promised in heaven : conversation worthy of the place and of the company. From Rouen, Gundulf, with his friend the arch- deacon, made a pilgrimage to the Holy Land, to visit, as they said, "the places of the Incarnation, Passion, and Ascension of our Blessed Lord, that they might ever after have a cheering recollection of these ROCHESTER 47 events." (Hook's Life of Gundulf Arclueological Journal, vol. xxi., p. 3.) On their homeward voyage they were overtaken by a tempest. In his distress Gundulf vowed that, if preserved, he would forsake the world and assume the cowl, and thus in 1060 he became a Benedictine monk at the abbey of Bee, then renowned for the strictness of its discipline and the excellence of the instruction given in its schools. Here he listened to Lanfranc, the famous prior, and formed a warm attachment for Anselm, both destined to sit in the seat of Augustine, and to exercise a lasting influence on the Church of England. The bent of Gundulf's mind, unlike that of his friend, was towards action rather than contemplation. His practical ability caused him to be appointed sacrist of the monastery, and led, no doubt, to the request of Lanfranc that he would accompany him when, about 1066, he became Abbot of St. Stephen's at Caen. At Caen, as well as at Bee, large building operations were in progress, and afforded Gundulf the opportunity of acquiring that skill in architecture for which he was subsequently distinguished. When Lanfranc was summoned by the Conqueror to preside over the English Church in 1070, Gundulf removed to Canterbury and undertook the manage- ment of the Primate's household. As steward and almoner he is said to have exercised a wise economy, but to have been most liberal in dispensing the charities of the archbishop. We are told that the misery of the country was at this time so great that Lanfranc dispatched Gundulf to London, where there was an absolute famine ; and night and day was he 48 ROCHESTER employed in relieving distress. His readiness to weep with those that wept made his charity more effective : " at the same time his compassion extended even to his beasts of burden. He visited the stables to see that his horses were duly fed, and he was sometimes found concealed there to perform his devotions in that peace and quiet which he sought in vain in his crowded apartment, where his ears were assailed by the importunityof starving applicants." (Hook's Life of Gundulf.) On the vacancy in the see of Rochester, occasioned by the death of Arnost, the archbishop promoted his friend to the post. Gundulf was consecrated March 19, 1077, and soon after enthroned. He quickly proved himself in one respect "a repairer of the breach, the restorer of paths to dwell in," in another a decided innovator. His first care was to replace the secular canons, who had hitherto formed the chapter of Rochester Cathedral, by Benedictine monks. In itself this was a step in the path of progress, for it must be admitted that at that particular period, though the reverse was afterwards the case, the "regulars" had the advantage over the "secular" clergy in zeal, activity, and learning. And it was the price which had to be paid for the assistance of Lanfranc — assistance absolutely required in conse- quence of the dilapidation of the buildings, the im- poverishment of the see, and the insufficiency of the clergy, in point of number, to discharge the multi- farious duties devolving on them. The secular canons, or some of them, took the Benedictine vows, and by the help of the archbishop a new cathedral was begun, ROCHESTER 49 with monastic buildings adjoining, and possibly an episcopal palace. Gervase attributes the work solely to Lanfranc : " He renewed and perfected the church of St. Andrew at Rochester which King Ethelbert formerly founded, and enriched it with valuable orna- ments and with monks." {Act. Pont. Cant., 1665.) Ernulf, on the contrary, speaks only of Gundulf : " In the thirty-one years he lived there, he built anew the church of St. Andrew, which had almost perished through age, as it appears to-day, and constructed all necessary offices for the monks, as far as the limitations of the spot permitted." (Ernulfus de rebus Ecclesice Roffensis, Anglia Sacra, vol. i., p. 337-) No doubt Lanfranc aided by his influence and his money the undertaking carried out by Gundulf. So successful was the work that it is said of the latter : " And whereas at the entrance on his episcopate he found not more than five canons in the church of St. Andrew, on the day he departed from this world he left more than sixty monks, able to read well and to sing excellently, fearing God, and rejoicing above all things in the service of the Almighty and of His Apostle." (Ibid.) The bishop, following the example of his patron at Canterbury, made a division of the property belonging to the see, reserving one portion to his own use, and assigning another to the support of the monks,1 subject to the delivery of 1 The manors assigned to the monks were Wouldham, Frinds- bury, Stoke, Denton, Southfleet, Lambeth, and Hadenham, with all their appurtenances. They had in course of time much property derived from other sources. D 5° ROCHESTER certain articles of provision, annually, on the festival of St. Andrew. It is stated that notwithstanding the enmity borne by the monks to the married priests, they did not scruple to inter, in the most honourable manner, the wife of ^Egelricus, priest of Chatham, and one of the seculars whom they had expelled from this priory, in return for which concession the priest pre- sented the society with a mansion which produced to them a yearly rent of one shilling. The new cathe- dral occupied a site somewhat to the east of the Saxon church. Its plan was peculiar, and differed con- siderably from the usual Norman type. " It consisted of a nave and aisles which, though unfinished, were intended to be at least nine bays long: an aisleless transept 120 feet long, but only 14 feet wide; and an eastern arm with aisles six bays long, terminating in a square end instead of an apse, with a small rec- tangular chapel projecting from the centre of the front. The four easternmost bays were raised upon an under-croft. There was no tower over the cross- ing, nor any towers flanking the west end, but a detached campanile stood in the angle between the choir and north transept, and to balance it, as it were, another tower was erected in a corresponding position on the south side, but of smaller size, and an integral portion of the fabric." (Mr. St. John Hope, quoted in Our National Cathedrals.) The consecration must have taken place before 1089, when Lanfranc died, and yet not long before. The year 1084 seems a likely date. There was a large assembly both of clergy and people. When the service was concluded, a procession was formed to translate the body of ROCHESTER 51 Paulinus from the old church to the new. The relics were deposited in a silver shrine, the gift of the archbishop,1 and probably placed in the small projecting chapel at the east. Not much of Gundulf s building is now visible, except the half-ruined tower on the north side of the choir, and the western half of the crypt, but some of the nave walls, and five bays of the south arcade of the nave as high as the triforium, may be attributed to him. The suggestion has been made by no less an authority than Mr. Parker, that Gundulf may be regarded as the inventor of the Norman keep, a form of castle unquestionably of Norman origin, and of which no specimen is known to exist earlier than his day. If this were so he was a very great architect, for he designed a building so well suited for its purpose that the same type continued to be followed, when required by similar circumstances, for five hundred years. It was long thought that the fine keep of Rochester Castle, one of the most striking in England, or the world, was the work of Gundulf, and we still hear it occasionally called by his name, but the credit of this erection is due to William de Corbeuil, Archbishop of Canterbury, in the next generation. The mistake arose from the circumstance that when Rufus was asked to confirm a gift by his father of the manor of Hadenham, in Buckinghamshire, to the bishop and convent, " for the food of the monks," he refused, except on payment of a hundred pounds of denarii. The archbishop and bishop in consternation replied that they neither had such a sum, nor knew where to find it. Two 1 Reg. Roff., p. 120. 52 ROCHESTER nobles, Robert FitzHamon and Henry, Earl of War- wick, friends of all parties, advised the king that in lieu of the money, about which there was so much difficulty, he should require Gundulf, whose skill in building was well known, to construct a castle of stone for him at Rochester. The proposition was even more unacceptable to the prelates than the original demand. They would altogether decline the concession. Be the manor at the bottom of the sea rather than the church of St. Andrew should be weighted with such a load. Whenever any harm befell the castle, if the wall were broken or decayed, the bishop or the church would be called on to repair it. "Far be it from me," cried Lanfranc. "And from me," said Gundulf. " Hitherto I have thought Archbishop Lanfranc one of the wisest men in the whole world, nor do I now say he is foolish," an- swered Earl Henry in courteous anger; "but what would be the hardship to build a castle to the king's satisfaction for forty pounds, and submit it to the earl, or sheriff, or any one of the county the king shall appoint, and then be free from all future liability? The king can seek no further service from the bishop or church ; rather it will become him, for the fear of God and the honour of the age, to preserve them in full enjoyment of liberty." The archbishop at length acquiesced in these arguments. The agreement was made with the king. Gundulf constructed a castle at the cost of £60. (A?ig. Sac, vol. L, p. 338.) It has been thought that as a large portion of the inner wall of the castle area appears to be his work, and as the term "castrum," which is the word used, ROCHESTER S3 does not naturally mean a "tower" or "keep," this may bs what is intended. With the Tower of London, the White Tower, the name of Gundulf is justly associated. The Textus Roffensis affords direct evidence of his em- ployment on this great undertaking ; for it preserves incidentally the fact, that while thus occupied he lodged at the house of Eadmer Anhcende, who, in return for the admission of himself and his wife into his religious society, and the promise of interment in the church of St. Andrew, with an annual obit for the benefit of their souls, granted the monks of Rochester a present moiety, and the ultimate re- version, of a fishery called the " Nieuue Uuere," and the whole of the land and houses belonging to him in London. At Lanfranc's death, in 1089, Gundulf, by the king's orders, administered the affairs of the province of Canterbury in spirituals, and for four years was in effect Primate. He must have been a man of conciliatory disposition, as well as of great judgment, or he could not have retained the favour and respect of three such sovereigns as the Conqueror, Rufus, and Henry I. He came into contact with the Conqueror while engaged in building the Tower of London ; and William, out of respect to Gundulf, left one hundred pounds of silver and his royal robe to the church of Rochester. Rufus, among other donations, bestowed on, or rather restored to, the see the manor of Lambeth, " for the food of the monks," the house of which, after being often placed at the disposal of the archbishops, at length passed entirely into their hands by an exchange made in 1197. 54 ROCHESTER From Henry I. Gundulf obtained a confirmation by royal charter of the grants and possessions which, through his industry and economy, had accrued to the Bishoprick and Priory of Rochester. We cannot but think highly of his powers as a negotiator, when we find him mediating successfully between the treacherous Odo and the exasperated Rufus, persuading the garrison of Rochester Castle, on the one hand, to surrender, and, on the other, inducing the king to spare their lives ; and at a later period bringing about a good understanding between Henry and the barons who had risen in arms against him. Nor may we refuse him the credit due to a zealous discharge of the personal duties of religion, since it is on record that when at Rochester he said mass daily, and in his journeys from one of his manor-houses to another he required his chamberlain to precede him, in order to arrange an oratory in readiness for his arrival, and there to deposit his book of devotions. We are told that in the last years of his life, when he reached one of his manors, he would often cause himself to be lifted down from his litter, that he might visit the sick, whom he would not only supply with food and clothing, but standing by their bedside, would weep with them, and offer the prayers of the Church on their behalf. Neither did he hesitate, at any rate on one occasion, to speak with becoming seriousness to Rufus himself, and urge him to repent- ance and amendment of life. Although a warm friend of Anselm, it is evident that Gundulf did not sym- pathize with the political views which placed the arch- bishop in such continual opposition to the sovereign ROCHESTER 55 and nobles of England, and there is a letter addressed by him to the Primate, when he was at Lyons, entreating him to return, and laying before him the deplorable state of the church of Canterbury as the consequence of his self-imposed exile. A man so energetic as Gundulf, and so skilful in architecture, would naturally give a great impetus to church-building in the diocese over which he presided. And there are abundant evidences in Rochester and its neighbourhood of the influence exercised by him in this direction. He was himself the founder of St. Bartholomew's, near Rochester, a house for lepers, which in its present condition as a hospital confers such benefit on the district. The chapel attached to the institution was, indeed, built by Hugh de Trottescliffe, who about 1126 became Abbot of St. Augustine's at Canterbury ; but as he was at the time of his advance- ment a monk of Rochester, we may fairly cite his work as an illustration of the bishop's influence. The apse and a portion of the south wall are no doubt remains of the original chapel. At West Mailing, Gundulf founded an abbey of Benedictine nuns. He did so by the advice of Anselm, who grounded his recommendation on the fact, that as the bishop had an estate there he could personally superintend the establishment. We are told that Mailing had hitherto been " a rural place with few inhabitants ; " but after the new foundation "people began to flock in, and build themselves houses and a street, and shops to supply the nuns." The lower part of the west front of the abbey church is undoubtedly his work. The ROCHESTER same may be said of "St. Leonard's Tower," near at hand, probably erected by him as a residence, and considered by Mr. Parker to be "the earliest Norman keep remaining anywhere, either in England or in Normandy." {Gentleman's Mag., Sept. 1863.) It consists entirely of rubble or rough stone, with scarcely any ashlar work about it. The lower part of the tower of Dartford church, built seemingly to command the river on whose bank it stands, is of very early Norman construction, identical with that of St. Leonard's, and was, in all likelihood, erected under his superintendence. In the opinion of competent judges the chancel of Trottescliffe church is to be ascribed to him. It would appear that under his influence the Saxon churches were rebuilt by the Normans at an early date after their coming into the country ; for we find throughout the valley of the Medway and its vicinity, the neighbourhood on which Gundulfs views and example would most surely tell, an unusual number of churches retaining vestiges, greater or less, of early Norman workmanship — as Addington, Aylesford, Banning, Bicknor, Detling, Ditton, East and West Farleigh, Hailing, Leyborne, and Paddlesworth near Snodland. We have before remarked that the Saxon churches in the majority of instances were of wood. "The Normans, therefore, in rebuilding them in stone had to find fresh material, and felt themselves untrammelled in respect of plan and design. Still there was a goodly number of Saxon churches built of stone, and these the Normans wisely refrained from destroying,'' contenting themselves with making ROCHESTER 57 such additions as they thought necessary. (Rev. G. M. Livett, Arch. Cant., vol. xx., p. 149.) It is an interesting fact that there is yet in exist- ence a copy of the Holy Scriptures in Latin, in two folio volumes, known as " Gundulf's Bible," which, in the judgment of the late Sir Thomas Phillipps, whose authority on such a subject will not be lightly dis- puted, was transcribed at the cost of the bishop either for his own use, or for the use of the priory at Rochester. The manuscript is not earlier than the year 1000, while the book of Baruch, at the end of the second volume, was not written before the be- ginning of the following century — dates which identify it with the age in which Gundulf lived. Originally it seems to have been covered in wood and white leather, but is now splendidly bound in blue morocco with insides richly tooled. The catalogue of the Priory Library, made in 1202, speaks of the work as " The Old and New Testament according to the translation of Jerome in two ancient volumes " — " Vetus et Novum Testamentum secundum transla- tionem Ieronimi in II voluminibus veteribus." After the dissolution of the monastery it came at some time into the possession of Herman Van de Wall, a clergyman of Amsterdam who had formed a rich collection of manuscripts. The Rev. Theodore Williams subsequently owned the Bible, and at his sale in 1827 it was purchased by Sir Thomas Phillipps for ^189. It is now the property of Sir Thomas's son-in-law, the Rev. J. E. A. Fenwick, of Thirlstaine House, Cheltenham. The last public act of Gundulf was the appointment 58 ROCHESTER of an abbess in his nunnery at Mailing, which, like the monastery at Rochester, had hitherto been under his personal superintendence. "Then, having distri- buted his goods, even to his shoes, among the poor, and having bequeathed his rich vestments to the cathedral, he assumed the monastic dress, and directed that he should be carried to the priory of St. Andrew, there to die a monk among monks. His weakness increased, and he was removed to the in- firmary." On the last Saturday of his life, believing himself to be dying, "he received the Holy Com- munion and caused alms to be distributed. He was comforted by the fervour of his devotions, and was able to raise himself in his litter to show his rever- ence when the Gospel was read. A change took place towards evening, and he lay till midnight, speech- less, though conscious. At matins the service was performed as usual in the infirmary, and it became apparent to those around him that the venerated father was now in articulo mortis. The tabula was sounded — a board of wood which it was customary to strike with a mallet when it was desired to summon the inmates of the monastery without sounding the bell, which would arouse the external world. The tabula was sounded, and the dying man was placed on the pallet of horsehair. The brethren knew what the stricken tabula meant; they hastened to the infirmary ; they solemnly repeated the creed, the litany, the com- mendatory prayer. The breathing, however, con- tinued, and the Psalms were chanted in the ears of the dying man ; the 8oth Psalm was selected by the grateful monks : ' Turn Thee again, Thou God of ROCHESTER 59 Hosts, look down from heaven j behold and visit this vine; and the place of the vineyard that Thy right hand hath planted ; and the branch that Thou madest so strong for Thyself.' The day was just dawning as they came to this verse ; the light of the eastern sun shone brightly through the chequered window ; ere the Psalm was concluded the spirit had departed from the body. ' Their father had quitted that vineyard,' says the biographer, ' which under God he had planted, which by precept and example he had carefully cultivated, commending it to the care of God Most High.' " (Hook, Life of Gundulph, p. 28.) The death of Gundulf occurred on March 7, 1108, when he had entered on his 85th year. He was buried in the cathedral "before the altar of the crucifixion." " The tomb ascribed to him on the south side of the sacrarium, next the east, consists," says Mr. Bloxam, " of a plain dark-coloured marble coffin and covering-slab of the same material. This is without inscription or any kind of ornamental detail, and as it is in shape that of a parallelogram, and not of the ancient coffin-like shape, diminishing in width from the head downwards, I can hardly attribute to it a period earlier than the fifteenth century, if so early. It may contain the remains of the prelate whose name it bears, removed from before the high altar, where he is said to have been buried, when the present east end of the cathedral was erected or rebuilt ; and such translations of remains were in early times not uncommon." {^Gentle- man's Magazine, Dec. 1863.) Go ROCHESTER It will not be necessary to do more than mention Ralph D'Escures, the next bishop, who had been Abbot of Luz, as his tenure of office lasted but six years (a.d. 1108— 1114), and was not marked by any- thing of importance in connection with the diocese. We may, however, just note in passing, that, after the death of Anselm, he was for five years adminis- trator of the see of Canterbury, to which he was subsequently appointed, exercising his authority at the request of the Chapter, so far as the diocese was concerned ; and with the concurrence of the suffragan bishops, and by direction of the king and his great council, in what related to the province, thus affording another illustration of the close connection which formerly existed between the two Kentish sees. The Saxon Chronicle represents the appointment of his successor as due to the personal intervention of Henry I. "At this same time the King went to- ward the sea, and wished to pass over, but the weather hindered him. During the while he sent his writ to the Abbot Ernulf of Peterborough, and commanded that he should come to him speedily, because he wished to speak with him in private. When he came he constrained him to accept the bishoprick of Rochester ; and the Archbishops and Bishops and Nobility who were in England agreed with the King. For a long time he refused, but it did not continue. And the King commanded the Archbishop to conduct him to Canterbury and con- secrate him, whether he would 01 no. This was done in the town called Burne (Eastbourne, or as ROCHESTER 6 1 some say Sittingbourne) on the seventeenth day of the kalends of October (September 14). When the monks of Peterborough heard this said, then were they so sorry as they had never been before, because he was a very good man and gentle, and did much good within and without while he resided there." The prelate, of whom a favourable opinion seems to have been thus generally entertained, was a French- man by birth, and, like Gundulf, had been a monk of Bee, whence Lanfranc had summoned him to Canterbury. Under Anselm he became Prior of Christ Church. While there Ernulf proved his pos- session of a true genius for architecture by the skill with which he continued the cathedral begun by Lanfranc. As Abbot of Peterborough he nearly rebuilt the monastery. Nor was he less zealous at Rochester, where he was enthroned October 10, n 14. For the Priory of St. Andrew he erected the Frater, otherwise called the Refectory, or dining-hall, the Dorter, or Dormitory, the sleeping apartment of the monks, and the Chapter-house, in which they met for the transaction of business. Of this last some slight but beautiful remains exist in the gardens on the south side of the cathedral, with fragments of the cloister wall beneath. The carved diaper on the wall appears to be a distinctive mark of Ernulf's work. It consists of a reticulated pattern, the lines of which are peculiarly interwoven wherever they intersect, and is not known to occur elsewhere than here and at Canterbury, where it is found on the wall of the passage leading from the north transept to the crypt. 62 ROCHESTER The bishop made provision for the repair of the buildings he had raised by assigning to the monks "the pence called synodals — pence which the parochial presbyters are accustomed to pay when they receive chrism, or assemble in synod." Another point of resemblance between his work at Canterbury and that at Rochester, may be seen by comparing an arcade on the exterior of St. Anselm's Tower in the one, with the arcade at the foot of the staircase in the Deanery at the other. Ernulfs liberality extended, as might be expected, to the cathedral, the church of the Priory, on which he bestowed the rectory of Hadenham in Buckingham- shire, with the tithes and lands belonging to it, for the supply of lights, adding, we are told, " most precious ornaments." With the name of Ernulf is associated the famous Textus Roffensis, one of the most remarkable docu- ments in existence, and as such claiming a notice in any account of the diocese of Rochester. This book, now bound in a single volume, but at one period in two, consists of 234 leaves of vellum measuring 9 inches by 6\ each, and containing 24 lines in a page. The former part is occupied with the laws of Kent and of the Saxon kings of England and of William the Conqueror — the latter is a chartulary of the church of Rochester, with lists of the early kings, bishops, and popes. There is a variety of writing in the course of the volume in the strong, bold style characteristic of the twelfth century. Simple initials of green and red are used throughout ; ROCHESTER 63 and at the beginning of the chartulary the large letter R is formed of the standing figure of an angel and a winged dragon, coloured with green, lake, and ver- milion. The MS. is made up of quires of various sizes, but generally of eight leaves. There are two sets of signatures. Those which mark the quires in the earlier part of the volume show that probably as much as three more quires once stood at the begin- ning. They must, however, have been lost before the early part of the fourteenth century, as the title of the book, Textus de eccksia Roffensi per Ernulphum episcopum, is written in a hand of that time on the first page. The second set of signatures begins with the chartulary (f. 119), showing that the present volume is made up of two MSS., written at the same time and in the same form. Dr. Liebermann con- siders that there are three manuscripts contained in the existing book rather than two, and remarks : "Ernulfs authorship must not be understood as a modern one. There is no author of Textus Roffensis in our sense; nor must the inscription of 1300 necessarily mean anything more than a collector, a compiler ; nay, it even perhaps designated only the owner, and afterwards donor. Ernulfs own hand has most likely not written any stroke in the whole volume, because great bishops were used to leave this tedious copyist's work to junior clerks. It is certain that he did not write the chartulary, the oldest hand of which penned a record of 1145. It is not impossible, though not the slightest argument is to be discovered for it, that Ernulf did the correc- 64 ROCHESTER tion of the early part of the work. Perhaps, owing to his French (not Norman) nationality, Ernulf had a feeling for the antiquity of the Anglo-Saxons. Under him the Anglo-Saxon Eadmer became Precentor of Christ Church j under him the last Anglo-Saxon his- torical phrases were penned in Christ Church ; under him Peterborough finished the string of the Anglo- Saxon annals. The prayer of the Anglo-Saxon chroni- cler for him is touching indeed : « May Almighty God ever dwell with him.' " All this would account for his interest in the former part of the Textus. "On the other hand Ernulf must have possessed a certain legal training " (we know that he was held in repute as an authority on canon law), and, as a disciple of Lanfranc, showed both at Canterbury and at Peterborough that he cared for the monastic temporalities. "The chartulary therefore, coming under the head of the ' exterior,' or administrative, business, would interest him." (MS. in the possession of the Dean and Chapter of Rochester.) During the seventeenth century this invaluable manuscript fell into the hands of a physician named Leonard, who secreted it for two years, but was at length forced by a decree of the Court of Chancery to restore it to its rightful owners. They were again in imminent danger of losing their property; for an accident having happened through stress of weather to the vessel in which Dr. Harris sent it to London, it lay for some hours under water. The doctor, who was one of the canons, had borrowed the MS. for the use of his intended history of Kent. It is ROCHESTER 65 now in safe custody, and but little the worse for its immersion in the Thames. Not much is told us of Ernulf's pontifical career beyond his presence at the consecration of other bishops. To the last he enjoyed the confidence of his old friends the monks of Canterbury, and was always revered by those of Rochester as a benefactor worthy to be classed with Gundulf and Lanfranc. Some three or four years before his death, he is found arguing in favour of the custom then coming into use of giving the bread dipped in wine to the communicant, instead of offering him each of the elements separately, on the plea afterwards commonly urged, that otherwise some of the wine would probably be spilled if taken by people with moustaches, and might possibly be spilled even by smooth-shaven men and by women. Ernulf died in March n 24, at the age of eighty-four. The episcopate of his successor, John, Archdeacon of Canterbury, was distinguished by an event which must have been deeply interesting to the diocese at large. The cathedral begun by Gundulf was in some sort finished, and now, one day in the Ascension-tide of 1 130 — on the 5th, 7th, 8th, or nth of May — the com- pleted edifice was consecrated by the Primate, William de Corbeuil, the builder of the castle keep, in the presence of Henry I. (whose statue, with that of "good queen Molde," perhaps the most ancient regal effigies remaining in England, still adorns the west front), and with the assistance of the Bishops of London, Winchester, Lincoln, Salisbury, Worcester, Coventry, Bath, Norwich, Chichester, St. Davids, Evreux and E 66 ROCHESTER Seez, as well, of course, as the diocesan. The concourse of so many dignitaries, with their attendants, and those of the sovereign, produced, or at any rate was followed by, one of those conflagrations which were of such frequent occurrence in the old towns, with their narrow streets and houses built of wood. The city suffered much, under the very eyes of the king, but it is doubtful whether the priory and cathedral were injured. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle simply says, "the town was nearly consumed," making no mention of the ecclesiastical buildings. Two disastrous fires subsequently occurred — in 1137 and 1179, — and as Edmund of Hadenham calls the latter of these the second fire, we may conclude that the newly- dedicated fabric was little, if at all, damaged at this time. A result of the royal visit to Rochester was the gift to the monastery of the rectory of Boxley, with all its rights and liberties as enjoyed by Jeffrey, the king's chaplain, and previously by Ansfrid the cleric. The charter expressly speaks of the donation as made "at the dedication, at which I was present" — "in dedicatione ipsiits ecclesie itbi presens affuiP (Reg. Roff., p. 179.) As a matter of local interest we observe that Bishop John built Frindsbury Church of stone ; the church on the hill, so conspicuous an object to all who approach Rochester by road, rail, or water, which retains to this day many of its Norman features, and has some wall-paintings of the following century well worthy of inspection. The bishop devoted the revenues of Frindsbury Church to the supply of wax tapers for the altar of the cathedral, and assigned to the ROCHESTER 67 same purpose those of the original chapel of Strood, also erected by his care.1 1 The declaration attributed in the Registrant to Henry I., that lie had taken the monks of Rochester and all their possessions under his protection, and commanded that wherever they went they should be honourably received and liberally assisted with the means of repairing their church, cannot have been published by him, as the king is styled in the preamble Duke of Aquitaine and Earl of Anjou, dignities to which he had no pretensions. It must have been issued by Henry II., to whom these titles be- longed, and probably referred to the fire of 1 1 79. Of the fire of 1 137 it is said that the church of Rochester and the whole city and all the offices of the priory were burnt. We must not, however, take this literally, but understand it as meaning that a large amount of damage was done. There is cause to believe that the accounts of fires were exaggerated by the monkish historians. CHAPTER IV The reign of Stephen, as is well known, was, at any rate for the greater part of it, one of the most disturbed periods of English history. We have no reason to suppose that the diocese of Rochester was more unfortunate than the rest of the country. The probability is that it was less so ; for the only circumstance which specially connects it with the civil war is the temporary imprisonment of the great Earl of Gloucester in Rochester Castle. Stephen's queen, finding she could not prevail on the earl to enter into any arrangement for the restoration of his liberty, committed him for safe custody to the charge of William of Ypres ; " and though she might have remembered," says William of Malmesbury, " that her husband had been fettered by his command, yet she never suffered a bond of any kind to be put upon him, nor presumed on her dignity to treat him dis- honourably; and finally, when he was conducted to Rochester, he went freely whenever he wished to the churches below the castle, and conversed with whom he pleased, the queen only being present. After her departure he was held in free custody in the keep ; ROCHESTER 69 and so calm and serene was his mind, that, receiving money from his vassals in Kent, he bought some valuable horses, which were both serviceable and beneficial to him hereafter." {History of his Own Times, book III.) It is remarkable that, notwithstanding the national troubles, perhaps in consequence of them, a large number of religious houses were founded in this reign j among others that of Boxley near Maid- stone, and the Benedictine Nunnery at Lillchurch in Higham, established by Stephen himself, of which his daughter, Mary', became the first prioress. The repairs of the cathedral and priory of Rochester, rendered necessary by the fire already mentioned, were continued, but under difficulties occasioned by the bishop who succeeded John of Canterbury. We are told that on the vacancy of the see it was entrusted to the care of John, Bishop of Seez, whom Stephen at his accession brought with him into England. During the three years he acted as diocesan, this prelate is said to have behaved " rather as the robber of a strange flock than a shepherd " ; 1 for while the majority of the monks were dispersed among other abbeys on account of the fire which had consumed their buildings, he, regardless of the protests of those who remained at home, and were therefore aware of what was being done, bestowed several of the churches belonging to the priory on the archdeacon he had just appointed. The archdeacon was a man of mark. His christian name was Robert. What his surname was, if surname he had, is uncertain — whether " Le Poule," i. e. " the 1 Reg. Roff., p. 8. 7o ROCHESTER Chicken," or Pully, or Pullen. In the Registmm Roffense he appears as Pullus, perhaps meaning "dark." An Englishman, as it is thought, by birth, he had studied at Paris, and on his return to his own country in the -reign of Henry I. settled at Exeter. We next find him lecturing at Oxford, for a period of five years, on " the Holy Scriptures, which were grown out o'f fashion in England."1 A voluminous author, he wrote a collection of sermons, a treatise on "Contempt of the World," comments on the Psalms and Revelation, and a work in four books, Super Dortorum dictis, besides his principal perform- ance, Sententicc, in eight books. In the Sentences he enjoins that " the flesh of Christ alone should be dis- tributed to laymen," thus appearing as almost the earliest advocate of the mutilation of the Holy Eucharist by administration in one kind only. " The fame of his learning recommended him beyond the seas," so that " three successive popes increased honours upon him," and as Cardinal of St. Eusebius and Chancellor of the Church of Rome he "lived in great respect"2 in that city, until his death, which occurred about 1150. But his short connection with the diocese of Rochester was not happy. It did not exhibit him in the most favourable light, and it gave rise to prolonged litigation. As soon as their buildings were repaired the monks returned to Rochester, and, learning what had been done in their absence, directed their brethren at Rome to acquaint the pope with 1 Fuller's Worthies, "Oxfordshire." See also Camden, " Oxfordshire." 2 Ibid. ROCHESTER 71 their wrongs. The new bishop, Ascelinus, late prior of Dover, backed their appeal, complained of the archdeacon as failing in the obedience due to his superior, and went in person to Rome. Pullen did not appear, either personally or by deputy, and Ascelinus carried home with him an order that the churches of Boxley and St. Margaret, with the paro- chial altar of St. Nicholas in the cathedral, should be forthwith restored to the monks, as well as Aylesford to Jordan the chaplain, and Southfleet to John the priest. "Besides," exclaims the Supreme Pontiff, "'how fitting it is that they who receive ecclesiastical benefices should discharge the corresponding duties, we therefore enjoin the bishop to summon the said Robert to his presence before the approaching Whit- suntide, when, if he wishes to remain archdeacon in the said church, and is willing to do what belongs to his office, to the glory of God, and of the said church, let him keep his archdeaconry in peace ; if not, let a fit and honest person be appointed who will carefully perform his duties." 1 At this juncture Celestine II. died, having occupied the papal chair but five months. Lucius II., his successor, not only nominated Pullen Chancellor of the Roman Church, but, at his request, bestowed the archdeaconry of Rochester, with the disputed emolu- ments, on his relative (//efos) Paris, ordained a deacon at Rome. Lucius, however, was killed in the following year, and then the monks renewed their suit, fortified by a letter from Ascelinus to Eugenius III. "The arch- deacon, relying on his great literary skill, usurped the 1 Ay. Roff., pp. 9, 39, 40. 72 ROCHESTER bishop's rights, and would pay no obedience to mc, his diocesan. Moved by such injuries, I sought the Roman seat, expecting he would go thither, and join issue with me at an appointed time. But when I found he did not appear, either unwilling to meet me, or terrified by an accusing conscience, I returned with directions to nominate another archdeacon in his place, and re- instate the monks and clergy in the churches of which he had unjustly deprived them. Celestine dies. Pullen is invited to the papal court from the schools of France, and I receive letters from Pope Lucius commanding me to restore him to all his possessions. Thus compelled, I surrendered two pence of the fee specially belonging to the episcopal jurisdiction. Afraid also of the Chancellor's power, and dreading a second journey to Rome in my infirm state of health, as a temporary measure I unwillingly confirmed Paris in the archdeaconry, but now beg that the matter in dispute may be investigated afresh and justice done to all parties." 1 Such, in substance, was the letter with which Ascelinus supported the petition of the monks. The Chancellor, as was to be expected, opposed it and carried his point. Paris however, convinced, it may be thought, of the injury inflicted on the monks, or anxious to live on fair terms with his neighbours, possibly doubtful of the course events might ultimately take, "came into the chapterhouse" at Rochester, and entreated the monks that " with their good-will " he might be allowed to retain possession of the churches in question, on the understanding that they » Reg. Roff., p. 9. ROCHESTER 73 should revert to the monastery at his death.1 The compromise seems to have been accepted ; but the difference as to the fees arising from ecclesiastical causes required, in the following episcopate, the intervention of the archbishop, by whom the matter was settled on the basis of a reduction in the arch- deacon's share from half to a third.2 Once more the dispute occasioned by the appointment of Pullen revived. A quarrel broke out between Ascelinus and his former friends. Imarus, Bishop of Tusculum, the legate, sat to decide the question at issue, in company with Archbishop Theobald, the Bishops of London, Winchester, Lincoln, Norwich, and Chichester, the Abbots of Reading, Westminster, Sherborne, and Ramsay, and the Priors of St. Pancras and Bor- mondsey. The monks complained that, imitating " the wicked usurpation of his predecessor, John " of Seez, the bishop had altogether deprived them of the manor of Lambeth, and had " violently and unjustly " appropriated to himself ten pounds, annually, from that of Hadenham, manors given by William Rufus "for their food," and confirmed to them by Lanfranc and Gundulf, their founders. The charters are produced. Ascelinus has no convincing arguments to offer, and the decree goes against him. Imarus is recalled. A few days after, the bishop begins to complain that a faction among the monks had put him to much unrequited trouble and expense in the matter of the journey to Rome and the proceedings against Robert Pullen. Both parties are now summoned to Canter- bury. The archbishop acts as mediator. By his 1 Reg. Roff., pi. io. 2 Ibid., p. 58. 74 ROCHESTER advice the monks consent to give their bishop a hundred marks (^66 135. 4</. ) ; fifty to be paid that year, fifteen in each of the three following years, and the remaining five in the fifth. This ends the strife. Ascelinus receives the monks to the kiss of peace, and confirms them in all their possessions. (Reg- Roff., pp. 41, 42.) The death of Ascelinus in 1148 might be said to mark a fresh stage in the history of the diocese, if it could be'shown that the Archbishops of Canterbury, for the first time since the foundation of the see, allowed the prior and convent of Rochester to choose whom they would as their spiritual head. That such a concession was now made is asserted by more writers than one. The evidence and the subsequent events negative the idea that it could have been more than nominal. The kings occasionally inter- fered, as we have seen in the case of Ernulf; but for some time longer the archbishops named the bishop, as the sovereign does at present, though the formal election was vested, as it now is, in the chapter. On this occasion, at any rate, the choice fell on the Primate's brother, Walter, archdeacon of Canterbury, and it was made at Canterbury, in the presence of the archbishop, so that on the face of it the proceeding could hardly be called free. As bishop, Walter assisted at the coronation of Henry, son of Henry II., and thereby incurred the anger of Becket, by whom he was excommunicated ; but during the whole of his episcopate, which lasted for five-and-thirty years, he contrived to live on friendly terms with his monks, with the exception of an interval, about seven years ROCHESTER 75 before his death, when a difference arose between them as to the appointment of a Vicar of Dartford. The bishop nominated a relation of his own, one Roger, on the death of Ralph de Wyngeham. The convent claimed the patronage. Both parties sent representatives to Rome. The case was referred to the Bishop of Winchester and Baldwin, Abbot of Ford, afterwards archbishop. Perceiving that the decision was likely to be against him, Walter made overtures to his opponents, with the final result that they, out of respect to their diocesan, agreed to present his nominee, on condition that Roger re- nounced, as illegal, the presentation he had received from his kinsman and accepted the preferment as of their bestowal, promising them, also, an addition of two marks and a half to the pension they received from the benefice. (Reg. Roff., p. 10.) In 1182 Walter died. When Walter was dead and buried, the archbishop, Richard, took possession of the property of the see, and anathematized all who should do anything con- trary to the dignity and prerogatives of the metro- political church. Ranulf de Glanville, the Justiciar, forbad him to act without the royal sanction. Messengers were sent to the king (Henry II.), then visiting his foreign dominions. They returned with the answer that the archbishop had done nothing but what he was entitled to do, and might appoint any successor he pleased to the late prelate. Archbishop Richard chose " his own clerk," Waleran, archdeacon of Baieux, caused him to be elected at Rochester, and consecrated him in France. The proceeding aroused 76 ROCHESTER much indignation. The English bishops considered themselves slighted, and the monks of Canterbury were furious at what they regarded as an invasion of their rights. The new bishop had been consecrated in a foreign country, without the presence of his comprovincials. This was contrary to the canon. The election had been held at Rochester, without any communication with the chapter of Canterbury. This was opposed to the established custom. " But that which was intended by an enemy as a slur on the mother church turned by Divine grace to its greater glory ! " Prior Alan of Christ Church, a very wise man, contrived a ceremonial which satisfied all parties. There was a great day at Canterbury. Waleran came to the chapter-house, and in the presence of the arch- bishop, who presided over an assembly of dignified clergy in addition to the members of the convent, swore -fealty to Christ Church on the Holy Gospels. The senior monks declared that they had seen this done by his predecessors Ascelinus and Walter, and further protested that before he was consecrated he should have paid homage to the archbishop for the baronies held of him. They asserted, also, that immediately after the funeral of a Bishop of Rochester his pastoral staff should be publicly carried to Canterbury, and deposited in the cathedral until his successor had been consecrated there and entrusted with it. From the chapter-house a procession was formed to Christ's altar. Waleran read his profession in the hearing of clergy and people, the archbishop standing by, and having read it laid the document on the altar, from which he took the staff and mitre. ROCHESTER 77 The archbishop placed the mitre on his head, and then the new bishop dismissed the assembly with the episcopal benediction. All this happened on the 19th of August, 1 183, and is duly chronicled by Ger- vase. {Opera Historica, vol. i., pp. 302-6-7, Rolls edition.) Waleran is said to have shared in the feeling of hostility towards the "regulars" which had grown up among the bishops, and prompted Archbishop Baldwin's attempted foundations at St. Stephen's, Hackington, and, at Lambeth— a feeling for which abundant cause existed in the constant endeavours of the monasteries to render themselves independent of episcopal supervision, and in their habitual subser- vience to the papal court, now ceaselessly attempting to grasp the supreme power in England. Whatever his wishes may have been, he had little opportunity of giving effect to them ; for while preparing for a journey to Rome, which the king desired him to undertake, and where it is supposed he hoped to persuade the pope to sanction the removal of the "regulars " in his cathedral, in favour of the " seculars " whom Gundulf had expelled, he was seized with an illness at Rochester, which proved fatal, August 29, 1 1 84. The monks then barred the gates of the convent, and buried him privately, placing the pastoral staff in the coffin that they might not send it to Canterbury. Gilbert de Glanville, a native of North- umberland, Archdeacon of Lisieux in Normandy, was the next Bishop of Rochester. His election took place July 17, 1185; not in the chapter-house at Rochester, nor in that of Christ Church, Canterbury, 78 ROCHESTER where business of this kind had been commonly transacted, but at Otford, in the archbishop's manor- house, and in his Grace's presence — a proceeding which led to a protest from the monks of Canterbury as to the disregard of their supposed rights in the election. Alan, the prior of Christ Church, with some of his convent, visited Archbishop Baldwin at Teynham, where, in a very fruitful though not too healthy neighbourhood, on the London road, about midway between Rochester and Canterbury, the archbishops had a manor-house at which they sometimes resided, but of which no vestige remains. The object of the visit was to protest against Baldwin's conduct in allowing the election of Gilbert to take place in what they considered an informal manner, and to beg him to maintain the privileges of their church. " Reverend father, we come a deputation from the convent of Canterbury, as sons to a parent. In reverence to your person, we say nothing of the elect of Rochester, who has been chosen where and as he ought not. But we must speak concerning the staff which, as soon as Waleran was dead, the monks of Rochester should have carried to Canterbury." When they had related all that occurred in connection with the appointment of Waleran, the archbishop replied that he certainly desired to uphold their rights, but knew not what to do, since the Rochester men positively refused to acknowledge the validity of their claims. " What can I do ? " " In strict justice you might suspend the prior and monks." " Who then will present the petition for the consecration of the ROCHESTER 79 bishop? It would be a grievous scandal, and of no advantage to you, if my suffragans who have come from a long distance should have their journey in vain. Devise some plan by which the church of Canterbury may have her own and the consecration yet proceed." Turning to the monks of Rochester he said, " We have heard, brethren, what are the rights of the church of Canterbury ; now I charge you, on your obedience, to tell me what is the custom and not to withhold what is due." After consultation they answered, that on the death of a bishop the staff should be carried, not to Canterbury, but to the archbishop, wherever he might be, or might command. "If so, why not rather to Canterbury?" "Because of the slander of the monks." " Is it to be wondered at that they seek to preserve the privileges of their church?" "It never was done, nor ever will be." " There are those present who have seen it done of old time." " We are young, and know nothing but what we have seen." Perceiving how matters stood, the archbishop consulted in private, and then, re- calling the Rochester men, said, "You confess that the pastoral staff ought to be carried where I bid. Give it up then, that I may at once receive my own." It was yielded and received. "Give me, further, an assurance that you will abide by my decision on the whole matter." The prior of Rochester and his com- panions gave it for themselves and the convent. Then said the archbishop, " It would be pleasing to me if you, prior, would with your own hand take the staff and lay it on Christ's altar at Canterbury, but, since 8o ROCHESTER that is disagreeable to you, I deliver it to the prior of Canterbury, to be carried thither." With this compromise the contention ceased. The new bishop was a man of parts, and at once set himself to work for the improvement of his see. He found his bishoprick, so the chronicler tells us, " very poor, with mean and ruined buildings," and "putting on the carefulness of Martha," he first re- built "the cathedral houses which had been destroyed by fire," then handsomely repaired those at Stone which had suffered from the same cause, made those at Hailing, TrottesclirTe, and Bromley more suitable to the purpose for which they had been erected, and entirely rebuilt the very shabby dwellings at Frecken- ham. {Reg. lioff., p. 1 1.) If " the cathedral houses " refer, as many consider, to an episcopal palace at Rochester, then we have here the first distinct mention of such an edifice. The farm buildings near Stone church, which continued to be the property of the bishops until they were sold by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners in 1856, probably occupy the site of de Glanville's house. The tower of Trottescliffe church, still standing, may be reasonably ascribed to him. The manor-house he erected at Bromley stood farther south than the present "palace," and would seem by the foundations to have covered a larger space of ground. The masonry supporting an ancient drawbridge, the remains of which consisted of a rude mass of flint and chalk, cemented together by mortar which had become as hard as stone, was discovered by Mr. Child some years since. At Lambeth, too, which now finally passed into the ROCHESTER hands of the archbishops by an exchange, Gilbert built a town residence for himself and his successors. In Saxon times Lambeth was a royal manor. It belonged to the Countess Goda,1 sister of Edward the Confessor. She bestowed it on the church of Rochester, but it was afterwards in the possession of Harold, and from him passed to the Conqueror, who gave a portion of it to his half-brother Odo. Rufus, by a charter signed with his mark, and still extant in the British Museum, restored the whole to the former owners, with the advowson, "for the food of the monks." 2 We may suppose that there was then on the property a dwelling for the bailiff, where business could be transacted, and where the bishop or prior of Rochester might find temporary accommodation. When Archbishop Baldwin wished to found a college, with the real, if unavowed, object of freeing himself from the interference of the Canterbury chapter, he obtained from the Rochester authorities, on the failure of his plans at Hackington and Maidstone, a part of their "court" at Lambeth, with twenty-four acres and a pole of the demesne, " to build a church in honour of the blessed martyr St. Thomas, and houses for the canons to serve there." In exchange he gave a sheep- 1 A gold and silver pyx, copies of the Gospels adorned with precious stones, and many church ornaments which had belonged to her were taken from Lambeth to Rochester. 2 The grant was made "for the safety of my soul, and of my father's, and of all my relations, and as a recompense for the loss which, although unwilling, I inflicted on that same church, in order to overcome my enemies, who were unlawfully gathered within the said city against me and against my realm, over whom God Almighty by His grace conferred on me the victory." 82 ROCHESTER cote in the Isle of Grain, with all its rights, then let to John the son of Eilgar, at a rent of 60.?., and the services yearly due for the sheepcotes the monks already held of him in Grain ; services to be hence- forth rendered to them by their tenants, instead of to the see of Canterbury. The arrangement was made by his " venerable brother the Bishop of Rochester," and by "Osborne the prior, and the convent," "at the request of our lord Richard, the illustrious King of England," and at his own and that of his suffragans, "and strengthened by the seals of his fellow bishops," seven in number, "in the first year of the coronation" of Richard, i.e. between Sept. 3, 1189 and Sept. 3, 1 1 90. Baldwin went to the Crusade, and died at Acre. His successor, Hubert Walter, in order to carry out the scheme, or if that might not be, to provide himself with a residence near the court, negotiated a further exchange. For the manor and church of Lambeth, which lay at a distance from the other possessions of Rochester priory, it was proposed to give the manor and church of Darenth, with the chapel of Helles, a sheepcote in Cliffe, called Estmers, and 220 sheep, some land belonging to the said marsh, and the tenants Heimericus, Thomas, the widow Hagenild, Joceline, Walter the beadle, Eilwin, Martin, William, Adam, and Admar the fisherman, with all their services. The mill belonging to the monks, opposite the Tower of London, and the marsh at Grain given by Archbishop Baldwin, were not to form part of the exchange. On these terms the business was concluded, 7 Richard I., between the archbishop and convent of Rochester, "by the authority ROCHESTER 83 and consent of Gilbert their bishop." 1 At this time he held the rectory of Lambeth with his see, and was entitled to certain accommodation when visiting London ; he therefore made his sanction to the transfer conditional on a pension of five marks being secured from the rectory to the bishoprick,2 and the grant of a piece of ground near Lambeth church on which to build a house. The mansion was known as " La Place," and continued to be the town residence of the bishops until the attainder of Bishop Fisher, when it was appropriated by Henry VIII., and after- wards given by him to the see of Carlisle. The dwelling had its drawbacks, for it was so situated that access to it could scarcely be obtained without trespassing on the archiepiscopal premises, which occasioned frequent disputes between the officers and domestics of the two prelates. At length, in 1357, Archbishop Islip granted Bishop John de Shepey a licence to build a bridge across a creek at Stangate, for the convenience of a more ready approach from the Thames. The house was pulled down in 1827, and the grounds covered with small tenements. The Hospital of St. Mary, on the north side of the High Street of Strood, was a proof of our bishop's practical benevolence. It was founded by him " for the redemption of King Richard I. from captivity, for the reformation of Christianity in the Holy Land, and for receiving and cherishing the poor, weak, and infirm, both neighbours and travellers," for whose use 1 Rtg. Roff., pp. 434, 460. 2 In 1 32 1 it was complained that the five marks had been withheld for some years, and an order was made for payment. 84 ROCHESTER beds, victuals, and drink were provided until their departure. Nor was the monastery without some evidence of his good-will ; for, in recompense of a small piece of marsh-land granted by the prior and convent in order to enlarge the site of his hospital, he not only erected a new cloister at his own cost and furnished their church (the cathedral) with "a pair of organs," but discharged a debt of thirty pounds they had contracted with the Jews, the enormous interest on which pressed heavily on them. Another benefac- tion bestowed by him on "the cathedral was the gift of "two g/ass windows at the altar of St. John and St. James." (Reg. Roff., p. 121.) Gilbert de Glanville is said to have enjoyed a high reputation as "learned in the law,"' both civil and canon ; his name appears, 1 190, as one of the justices appointed to hold the pleas, and in 1206 he was a commissioner to investigate the dispute between the Abbey of Eves- ham and the Bishop of Worcester. We find him em- ployed in public affairs on several occasions. In 1186 Bishop de Glanville was one of the embassy sent to Philip of France. With Archbishop Baldwin he preached the crusade at Geddington in 1188. He was present at both the coronations of Richard I., and was a witness to the treaty of 1 189, by which William the Lion repurchased the rights conceded in 11 74. In 11931-iewas summoned to Germany by Richard, and on his return excommunicated John, against whom, during the king's absence, he supported Long- champ. After suffering much injury at the hands of John, now in possession of the throne, he fled in 1207 to Scotland, and is mentioned, in the following year, ROCHESTER 85 among the prelates who went to Rome in consequence of the confiscation of Church property which ensued on the publication of the interdict. Our business with him is as Bishop of Rochester. In this capacity his life was embittered by a prolonged struggle with his monks. The contest lasted for years, and proved so ruinous that the monks are reported to have even melted the silver shrine of St. Paulinus to furnish themselves with funds. We have seen that for some reason they had incurred a serious debt, and though we are not told that it was in connection with their dispute with the bishop, we shall probably not be far wrong if we assume this to have been the case. There can be little doubt that the feeling which prompted the Scottish king to say of his predecessor, David, that he was " a sair sanct for the crown " was that with which many of his successors, if not all, regarded Gundulf. They thought he had injured the bishoprick by a needless liberality to the monastery. This sentiment lay at the bottom of the present quar- rel, or at any rate lent a personal interest to the feeling with which, as a scholar and a lawyer, Glanville entered into the anti-monastic movement of the day. In the presence of the archbishop, and many prelates and " discreet and religious men," the monks finally abandoned their pleas, and submitted themselves to the mercy of their diocesan. From his award, given in the chapter-house at Rochester, which occupies several pages of the Registrant, we may gather a fairly accurate idea of the points in dispute. The monks, it appears, claimed to present to the churches of Frindsbury, Southfieet, Uartford, Stoke, Chislehurst, 86 ROCHESTER Woolwich, Aylesford, St. Margaret, Strood, Sutton, Wilmington, Kingsdown, and the parochial altar of St. Nicholas and that of St. Martin, in the diocese of Rochester, and to the churches of Boxley, Norton, Stourmouth, and Rotherfield in the dioceses of Canter- bury and Chichester. They objected to pay the exennium1 due from their estates on St. Andrew's Day, unless the bishop personally kept the festival at Rochester. They raised a question as to the hospital at Strood, on which, as having been endowed with some property they regarded as their own, they had always looked with a jealous eye, and as to the small tithes derived from the lands of William of 1 The exennium or xenium was a payment in kind, to be made annually to the bishop on St. Andrew's Day (Nov. 30), from the estates settled on the priory when Gundulf divided the church property between himself and the monks. "I, Gundulf, do appoint, that every year, at the celebration of the feast of St. Andrew the Apostle, there be reserved to me and my successors, out of the estates which I have assigned for the maintenance of the monks, such a xenium as is here specified. That is to say : from Woldham, and from Frendsbury, and from Denitune, and from Soutlifleet, and from Stoke, sixteen hogs cured for bacon, thirty-two geese, two hundred fowles, one thousand lampreys, one thousand eggs, four salmon, sixty bundles of furze ; and from Stoke one measure of oats ; but half the fish and eggs to be the monks' portion. And from Lambathe, five hundred lampreys, for the use of the monks ; also from Iladenham twenty shillings' worth offish, to be carried to their cellar, and there equally divided between me and them. But if it should happen, contrary to my wishes, that I, or any of my successors, shall be absent from the feast, then in God's name and my own I order that the whole xenium be carried to the hall of St. Andrew, and there, at the discretion of the prior and brethren of the church, be distributed to the strangers and poor, in honour of the festival." ROCHESTER 87 Wicham. They had a further cause of complaint respecting the appointment of certain officials in the cathedral church and priory. The bishop, on his part, had desired the restoration of the secular clergy whom Gundulf, "without the knowledge of the Roman court," had ejected to make way for the "regulars" then in possession. He had sought a suitable re-ad- justment of the "immense gift" made by Gundulf to the monks of manors belonging to the episcopal table, that is, intended to meet the bishop's household ex- penses— Hadenham with its church and appurtenances, Codintune, Uarenth, " which is the exchange for Lambeth," Southfleet and Frindsbury, Denton, Would- ham, Stoke, and Priestfield, and the land of Tonbridge with whatever pertained to it. Besides which, he had accused them of appropriating to themselves tithes, both his and others, and pensions from churches belonging to the see, contrary to the decrees of the Lateran Council, and without the authority of the bishop. These, said he, had been the points in dispute. The monks, however, " prostrate before him in the chapter-house at Rochester," had re- nounced their complaint and appeal, and again com- mitted themselves unreservedly to his judgment, in accordance with "the wiser council" they had taken " before Archbishop Hubert of good memory." Now he, on his part, " moved by their humiliation," and anxious to "admit them to the kiss of peace," renounced his complaints, as they had first renounced theirs, and "after mature consideration with many learned and religious men, and with the consent of their own chapter," "in order that there might be 88 ROCHESTER a lasting peace between the bishops of Rochester and the monks," issued his decree. Subject to th: life of Gilbert, the present incumbent, who is to become their vicar, on payment of four marks annually from the profits of the benefice, he gives the church of Sutton with the chapel of Wilmington to the monks, and puts them in possession, "that there be not wanting sufficient hospitality and alms for the poor, which in so celebrated a place as Rochester would cause no little scandal from travellers." On the death, or resignation, of Gilbert, the cellarer of the monastery will receive the tithes of corn, houses, and meadows without any further licence from the bishop, and yearly deliver at the almonry I one hundred seams —a seam is a measure of eight bushels— of corn, for increasing the alms to "the poor flocking to it '—thirty of wheat, sixty of barley, five of white wheat, and five of peas, twenty-five seams at each quarter day ;— expending the rest "in augmentation of hospitality." At Sutton a perpetual vicar2 is to be appointed, with care of souls, and endowed with the altarage, small tithes and offerings, and all church 1 The almonry was situated near the south-west end of the cathedral, and after the dissolution became the residence of the fifth canon. It was taken down in the early part of the present century, when the canon was provided with the house, opposite the archdeacon's, next the Vines. -' This is an early instance of the endowment of a permanent vicarage. In the course of our narrative we shall have occasion to mention other examples, especially that of Burham in the next century, of which the particulars are set forth at length in the Rcgistrum, and will afford, when we come to speak of them, an opportunity for explaining the subject. ROCHESTER 89 fees, and any land already given or to be given, except the yard with the houses and meadows belonging to the monks, and the tithe of corn. The same pro- vision is to be made at Wilmington : the burdens, beyond the synodals, which the vicar shall pay, to be borne by the cellarer on behalf of the convent. With regard to the other benefices appertaining to the church of Rochester, whether of royal gift or of the manors of the monks, the bishop, as vacancies arise, shall present to them on his own authority, but the persons so presented must attend in the chapter-house and pledge themselves to a faithful payment of the pensions due to the monastery. The church of Kings- down is to be in all respects at the disposal of the bishop, subject to the accustomed pension. In the churches beyond the diocese the bishop's nominee is to be appointed, but the monks are to join him in the formal presentation, and security is to be given, as in other cases, for the regular payment of the pension, which may be increased if the sanction of the bishop in whose diocese the church is situated can be ob- tained. The exennium must be rendered on St. Andrew's Day, whether the bishop be in Rochester or not. With the advice of the prior, the monk in whose department it lies shall, in five specified instances, present a fit person to the bishop to fill a vacancy among the servants of the monastery : in all other cases the bishop shall make the appointment as he has been accustomed to do. As to the Hospital at Strood, he declares that " for the sake of love and lasting confederacy," whenever the present master leaves, he will consult the prior and seniors 9o ROCHESTER of the convent before selecting a successor. The man so chosen shall come into the chapter-room and there, in the bishop's presence, take an oath that he will faithfully manage the house and all its concerns, alienating nothing without leave, and spend- ing usefully on the poor whatever remains after his own necessary expenses have been met, with those of two priests, two deacons, and the needful servants. Further, he shall engage for the punctual payment to the monks of the pension of two marks from the church of Aylesford, and of half a mark from St. Margaret's, and, " this done, let the monks admit him to the kiss of peace, and the society of their brotherhood," promise to uphold the settlement at which we have now arrived, and to maintain him in the enjoyment of his house and its surroundings, and the adjacent tenements, formerly held by Wine- man, and Almaric Buche, and Godwyn the weaver, together with the churches of Aylesford and St. Margaret, and the small tithes of the Wicham pro- perty, and the parochial church of St. Nicholas Strood, and the church which used to be known as St. Martin's. For " the more conspicuous veneration of St. Andrew " the master shall on the feast of the Apostle offer, annually, at the greater altar, two tapers containing four pounds of wax. And if any of our successors shall seek to contravene this ordinance, the monks shall be free cither to compel him to observe it, or to revive the pleas they have abandoned ; provided always that the hospital shall remain, that the right of the clergy in the several churches to which we have instituted them shall not be questioned, and that ROCHESTER 91 if any doubt should arise, during our lifetime, as to the interpretation of any part of this agreement, the decision shall rest with ourselves. Such, in its main features, was the decree. It was witnessed by the Abbot of Boxley, the Prior of Leeds, William Arch- deacon of Rochester, Master William the physician, and others. {Reg. Roff., pp. 52 — 55.) Although the monks were admitted to " the kiss of peace " in the chapter-house, and everything was said to be done with their consent and good-will, we can believe that their feelings towards their bishop were the reverse of cordial, but we should scarcely be prepared for the indecent outburst of rancour with which they greeted the news of his death on Mid- summer Day, 1 2 14. They at first refused to allow his body to be deposited in the cathedral, and finally committed it to the earth without any funeral ceremony, alleging as a reason the interdict under which the country was then lying. That they eagerly availed themselves of this excuse we cannot doubt, when we remember that one of their number, Edmund of Hadenham, the Rochester Chronicler, in after years declared it to be a token of the Divine vengeance on Gilbert de Glanville that he was buried without the rites of the Church, and that negotiations for the removal of the interdict were then in progress, and proved successful within five days of his death. A monument on the north side of the choir of the cathedral, within the sacrarium, is said to be that of this bishop. It consists of a high tomb of forest, of dark-coloured, marble, with an arcade of pointed arches on the south, the only side exposed to view. 92 ROCHESTER In the spandrels between these arches is stiff foliage not unlike the fleur-de-lis, and within the arches is other stiff foliage of peculiar design. The tomb is surmounted by a coped lid, or cover, partly embedded in the wall. This cover, which is partially open at the ends, has been much mutilated, but exhibits the remains of two quatrefoil compartments, each con- taining the mitred head of a bishop, sculptured in relief. Though the details are different, the tomb resembles in general character one in Canterbury Cathedral, long ascribed to Archbishop Theobald, but now known to be that of Archbishop Hubert Walter, who died at Teynham, in 1205, attended in his last illness by his friend Gilbert de Glanville, in whose presence he dictated his will. This resemblance makes the conjecture of Mr. Bloxam, that the tomb was in reality one of the shrines containing the remains of St. Ithamar or St. Paulinus, less likely than it would have been. With our present knowledge we may be inclined to think that the bishop's monument is an imitation of that which he had himself raised to the archbishop. There is an engraving of the former in Murray's Handbook to the English Cathedrals, and of the latter in Arch. Cant. vol. 20. 1 During the latter part of this episcopate, the diocese of Rochester, in common with the rest of England, lay under the interdict proclaimed on March 23, 1208, in consequence of the dispute between John and Pope Innocent, and followed on the king's 1 As Hubert Walter was the nephew of Ranulf de Glanville, the Justiciar, to whose family Gilbert is said to have belonged, it would seem that the two prelates were related. ROCHESTER 93 part by the immediate sequestration of the property of those clergy who obeyed it. The Bishop of Rochester, as we have seen, left the country for a time, but as to the general results of an interdict, we shall do well to bear in mind that they were not always in fact what they were intended to be. In this case the bishops of Durham, Winchester, and Norwich supported the king. In their dioceses, therefore, the interdict would be only partially ob- served. Throughout England some of the clergy disregarded it. As his own adherents were the greatest sufferers from his action, the pope was obliged in numerous instances to grant dispensations. No doubt much annoyance was caused, and a large amount of inconvenience was experienced, but it would be a mistake to suppose that the offices of religion altogether ceased in the land.1 It may not be without interest, as casting some light on the literary condition of the diocese at this time, to refer to a document discovered by Mr. W. B. Rye among the Royal Manuscripts in the British Museum, and printed by him in the third volume of Archaologia Cantiana. I allude to the Scrutinium, or list of books belonging to the Library of Rochester Priory, drawn up in the year 1202, on a couple of vellum leaves at the beginning of St. Augustine's De Dodrina Christiana, by Alexander, the precentor of the monastery. A catalogue of this period is in itself 1 " 1209. — Our lord the pope gave permission that once in the week divine service might be celebrated in the abbeys through- out England, but in a low voice, with closed doors, and after the seculars had been excluded." — Chronicle of Mdrose. ROCHESTER valuable, and it has something of diocesan importance, inasmuch as it proves that the higher clergy had within their reach the means of mental improvement — means enjoyed also by those of their humbler brethren who went forth from the convent walls to minister, from time to time, in the rural parishes, or held the benefices in the patronage of the monastic body. The books "represent a very fair collection for a library of this early date, consisting of about 280 volumes, and as many of these contained several distinct treatises, the number of works would be considerably increased. The list embraces copies of Holy Writ, of liturgical and devotional books, the Fathers, the Schoolmen, a goodly array of the classics, philosophical and medical treatises, works on grammar, and on historical and other subjects. Among the latter, we meet with a fine twelfth-century copy of William of Malmesbury, which was thought worthy of special record by the monks themselves in their list of benefactions to the Church, and which is now the Harleian MS. 261, in the British Museum. In the old royal collection alluded to, there are eighty-four volumes of manu- scripts, written on vellum and partly illuminated, which once belonged to the Priory ; they range from the ninth to the fifteenth century, and it is pleasing to find that about one-half of them are the identical venerable copies specified in the catalogue of 1202. Many bear on their leaves terrible anathemas launched against all who should deface, purloin, or conceal the volumes. The names of the donors — Kentish names for the most part — are oftentimes recorded, occasion- ally the name of the scribe is added, and in a few ROCHESTER 95 instances we meet with a memorandum showing that a particular book had been placed in pawn in one of the public chests applied to this purpose in various parts of the kingdom, with the amount of money advanced upon it." We find in Precentor Alexander's list, among others, The Confessions and De Civitate Dei of St. Augustine; St. Jerome on Ecclesiastes, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, the Minor Prophets, and St. Matthew ; Gregory on Job in two volumes ; the Epistles of St. Paul with comments ; the Old and New Testament in two volumes (Gundulf's Bible), Josephus, Ruffinus' Ecclesiastical History, the works of Bede, Canons and Councils, Life of St. Bernard, History of the Britons, Chronicle of Adam of Cobham, Miracles of St. Pauttnus and St. Ithamar in one volume, Horace, Virgil, Sallust, Terence, Lucan, Persius, and Macrobius. It is gratifying to observe that the books of Holy Scripture, and the com- mentaries on them, were in many cases the gifts of the bishops, who thus showed their desire to promote the spiritual edification of their clergy, and through them of the people entrusted to their care. 96 CHAPTER V After the death of Gilbert de Glanville the see of Rochester was occupied during the remainder of the thirteenth century by eight successive prelates — Benedict de Sansetun, Henry de Sandford, Richard of Wendover, Laurence of St. Martin, Walter of Merton, John of Bradfield, Thomas de Inglethorpe, and Thomas of Woldham — whose episcopates will form the subject of this chapter. Benedict de Sansetun, precentor of St. Paul's, is first known to history in connection with the struggle between Prince, afterwards King John, and William de Longchamp, Chancellor and Regent of the realm. In 1 191 he had been custodian of the great seal. He became Bishop of Rochester in the year in which the interdict was relaxed and a reconciliation effected between John and the Roman court. Lang- ton's charter referring to his election, dated at Winchester January 20, 12 15, is considered to be the earliest specimen of Norman French existing in this country, and is also remarkable as showing the anxiety of the Primate not to endanger in any way the success of the negotiations then pending. It runs in ROCHESTER 97 English, "Stephen, by the grace of God, Archbishop of Canterbury, Primate of All England, Cardinal of the Church of Rome, to all who shall see this charter, greeting. Know all of you that we do not wish that anything which is done by our dear Lord John, the King of England, or by us, touching the election or the confirmation, or the consecration, of the elect of Rochester, which can be hurtful, or may seem to be hurtful, to our aforesaid lord, or to his heirs, shall be hurtful to him, or to his heirs, either in seisin or in the right, which he declares himself to have in the advowson of the Bishop of Rochester. Moreover, whether the peace spoken of between him and us be concluded, or not, we wish that the charter which the aforesaid our Lord the King made us beforehand of the advowson of the aforesaid church of Rochester, shall be firmly held at all times ; and that these things may be established we have confirmed them by this charter and our seal. Witnesses our dear brothers Peter Bishop of Winchester, Jocelyn Bishop of Bath and Glastonbury, Walter Bishop of Worcester, Master Pandulf, the subdeacon of the pope." (Meg. Roff. pp. 36.) The royal charter, Nov. 26, 1214, had granted the archbishop the patronage of the church and bishop- rick of Rochester, with all its appurtenances, liberties, dignities, and free customs, so that on a vacancy the archbishop and his successors should hold it freely and peaceably, and in the election of a bishop should not require the royal assent, before or after. The bishop elect was to receive the temporalities, hitherto called royalties, from the hands of the archbishop, and ROCHESTER to. do homage to him for the estates belonging to the see, and to render to him and his successors such services as were due to the king and his heirs. These services the archbishop was to pay to the sovereign, to whom as to his prince the Bishop of Rochester must do homage ; but not on account of any fee. In other words, while the bishop acknowledged himself to be the king's subject, he was to regard the Archbishop of Canterbury as his feudal lord. The circumstances attending the appointment of Benedict seem creditable to all concerned in it. When Gilbert de Glanville died, the legate, Nicholas Bishop of Tusculum, came to Rochester, and, recommending some of his friends as worthy of the episcopate, repeatedly urged the monks to fill up the vacancy on the authority of the papal letter he had already for- warded. But nothing was done. In time letters arrived from the king, referring to an election, and directing that they should look to the archbishop as they had been accustomed to look to the king and his pre- decessors. On this Stephen Langton, the arch- bishop, paid several visits to the convent. He found the monks reluctant to take any steps. They were afraid of putting their church in a different position to that in which it had hitherto stood. " There is no ground for alarm," said he, " I promise to be a good and careful pastor and guide." Long and often they debated among themselves as to the choice they should make, being anxious to select a " suitable man in God's sight, who should be useful to the sovereign and the realm, and acceptable to the king and the archbishop." ROCHESTER A good report reached them of Master Benedict, Precentor of St. Paul's, for whose estimable qualities the archbishop vouched. They carefully discussed the matter with each other and with Stephen, some- times in the prior's lodging, sometimes at Hailing. The election was finally fixed for December 13, the feast of St. Lucy. On the appointed day the arch- bishop appeared, and taking his seat in the Chapter- house "admonished and besought" them to provide a pastor according to God's will, discreet, far-seeing, of good character, fit to execute the office of a bishop, able in all respects to supply his place. " Lord and Father," said they, " it is for us to elect." "And for us readily to withdraw," answered Master Simon, the archbishop's brother. " You ought not to leave. My lord will go out, for the election should be made in the Chapter-house." The archbishop went out and his brother with him. Then the monks discussed the claims of Benedict and of other candidates. Those of Benedict seemed so superior that every vote was given in his favour. The archbishop was recalled and informed of the result, which was then made public. Without loss of time William Prior of Rente, and William of Hoo, were despatched to Paris, where the newly-elected bishop was presiding in the schools. Benedict returned at once to England, was confirmed at Harrow and consecrated at Oseney, by Oxford, on the Festival of the Conversion of St. Paul. {Aug. Sac. vol. i. pp. 385-6.) The most remarkable event in Benedict's episcopate was the siege of Rochester Castle, held by the barons against John. The story has been often told and 1 jj need not be reproduced here. When the castle at last surrendered, John, like the mean-spirited tyrant he was, gave orders for a general massacre of the garrison and commanded that the leader, William d'Albiney, and all the nobles should be hanged on a gibbet. The order would have been carried out, had not Savaric de Mauleon, moved by magnanimity, or self-interest, or a mixture of the two, gone to him and said, " My lord king, our contest is not yet over, there- fore you ought carefully to consider how the fortunes of war may turn ; for if you now order us to hang these men, the barons, our enemies, will perhaps, by a like event, take me, or other nobles of your army, and, following your example, hang us ; therefore do not let this happen ; for in such a case, no one will fight in your cause." The plea availed to save the lives of the chieftains, who were sent in close custody to Corfe Castle, but the common soldiers, except the cross-bowmen, were hanged. How little accessible John was to any but the lowest motives is proved by what happened on this occasion. One day during the siege he and Savaric were riding round the castle to examine its weaker parts. A cross-bowman in the service of Sir William d'Albiney saw them, and said to his master, " Is it your will, my lord, that I should slay the king, our bloody enemy, with this arrow which I have ready ? " " No, no," replied William, "far be it from us, villain, to cause the death of the Lord's anointed." The cross-bowman said, " He would not spare you in a like case." To which the knight answered, "The Lord's will be done. The Lord disposes events, not he." " He was like David,"' ROCHESTER lor adds the chronicler who has preserved the anecdote, " who spared Saul when he could have slain him. This circumstance was afterwards known to the king, who, notwithstanding, did not wish to spare William, when his prisoner, but would have hung him had he been permitted." John, though very superstitious, did not possess a particle of religious feeling, and we are therefore not surprised to hear that in besieging the castle he was so far from protecting the neighbouring cathedral and priory from needless damage {some they must necessarily suffer) that he stripped them of everything on which he could lay his hands, not leaving even a pyx in which the Body of the Lord might rest upon the altar — "adeo ut nec pixis cum corpore Christi super altare remaneret." 1 Benedict, who is said to have done much for the houses of the see, "qui fecit omnes aulas episcopalus," - was buried in the cathedral Dec. 21, 1226. The election of his successor. Henry de Sand- ford, archdeacon of Canterbury, styled " the great philosopher," caused a renewal of the quarrel which had raged between the monks of Rochester and those of Canterbury forty years before. The parties met at Maidstone in the presence of Cardinal Archbishop Langton. Two monks, Walter and William, appeared in support of the Canterbury claim, that no election to the see of Rochester could be valid unless the staff of the deceased bishop had been carried to Canterbury. On the other hand, the 1 Edmund of Iladcnhani, Ang. Sac. vol. i. p. 347. 2 Additions to Customs of the Church of Rochester, 4ng. Sac. vol. i. p. 390, 102 ROCHESTER prior of Rochester, Richard of Darenth, petitioned that the election of Henry de Sandford might be confirmed. By the advice of "certain prudent men, anxious to save trouble and expense to both churches," it was agreed to refer the matter to the arbitration of Richard, prior of Holy Trinity, London, and Giles, prior of Merton, the consecration of the new bishop being postponed until a decision had been arrived at, but his election confirmed, "lest loss or danger should be incurred by the church of Rochester remaining so long destitute of a pastor." In about a year and a half the arbitrators issued their award. Contrary to what Gervase's account would have led us to expect, it sustained the conten- tion of the Rochester men that no such ancient custom as was alleged had existed, or if it had it had lapsed, inasmuch as for sixty years past the church of Rochester had enjoyed the right of free election, without sending the staff to Canterbury ; and that the presence of the staff at Canterbury, if proved, was simply due to the circumstance that the election of a new bishop had taken place there, and was no acknowledgment of " service or subjection." This decision was given at St. Paul's, London, 3 nones May, 1228. The beginning of Henry de Sandford's episcopate was marked by the use for the first time of the new choir of Rochester Cathedral ; much as we now see it, with the low desks yet remaining below the later woodwork of the stalls. A curious specimen of Henry[s preaching has been preserved. It is said that on on- occasion, when delivering a sermon in ROCHESTER Sittingbourne church, before a great audience, and in the presence of the Primate, he suddenly broke off the thread of his discourse by exclaiming, in a rapture of joy, "Rejoice in the Lord, my brethren all, and know ye assuredly, that of late there departed out of purgatory, Richard, some time king of England, Stephen Langton, archbishop of Canterbury, and a chaplain of his, to go to the Divine Majesty ; and in that day came forth no more than these three from that place of pains. Fear not to give full and assured faith to these my words, for this is now the third time it has been thus revealed to me, and to another man, and that so plainly, as to banish all doubt and suspicion from my mind." Bishop de Sandford was sent by Henry III. to Rome, in company with the Bishop of Chester (?'. c. Lichfield), and John Archdeacon of Bedford, to oppose the appointment of Walter of Hemesham, whom the monks had chosen, to the archbishoprick of Canterbury, and while there joined his colleagues in promising the pope, in the king's name, a tenth of all the movable property in Ireland as well as in England for the war, or crusade as it was called, which His Holiness wished to wage with the Emperor. The embassy accomplished its object, and Richard Grant obtained the archbishoprick, "When the day came for his consecration a con- troversy arose. It so happened that there were two other prelates, Roger Niger, the elect of London, and Hugh Norwold, elect of Ely, waiting to be consecrated at the same time. The Bishop of Rochester, as vicar of the cathedral, claimed the right to officiate. The 104 ROCHESTER Bishop of Bath, as senior of the episcopal college, asserted that the duty devolved on himself. Neither would yield. Finally, a compromise was arranged. The rights of each disputant were reserved, and the Bishop of Rochester consecrated the Primate in the choir of the cathedral at Canterbury, while the Bishop of Bath consecrated the suffragans in the chapel of the Infirmary. Henry de Sandford died February 24, 1235, aRd was buried in his cathedral, but no memorial remains by which the spot can be identified. A storm, which to some extent cleared the air, burst forth on the election of his successor. The prior and convent of Rochester chose Richard of Wendover, Rector of Bromley, and presented him to the archbishop, Edmund Rich, for consecration. The archbishop refused, on the plea that the clerk selected, so far from being a scholar, was "rude and unlearned.'' No doubt, the true objection was that Edmund had not been consulted in the matter, although the monks of Canterbury, in order to be revenged on those of Rochester for their victory over them respecting the staff, had delegated their rights, real or supposed, to him. The Rochester monks appealed to Rome. For three years the contest lasted. A decision was de- layed by the war with the Emperor, by the dissensions among the Cardinals, and by the non-appearance of the archbishop in court. He was willing to appear by his proctors, Simon Langton, archdeacon of Canterbury, and Thomas of Frakeham, but not in person, though he was at the time in Rome. ROCHESTER On St. Cuthbert's day, March 20, 1238, the election of Richard of Wendover was confirmed. Henceforth the feast of St. Cuthbert became a "double" festival in Rochester Cathedral. The representatives of the convent, A. de Glanville and Symon of Clyve, both subsequently priors, reached home "in great triumph" on July 16. The new bishop was consecrated at St. Gregory's, Canterbury, in the presence of a great multitude of nobility and clergy, and enthroned on St. Andrew's Day by Archdeacon Langton. One of his consecrators was Robert Grosseteste, the famous Bishop of Lincoln. After this rebuff, we hear no more of any open interference on the part of the archbishops with the election to the see of Rochester, though on each vacancy they probably made a formal assertion of their claims, until the Reformation. The monks found that " papal provision " was as much to be dreaded as archiepiscopal dictation. But this was not yet. Our prelate, however, and Simon Langton were before long engaged in a dispute as to the duties to be discharged by the former whenever the see of Canterbury should happen to be vacant. From old time the Bishop of Rochester had been the "vicar" of the archbishop, the "curate" as we should say, on whom, in the absence of his chief, the pastoral care of the parishes in Kent, and of the churches in the manors belonging to the metropolitan had devolved, and it was now settled that, sede vacante, the arch- deacon, whose jurisdiction was not to be interfered with, should give notice to the bishop as often as it was needful to dedicate a church, to hold an ordin- ROCHESTER ation, or to consecrate holy oil. If the archdeacon omitted to give notice, the bishop might announce his intention of visiting the diocese, while, on the other hand, should the bishop be unable or unwilling to obey the summons, the archdeacon was at liberty to secure the services of any other prelate. {Reg. Roff., p. 60.) The cathedral at Rochester, the mother church of the diocese, had long been in course of renovation, partly on account of the injuries it had sustained by fire, partly in consequence of the change in archi- tectural taste which marked the close of the twelfth century and distinguished the thirteenth. With funds derived chiefly from the offerings at the shrine of St. William, the eastern arm of the church had been erected in the Early English style, under the super- intendence of William of Hoo, the sacrist, and roofed in and leaded by Priors Radulfus de Ros and Helias. While the walls of the beautiful north-west transept, begun by the sacrist Richard of Eastgate, were rising, if not completed, — to be followed at no distant day by those of the south,— the choir thus adapted and enlarged, and wearing much the aspect it now presents, was solemnly dedicated on November 5, 1240, by Bishop Richard of Wendover, assisted by Richard, Bishop of Bangor. This may have been done, not in consequence of any alterations in the edifice, or of additions to it, but in obedience to the order of Pope Gregory IX., in 1237, that "all churches and cathedrals not consecrated with holy oil, though built of old," should be dedicated anew. Two years afterwards, 1242, the bishop appropriated ROCHESTER 107 the rectory of Eltham to the abbey of Keynsham, near Bristol. In so doing, he reserved his rights as diocesan, and instituted a perpetual vicar to the cure of souls in the parish. The arrangement, however, was not to take effect until the resignation or death of Robert of Londone, the existing incumbent, who in the interval was to pay the canons of Keynsham a hundred shillings a year from his benefice. In 1 244 a council of bishops assembled at Rochester. A new order of Friars, called Brethren of the Cross, from the crosses they carried on their staves, appeared, and, demanding leave to settle in England, requested that a habitation should be assigned them. They produced a bull from the pope, the contents of which excited general astonishment. For it conferred on them a total exemption from external control, and the power of excommunicating any who should venture to oppose, or even to reprehend them ! The bishops were naturally unwilling to encourage a body of men whose pretensions were pitched in so high a key, and dismissed them, on the plea that to give them a 1 licence would be to infringe the canons of the Lateran Council. The refusal was wise, but it is not easy to reconcile it with the belief in papal infallibility, or with the supposed dependence of the Anglican Church on that of Rome. On the contrary, it is one of many proofs that at no period of her history did the national church of England hesitate upon occasion to set at nought the requirements of her Italian sister, or to reject her recommendations. Richard of Wendover died at Frakenham, his Suffolk manor, October 12, 1250, and was buried in West- io8 ROCHESTER minster Abbey, by the special command of the king, who regarded him as a man of unusual piety. It is not known in what part of the abbey the body was laid. Laurence of St. Martin, chaplain to Henry III., president of his council and procurator in all ecclesi- astical affairs in 1244, an "elegant scholar," was conse- crated Bishop of Rochester, at Lyons, April 9, 1251. In 1257 he seems to have been at Rome, and to have obtained from Alexander IV. a confirmation of the ecclesiastical privileges of the English. From the Registrum Roffensc it is clear that his intercourse with Archbishop Boniface was anything but happy. The close connection with the metropolitan, which at an earlier period had been a source of profit and pleasure to the suffragan, brought with it in process of time many annoyances and some disadvantage. Boniface, engaged on the visitation of his province, of which the main object was to procure money under one pretext or another, sent an order to Laurence to proceed to Canterbury for the solemnities of the Holy AVeek of 1254. Laurence replied, from Hailing, that " though he was bound to his pastoral office and in- tended to keep the Paschal Feast at Rochester, to the honour and glory of the Lord's resurrection," yet he would do as desired if Boniface would direct that going, staying, and returning, he should be paid the sum his predecessors had received from previous arch-, bishops. Boniface repeated the command in the peremptory style of the age, observing that he had ordered his treasurer to give twenty shillings sterling, with which Laurence ought to be satisfied, "since ROCHESTER ancient custom abhors new exactions in sucli a case, and though he was specially bound to Rochester, yet he owed reverence and obedience to Canterbury, as to a mother.'' The bishop went to Canterbury and took up his abode with Lambert of Flanders. On the appointed day, Gilbert of Westgate, on behalf of the archbishop, waited on him at Lambert's house, and tendered twenty shillings as "procurations." Laurence declined the offer, and exhibited a book showing the customs by which the archbishop was bound — namely, that whenever the Bishop of Rochester was absent from his diocese at his request, he should be paid twenty shillings a day for three days. He further protested that if the sixty shillings, which his immediate pre- decessors Gilbert, Henry, and Richard, had received, were not forthcoming, he would never again obey the archbishop's mandate, as that " would be to yield the church of Rochester to perpetual servitude." The tender, the showing of the book, and the protest, were made on the same day, at the place specified, before Divine service began, in the presence of Walter of Hat- field, chamberlain of Holy Trinity, Canterbury, William of Hardies a monk there, Adam sacrist of Rochester, Samson a monk of Rochester, chaplain to the bishop, Alan of Bokland, William of Pitou, chaplain to the bishop, John of St. Dionysius, and Philip, official of the archdeacon of Rochester. For the future, we may suppose, the three pounds were duly paid when occasion required. At any rate, in 1280 Archbishop Peckham, "being absent in fulfilment of his duty, at a great distance," wrote ROCHESTER to Bishop John of Bradfield, from near Brackley in Northamptonshire, that it was his duty to ordain for him at Quadragesima and to officiate at Canterbury in the consecration of oil, &c, on Maundy Thursday. John replied that there was no claim upon him except the express request of the archbishop, but he would readily undertake the duty if his expenses were paid on the accustomed scale, and as the chapter of Canterbury had paid him when officiating during the late vacancy. Peckham agreed, but, "inasmuch r.s his treasurer was rather in need of money than abounded," hoped immediate payment would not be pressed ; " the Lenten ordination might be held at Canterbury, or at any place on the border of the two dioceses, as might be most convenient." The next year, 1281, the request was renewed, as the archbishop was engaged in visiting the diocese of Winchester. The Bishop of Rochester hinted that his past services had not yet been recompensed, but went to Hartlip for the night and ordained at Sitting- bourne the next day, being the vigil of St. Thomas, receiving forty shillings. While we are on this subject, we may remark that there is in the Textus Roffensis a memorial which directs that the Bishop of Rochester shall have twenty shillings a day, when travelling at the archbishop's request, or while exercising the episcopal office during the vacancy of the metropolitan see. When the two prelates were travelling together, it was left to the option of the archbishop whether to find the bishop in all things necessary, or to entertain him, his clerks, and his officers; at his own table. But, in the evening, it was ROCHESTER agreed that the Primate should provide the Bishop of Rochester with two good wax tapers, fourteen greater candles, twenty-five lesser, answering to the number of twenty-five horses and men ; plenty of wine and beer, and five shillings every day for his horses and family. The payment to be made for discharging episcopal offices was not the only bone of contention between Laurence of St. Martin and the archbishop. It is probable that some ill-feeling had existed from the first, since Boniface had tried to set aside his election in favour of another candidate. However that may have been, for no less than six years there was a law- suit pending between them. The details occupy fifteen folio pages in the Registrum.1 The Primate sought to prove that the lands of the bishoprick were subject to certain feudal payments which, by virtue of the charter of John, should be made to himself, and enforced his claim by levying a distress. The king 1 The whole account is interesting though not always very easy to follow. In "fence of tongue," Laurence was evidently quite a match for his adversaries. One of his remarks to the enraged Boniface is a curious instance of the way in which the clergy of the time confused things temporal with things spiritual. He tells the archbishop that he is bound to defend the privileges of the Church at the cost of limb and life, after the example of our Lord Jesus Christ, who suffered on the cross chiefly that He might give freedom to us and His Church, and also after the pattern of the blessed martyr, Thomas, his predecessor, who in defence of ecclesiastical liberty exposed his head gloriously, and fell under the sword of the wicked ; language which seems to us altogether misplaced, inasmuch as the present contest related only to feudal tenures and services and had no connection what- ever with religious doctrines or practices. 112 ROCHESTER asserted that some of these payments were due to the crown. The bishop pleaded that the possessions of the see were held in "free alms," and that he owed nothing, therefore, either to the archbishop or to the sovereign. His argument, strong in itself, was weakened by the fact that his predecessor had paid scutage twice, once at the time of the expedition to GannoCj and again at the marriage of the king's sister to the Emperor, which the barons- of the exchequer construed as an admission of liability. Laurence replied that if, by inadvertence, Richard of Wendover had borne a burden from which he was legally exempt, the act should be regarded as a proof of his willingness to come forward in a public matter, and not be drawn into a precedent against himself, since it was admitted that in the book of Fees nothing was entered as recovered, or recoverable, from the Bishop of Rochester. After much delay and some adverse decisions, he seems to have so far proved his case. But in another branch of the controversy he was not equally success- ful. Pressure from the highest quarters was brought to bear on him, and, at last, on July 19, 1259, he accepted a compromise whereby he regained for himself and his successors some of the rights and emoluments of which Boniface had deprived him, at the cost of a pension of twelve marks to be annually paid thence- forth to the archbishoprick. While the suit was still undecided, on the Tuesday within the octave of Pentecost, 1256, Laurence entered the Chapter-house at Rochester, the lord Symon, the prior, being present, with all his chapter, and there, "with lively voice but embittered mind," declared ROCHESTER "3 how the rents and profits belonging to his table were so small that he could not be supported by them, for they scarcely amounted to fifty marks a year, which did not meet half his expenses. The manors of the bishop and the city and bishoprick of Rochester were situated on a great public thoroughfare, and his expenditure was therefore much larger than it would otherwise be, on account of the necessity of showing hospitality, according to the custom of the country, to .the nobility of the kingdom, and others, whether Englishmen or foreigners, who passed that way. The bishops of Rochester, himself and his predecessors, being so much nearer to London than many other prelates, were obliged to attend State ceremonials by the command of the king and queen, not without great expense to themselves. His predecessors had held remunerative offices in conjunction with the bishoprick, and had thus been enabled to maintain their dignity, but had not been careful to obtain such an augmentation of their episcopal revenues as they might and ought to have secured. The cost of repair- ing and building the houses on his manors, which for the most part threatened ruin, had been a heavy burden upon him. He had paid debts to the Floren- tine merchants and others, and pensions to various persons, on behalf of Richard, his immediate prede- cessor. Through the war he had suffered much loss, as well as by the litigation and strife he had long endured in defence of the rights and liberties of the church of Rochester, against Archbishop Boniface, or rather against the king and queen, who had espoused his cause. Now it behoved him to go to Rome, costly i'4 ROCHESTER and fatiguing as the journey would be, because he could not get justice in England. He had expended, not only the insufficient income of the see, but his own private property, movables and immovables alike, and was so exhausted in the said quarrel that sometimes he had hardly necessary food for himself and his house- hold. What a disgrace was it to the Church that their bishop should be so poor, and how dangerous to themselves, since through his inability to defend them they might lose their liberties and be deprived of their rights. For these reasons, he had assigned in perpetuity, for the expenses of his table, not only the church of Isleham in the diocese of Norwich, and the church of Dartford, which, by the authority of Innocent IV., he had already so appropriated for his life, but also that of Frindsbury, then vacant, and in his gift, subject to the consent of the prior and convent. This consent was willingly given, on the condition that ten marks should be secured to them from Dartford, and one mark from Frindsbury, with all the tithes beyond the bounds of Frindsbury which they had hitherto enjoyed.1 The whole arrangement was subsequently confirmed by Clement IV. 1 To this period Mr. Hope ascribes the paintings on the jambs of the destroyed Norman windows in Frindsbury church. The figures, about 4 feet high, are those of St. Edmund of Pontigny, Edmund Rich Archbishop of Canterbury, canonized in 1246; St. Laurence, the patron saint of Bishop Laurence de St. Martin, as an abbot with his crosier; St. William of Perth ; and St. Leonard with his fetters. These are the only known repre- sentations in mural paintings of St. Edmund and St. William. (See Arch. Can/., vols. xv. and xvi.) ROCHESTER "5 From a copy of the "return" made in 1255, we gather some particulars as to the extent and value of the property belonging to the bishoprick of Rochester. The estate at Hailing, with its member of Holborough, and Cuxton, contained 717 acres of arable, which, not being "marled," were valued at fourpence an acre. There were also 38 acres of meadow worth sixpence, and 20 of pasture at eightpence per acre. The mill at Holborough was estimated at twenty shillings, and that of Cuxton at thirteen and fourpence. A vineyard is mentioned. At Stone 236 acres of arable were appraised at threepence an acre, and fourteen acres of marsh-meadow at sixpence. The mill was worth ten shillings. At Bromley the arable land did not repay the necessary expenditure on cultivation, and the buildings had to be maintained from the "rents." (A later return speaks of the "sterility of the land at Bromley.") The 200 acres of arable at Trottescliffe were valued at fourpence, and there was some pasture • and wood together worth twenty shillings. At Borstal 140 acres of arable were estimated at fourpence, eleven acres of pasture at eightpence and * fourteen at sixpence. The acreage at Frakenham is not given, but arable, meadow, and pasture were put at eight pounds eight shillings and fourpence. On the whole of the estates, the repairs were estimated at 20 pounds per annum, and the total gross receipts, including pensions from the churches of Lambeth, Bermondsey, Lewisham, and Tunbridge, and rents of assi/.e,1 &c, appear to have amounted to about 140 pounds. It is also stated that the " present 1 Rents of assize were tolls arising from markets, fairs, &c. u6 ROCHESTER bishop" (Laurence), "in order to obtain peace with the archbishop" (Boniface), "had been obliged to give him twelve marks annually out of his manors." Notwithstanding his financial difficulties, Bishop Laurence, if the conjecture of Mr. G. E. Street be correct, found the means of carrying out one of the finest architectural works in the diocese of Rochester — the erection of Stone Church. Mr. Street says, "The choir of Rochester Cathedral was first used in 1227, and the difference in style between the work there, and that at Stone, is so marked that I think it would be safe to assume that it could hardly have been commenced for some years after this date, and probably not long, if indeed at all, before the accession of Bishop Laurence de St. Martin to the see in 1251. He was bishop until 1274, and was succeeded by Walter de Merton, whose buildings, as we know, are in a more advanced style than any portion of the first pointed work at Stone. I believe, therefore, that it must have been during the time that Laurence was bishop that the church was rebuilt It was in his time, and through his efforts, that St. William of Rochester was canonized, and the shrine of this saint in the north-east transept of the cathedral appears to have attracted enormous numbers of pilgrims to Rochester, and to have greatly enriched its guardians. It was just the time, therefore, at which it might have been possible for the bishop to provide, or obtain, the funds for so very remarkable and sumptuous a work as this church, on the road between the cathedral and London, and at a place where he possessed a residence and estate of some value. It was, too, ROCHESTER 117 during his episcopate that the chief portion of Westminster Abbey was built, it having been com- menced 1245, and first used' in 1269, and the evidence of similarity between the work at Stone and that at Westminster is in many respects so marked that I believe I may safely venture to affirm the architect of both to have been the same man." {Archccologia Cantiana, vol. iii. pp. 107-8.) The story of St. William, to which Mr. Street refers, and which is more or less familiar to all who have any acquaintance with Rochester, cannot be better told than in the quaint words of Weever. "This Saint William was by birth a Scot of Perthe, by trade of life, a baker of bread j in charitie so abundant, that he gave to the poore the tenth loafe of his workman- ship, ia zeale so fervent that in vow he promised, and in deed attempted, to visit the holy land and the places where Christ was conversant on earth. In which journey, as he passed through Kent, he made Rochester his way, where, after that he had rested two or three dayes, he departed towards Canterbury, but ere he had gone farre from the citie, his servant that waited on him led him of purpose out of the high way,1 and spoyled him both of his money and life. This done, the servant escaped, and the master, because he dyed in so holy a purpose of mind, was by the monkes conveyed hither to Saint Andrewes, laid in the Quire and promoted by the Tope from a poore baker to a 1 At a later period a chapel of St. William, of which some fragments remain, was erected in Delce Lane, on the traditional site of the murder. The present Hospital for infectious diseases, known as St. William's, stands close to the spot. n8 ROCHESTER blessed martyr. Here, as they say, he shewed miracles very plentifully, which made people of all sorts offer unto him wonderous liberally, even until these latter times ; insomuch that with two years oblations at his shrine one William de Hoo, a sacrist, or keeper of the holy treasures of this church, built the whole Quire as it now stands." 1 So writes Weever in his " Funeral Monuments." We are not to infer from this account that the death of William of Perth occurred in the episcopate of Laurence. It happened fifty years before, in 1201, when Gilbert de Glanville was bishop, and had long been a source of revenue to the priory of Rochester, but the canonization was procured by Laurence and a fresh impetus thereby given to the veneration with which the saint was regarded. We have seen that the cathedral was in process of enlargement during a large part of the thirteenth century, but we do not know at what precise date the remains of St. William were deposited in the north- east transept. A tomb, consisting of a large stone coffin of Petworth marble, ornamented on the side and lid, but without any trace of inscription, in the 1 On the iStli February, 1300, Edward I., passing through Rochester, offered the sura of 7s. at the shrine of St. William in the church of the Priory. On the following day the like amount, specially termed "the King's oblation," is bestowed on the said shrine. On Feb. 27th, on his return from Canterbury, he offered the sum of 14*. to the two shrines of Saints Ithamar and Paulinus, 7*. for each. John II., King of France, who had been taken prisoner at the battle of Poitiers and detained in England three years, on his way back to Calais (July 2, 1360), made an offering at the church of Rochester of 40 crowns, valued at £6 13*. 4^. {Arch. Cant., vol. vi. pp. 44-5-6.) ROCHESTER north wall, near Walter of Merton's monument, is shown as that of the saint. The shrine, however, stood in the middle of the transept. All that remains of it is the base, removed, not long since, into the Warner chapel. St. William's Gate, mentioned in the licence to crenellate granted to the monks in 1344, was situated nearly at the bottom of the passage leading from the High Street, and was built for the convenience of the pilgrims who entered the cathedral by the north door of the western transept, and were conducted to the shrine, through the north aisle of the choir, by a flight of steps whose worn appearance testifies to the number of feet which have passed over them, and recalls to the mind the larger, but very similar, approach to the more famous shrine of St. Thomas at Canterbury. The subject of miracles from the age of Bede to mediaeval times is one of great difficulty. The men of those days were little acquainted with natural laws ; they were unaccustomed to critical investigation, their ideas as to what constituted proof were indistinct ; we may therefore allow that, as a rule, they honestly believed the truth of things which we have no hesita- tion in rejecting as unworthy of credit. Nor can we doubt that beneficial results often followed, in fact, from visits to spots of reputed sanctity. The expectation of relief, the unwonted excitement, the mere change of air and scene, would in many cases of themselves accomplish the desired effect. And no Christian can question the efficacy of prayer for bodily health, offered, even in the weakness of super- stition, to the God " in whom we live, and move, and i 20 HOCHESTJiR have our.being." So that we need not regard all the miraculous tales which have come down to us as deliberately concocted falsehoods. Imposture, no doubt, there was, and the feeling that "the end justifies the means" was too common then, as now, but we are not entitled to take it for granted that Bishop Laurence, or the monks, acted in bad faith in what they did in the matter of the baker of Perth who became St. William of Rochester. Be that as it may, it is likely that the church and priory about this time stood in need of assistance. Rochester was besieged by Simon de Montfort, Earl of Leicester, who, on Good Friday, 1264, having burnt a portion of the bridge, passed the river in the smoke and confusion occasioned thereby, whilst St. Clare entered the city from another quarter. It is said that the enemy rode into the cathedral on horseback, with drawn swords, regardless of the sanctity of the place and of the solemn service then proceeding; they robbed the church and cloisters of their gold and silver, injured the monuments of the dead, abused and slew many of the monks and citizens, and turned the building into a' stable. There seems to be no reason for questioning the truth of this statement, but we are surprised at it, since de Montfort was one of the most religious men of his day, and the Bishop of Rochester and the prior are not known to have acted in opposition to the barons. The bishop, however, may have been regarded simply as the feudatory of the archbishop, who belonged to the opposite party, or the acts spoken of may have been, and probably were, due to the licence of irresponsible persons, and ROCHESTER had no special significance. Laurence of .St. Martin died on June 3, 1274, and was buried in the cathedral, " with great solemnity," on the north side of the sacrarium, to the east of the monument ascribed to Gilbert de Glanville. There 011 a coffin-shaped tomb of dark-coloured marble, lies the effigy of a bishop in high relief. The figure is mutilated, but clad in the usual episcopal vestments. The style of the memorial is that of the latter part of the thirteenth century, so that it may be reasonably assigned to this prelate. ' The next Bishop of Rochester, Walter of Merton, is one whose name will be gratefully remembered while England lasts ; not, however, in consequence of anything he did in connection with this diocese, over which he presided but for a few years at the close of his career. We know nothing of his birth and boy- hood, and were it not for a chance entry among the Close Rolls, relating to an inquisition concerning some lands he held, should be ignorant of even his parents' names. They seem to have been persons of no distinction, but fairly well off, who lived at Basingstoke, where they died and were buried. In that town we may suppose the future bishop to have been born. The probability is that he received his early education at Merton in Surrey, and thence proceeded to Oxford. While at the university, he is said to have associated with the learned men of the day, and resided, according to tradition, at Mauger Hall, the site of which is now occupied by the Cross Inn, in Cornmarket Street. He had taken priest's orders before 1248, in which year he received prefer- 122 ROCHESTER ment from Nicolas, Bishop of Durham. From his subsequent career, we are justified in believing that he practised in the Law Courts with reputation and success. We know that he purchased large estates in the neighbourhood of Merton, a proof that he entertained a predilection for that place, whether it had been the scene of his school days or not. His biographer, Bishop Hobhouse, thinks he was twice chancellor in the reign of Henry III. — in May, 1258, through the influence of the barons, and again in 1 261. In this high position, when, in consequence of the absence of the sovereign, he was left the responsible person in the kingdom, his energy, ability, and conciliatory disposition, in very trying times, were conspicuous. On the death of Henry, in 1272, while Prince Edward was abroad, the barons appointed Walter, for the second or third time, chancellor of the realm. He held office for two years, retiring on the return and coronation of Edward in 1274. In that year he accepted the bishoprick of Rochester, to which he was consecrated in Gillingham Church, by licence from the chapter of Canterbury. Though resident in Rochester, his heart must have been in Oxford, planning and rearing his college, watching the work- men, looking forward to the future. He was permitted to see his great work in course of accomplishment. Before his departure the legal difficulties had been overcome ; the ground was bought, the walls were rising, the chapel was sufficiently ad- vanced to allow of the dedication of the high altar. Originally seated at Maiden in Surrey, Merton, the ROCHESTER 123 earliest of the English colleges, as we understand the word, and the model of the rest, dates from 1264. It was meant to be a seminary of secular clergy. The founder, fully appreciating the intellectual movement of his age, and unwilling to see the paramount control of it in the hands of the religious orders, then the zealous advocates of papal supremacy, forbad his scholars ever to take vows, and enjoined them to maintain their corporate independence against all foreign encroachments. The establishment of Merton College marked an epoch in English University life. Walter of Merton introduced the collegiate system, and to him, in all likelihood, we owe the Decorated style of architecture, of which his buildings furnish the earliest known example. So that, probably, one bishop of Rochester was the author of the Norman Keep, and another of Decorated Gothic. "Walter was, we may suppose, advanced in life when he came to Rochester. At any rate, his episcopate was short and uneventful. We are told that in 1275 'ie was one °f tne onty two suffragans who, to the "great disturbance" of Archbishop Kilwardby, annoyed at the small attendance, assisted at the consecration of Thomas Cantilupe to the see of Hereford, and that he obtained for his bishoprick the advowsons of Brundish in Suffolk, and Henley and Mixbury in Oxfordshire, and purchased the manors of Middleton in Northamptonshire and Cobhambury. The price of the last, now the property of Lord Darnley, was 360 marks, or .£240, the vendor being Henry of Ghent. The circumstances attending this great man's death 124 ROCHESTER have not been fully ascertained. According to the chronicle of Thomas Wikes, he fell from his horse when fording "a certain river," his servants drew him to shore, but he expired shortly afterwards. Kilburne says that he was drowned in passing over the Medway at Rochester in a boat, there being no bridge. The assertion that there was no bridge is clearly a mistake; the bridge existed, but was at the time in a very ruinous condition. Weever, in a poem called "The Mirror of Martyrs," published in i6or, in which he refers to Rochester Bridge, ignoring the original wooden bridge, and forgetting that the stone bridge was not built till 1387-92, writes — "And Walter Merton, Merton's Colledge founder (Why doth mischance neare charitie thus dwell), With lime and sand 'gainst tempest beating bound her, Who from her top by great misfortune fell, Riding along the workemen for to see : Fortune is ahvaies vertues enemie." All that is certain is that, Oct. 26, 1277, he added a short codicil to his will, leaving the residue of his property to his college, and died the next day, or the day following, where we know not. He is the earliest prelate of the see whose burial- place can be actually ascertained. Bishop Hobhouse {Life of W. de Merton, p. 40) says— "The executors' accounts give us particulars of the sumptuous monu- ment which arose over his remains" (in the north- east transept of Rochester Cathedral), "the chief peculiarity of which is its insertion in the thickness of the wall itself, beneath the sill of a window, and the insertion of new lights filled with coloured glass, ROCHESTER I25 just above the level of the monumental slab, and casting their chequered hues upon the inlaid brass of Limoges work. The whole expense of masonry, Limoges work, and iron railing, amounted to ^70." The original memorial having been injured, an alabaster recumbent figure was prepared and laid upon the tomb. It represents the bishop, not in the ancient episcopal habit, but in a rochet of the reformed church, with a ruff round his neck, an article of attire not introduced before the reign of Elizabeth. This effigy the authorities of Merton College did not value, and in 1849 they removed it to an adjoining recess, and placed in its stead a new stone slab, engraved in the style of the thirteenth century. When these alterations were made the tomb was opened. The Provost of Oriel (Dr. Hawkins) "distinctly saw the bishop for a few seconds," and had "a perfect recollection of his appearance." "It was not," said he, "such as I had expected, being of the Calmuck type ; the fore- head low, and the eyes very close together. He was very tall, more than six feet in height." Though so eminent a man and so great a bene- factor to society, the monastic chronicler of Rochester sufficiently indicates that the memory of Walter of Merton was not greatly revered by the Benedictines of his convent. He acquired, we are told, two additional manors for the bishoprick, but " notwith- standing his great power and authority, neither did himself, nor procured from others, any good thing for the prior and convent." (Ang. Sac. vol. i. p. 352.) The next Bishop of Rochester (consecrated by Archbishop Kilwardby, at Lambeth, on the Sunday 126 ROCHESTER after Ascension Day, being May 29, 1278) seems to have been an instance of what is not uncommonly seen — that a man may fill an inferior position with credit to himself and advantage to others, and yet fail in a higher. John of Bradfield, a monk of Rochester and precentor, on whom the choice of the chapter fell, was not likely to be the equal of Walter of Merton, and his short episcopate of not more than five years was certainly as uneventful as it was brief. But it can never now be known whether he did, or did not, altogether deserve the slighting terms in which he is spoken of by the conventual chronicler. It was too much the custom of monkish writers to measure the worth of kings, bishops and nobles, by the amount of their bene- factions to the particular society to which they them- selves belonged. We must, therefore, receive with caution the unflattering portrait Edmund of Hadenham has drawn of this prelate, though it may possibly be a faithful likeness. "This John," says he, "nourished in the bosom of the monastery and sent to its schools, found such favour in the eyes of the monks that, at great expense and with many journeys, they gladly promoted his election to be the father and pastor of their church, expecting to find him as humble and peaceable on the episcopal throne as he had been in the cloister. But, promoted to the bishoprick, he cared no more for the monks, of the prior he thought little, he bestowed serjeancies, he instituted officials, he took the exennium on St. Andrew's Day. Before they chose him, the monks believed he would be an ROCHESTER 127 imitator of Gundulf; changed into another man, he proved a follower of Gilbert. When one seeks the office of bishop, he is mild and lowly, unpleasant to none, hurtful to none, he defends the liberties of the church and fights for them with all his might. But when he has grasped the pastoral staff, suddenly he falls from superlative to comparative, from comparative to positive." (Anglia Sacra, vol. i. p. 352.) Fuller's account of him is far more favourable. He says, " Finding fifteen villages of the name, I fixt his nativity at Bradfield in Berks, as (in my measuring) the nearest to Rochester, where he was chanter and bishop. If mistaken the matter is not much, seeing his sirname is controverted and otherwise written John de Hoe. However being charactered, 'Vir conversationis honesta?, decenter literatus et in omnibus morigeratus,' (A man of good life, meet learning, and general affability,) I was desirous to crowd him into our book where I might with most probability." {Worthies — Berks, p. 92.) Some not very creditable incidents seem to have marked his election. The monastic chroniclers give no hint of the kind, merely saying that Prior John of Rainham, who had been appointed in 1262, resigned in December 1283. But Archbishop Peckham's register shows that the prior was deposed by the Metropolitan, on account of dishonourable practices in promoting the election of the late Bishop John, for which object he had con- sumed much of the movable goods of the church, and was said to have alienated other property in perpetuity, not without a measure of simony. {Aug. Sac, vol. i. p. 394.) 128 ROCHESTER John of Bradfield died April 23, 1283, and was buried on the south side of the cathedral, near the door or passage of the watchers, "juxta ostium excubitorum," — watchers, it may be supposed, at the shrines of St. Paulinos, St. Ithamar, or St. William, or, as some think, porters, whose duty it was to wake the monks for the nocturnal offices. The mutilated effigy on a dark marble coffin, in the north wall of St. Edmund's Chapel, not far from the steps leading to the crypt, is said to be that of this bishop. The head is gone, and the vestments are not very clearly defined. The left hand appears to have grasped the pastoral staff, placed diagonally across the body from the left shoulder to the right foot. Over the effigy there is a plain pedimental canopy of good design, which appears to be some half-century later in date than the figure itself. Thomas de Inglethorpe, John of Bradfield's suc- cessor, was consecrated at Canterbury by Archbishop Peckham, assisted by the Archbishop of Dublin and the Bishops of London and Winchester. He seems to have belonged to a family of some consequence, which took its name from a place called Ingolds- thorpe, near Castle Rising, in Norfolk. The first benefice he is known to have held is that of Pagham, in Sussex. In 1267 he appears to have been Arch- deacon of Sudbury. We find him Prebendary of Stoke Newington and Archdeacon of Middlesex. As Dean of St. Paul's, in 1278, he gave his consent to the erection of the new church built by the Black Friars between Ludgate and the river Fleet, on their removal from their original home in Lincoln's Inn. ROCHESTER 129 In 1283, after the refusal of John de Kyrkeby, Archdeacon of Coventry, to accept the office to which the monks had elected him, Thomas de Inglethorpe became Bishop of Rochester.1 His name occurs in the Registrum chiefly in connection with his dealings with the property of his see, but a few particulars are recorded which shed their measure of light on the times in which he lived. Shortly after his appointment, the Primate, writing from St. Neots, com- missioned him, "or any other catholic bishop obtain- ing the grace of the apostolic see," to "reconcile" the church of Maidstone, "said to be polluted by the shedding of blood." In the following year, 1284, "on the morrow of the birthday of the Blessed Virgin," Andrew, the Dean of St. Mary at Arches, and William of Alyng- berge, the registrar, arrived at Stone, where de Ingle- thorpe was, with letters of importance from the archbishop. A sad event had occurred at Bow Church, the seat of the Court of Arches. Blood had been shed, and the right of sanctuary violated. One Duckett, a goldsmith, having wounded a man named Ralph Crepin, took refuge in the church and slept in the steeple. While there certain friends of Crepin entered during the night, slew Duckett, and so placed the body as to induce the belief that he had committed suicide. A verdict to this effect was returned at the inquisition, and the body was buried 1 If it be true that Kyrkeby renounced his election on account of the refusal of Archbishop Peckham to confirm the choice of a pluralist, we have another instance of the efforts made by that zealous man to reform the abuses which had crept into the church. i3o ROCHESTER with the customary indignities. The truth, however, being discovered through the evidence of a boy who was with Duckett in his refuge, and hid himself during the struggle, the murderers, among whom was a woman, were apprehended and executed. The church which had thus been defiled was interdicted for a time, and the doors and windows stopped with brambles. To these circumstances the letters received that day at Stone referred. They were dated from Hunt- ingdon, and related that the archbishop had shared the opinion of many of his advisers, that the recon- ciliation of the church of St. Mary at Arches should be postponed until full justice had been done on all concerned in the horrible crimes committed there, but on further consideration, and having regard to the ill effects which would arise from too great delay in holding his courts, he begged the Bishop of Roches- ter, "salvis salvandis," to reconcile the church, that business might proceed in the accustomed manner. The dean read the letters in the presence of many of the bishop's attendants, and made the reason plain why the words "salvis salvandis" were inserted in them. (Jteg. Roff. p. 102.) Bishop de Inglethorpe did as he was requested to do. Some time afterwards a difference arose between him and the Abbot of St. Augustine's at Canterbury, Thomas de Fyndon, which resulted in an appeal to the law. The pope had summoned a council to meet at Rome, " for the benefit of the Universal Church," and ordered the archbishop to send representatives of his province. The clergy were accordingly called ROCHESTER together in convocation, where they made a rate on all beneficed men, "whether exempt or not exempt," to defray the expenses of the delegates who should be chosen. If any refused, or neglected, to forward their contribution they were to be brought to a sense of their duty by the application of ecclesiastical censures. Among the defaulters in the diocese of Rochester was no less a person than the Abbot of St. Augustine's, who "held the Church of Plumstead to his own uses." His plea probably was that as the head of a royal foundation he was exempt. The money, in any case, was not forthcoming, and the "ordinary" of Plum- stead, the Bishop of Rochester, pronounced the sentence of excommunication against the abbot, in Cobham Church, and laid his churches under an interdict. The abbot appealed to the king, the patron of St. Augustine's. A writ was addressed to the Sheriff of Kent, 1278, commanding the bishop to show cause before the justices at the next assizes why he acted as he had, and in the interval to withdraw his censures, under a penalty of ten thousand pounds. The bishop appeared by his attorney, and related the circumstances, pleading that the matters in dispute were of a spiritual nature, not affecting the king's crown and dignity, for which he ought not to be sued in a temporal court ; adding that he had in fact relaxed the sentence on receipt of the royal missive. The jury found a verdict to this effect and the bishop was dismissed. {Reg. Roff. pp. 106, 107.) Another dispute in which Thomas de Inglethorpe was entangled was with the monks of Rochester at the outset of his episcopate. We learn the particulars I32 ROCHESTER from Edmund of Hadenham. (Anglia Sacra, vol. i. p. 353.) The monks complained that, following the example of his predecessors, the bishop had used his authority to the injury of the monastery ; he created needless offices,1 filled them with his own nominees, and did not act fairly with regard to the exennium on St. Andrew's Day. The bishop stood on what he held to be his rights. The prior kicked against them to the utmost of his power. " I will come down and see," said Archbishop Peckham. His Grace came in the absence of the prior, and was met by the bishop. Together they entered the Chapter-house. A chapter was constituted. Then the archbishop, addressing the monks, said, "I have not come as Metropolitan to the prejudice of the bishop or of the Church, but as Visitor." Solomon de Roffa, a Justiciary, who happened to be present, testified that this was not a matter with which the king would interfere, even if there were no Visitor. The bishop retired, as did all except those whom the archbishop had named and sworn, the monks were separated from the officials, and then the enquiry began. When it ended, the archbishop inclined rather to the view of the monks than to that of the officials. 1 The various offices about which the dispute arose and which, to the number of 24, were ultimately decided to be in the gift of the Bishop, were — The Cantor, the Cellarer, the Sacrist. The Gatekeepers, the First and Second Cook, the First and Second Baker. The First and Second Brewer, the First and Second Tailor, the Laundress, &c. ROCHESTER 133 Calling the bishop to him, he said, " It is insinuated to us by the brethren that you wrong the Church of Rochester by acting against the wishes of the prior and seniors of the Chapter." Then said the arch- bishop to the bishop, " My lord, you do ill." "My predecessors," answered he, " have done the same." "By Saint Francis," rejoined the archbishop, "if an angel had done it, he did ill ; if your predecessors have so exercised their trust, you ought not to over- look the right. He is quite enough in fault who perpetuates the mistake and wrong of another." "So the bishop retraced his steps and began to follow better advice." The subsequent relations between Thomas de Ingle- thorpe and the Priory appear to have been all that could be desired, for the chronicler describes him as a man worthy of praise, gentle and affable, of a cheerful disposition, and given to hospitality, who deserved to have his place with the blessed. He was buried on the Sunday before the Feast of St. Dunstan, May 13, 1 29 1, with all due solemnity, to the south of the high altar in his own cathedral. The tomb is to the west of that ascribed to Gundulf, and bears a recumbent effigy, bearded and moustached, in the costume of the period. A few days after the funeral of the bishop, a scene was witnessed which, considering the religious pro- fession of the persons engaged in it, appears to us so extraordinary. It cannot be better described than in the humorous language of Lambarde, whose narrative is substantially borne out by the contem- porary chronicler. 134 KOCIlh.VIKR " It befell in the reign of King Edward the first, by occasion of a great and long drought of the aire, that the monkes of Rochester were agreed amongst them- selves, to make a solemne procession from their owne house thorowe the citie, and so to Frendsbury on the other side of the water, of a speciall intent and purpose to pray to God for raine. And bycause the day of this their appointed journey happened to be vehem- ently boisterous with the winde, the which would not onely have blowne out their lightes and tossed their banners, but also have stopped the mouthes of their syngingmen, and have toiled themselves in that their heavie and masking attire, they desired lycence of the Maister of Stroud Hospital, to pass through the orchyard of his house, whereby they might bothe ease theyr company, and save the glorie of their shewe, whiche otherwise through the injurie of the weather must needs have been greatly blemished. The Maister assented easily to their desire, and (taking it to be a matter of no great consequence) never made his brethren of the house privie there- unto. But they, so soon as they understood e of this determination, called to minde that their Hospitall was of the foundation of Gilbert Glanville (somtime a Bishope of Rochester), between whom and the predecessours of these Monkes, ther had been great heates for the erection of the same : and therfore fearing that the Monkes (pretending a procession) intended to attempt somewhat against their privileges (as in deede all orders in PapUtrie were exceeding jelous of their prerogatives) they resolved with all their might to resist them. And for that purpose, they ROCHESTER 135 bothe furnished themselves, and procured certaine companions also (whom the Hystorie calleth Ribaldes) with clubbes and battes to assist them, and so (making their ambushe in the orchyard) they awaited the Monkes comming. It was not long, but the Monkes (having made all things redy) approached in their battell array, and with banner displayed, and so (minding no harme at al) entred boldely into the house, and through the house passed into the orchard, merely chanting their latine Letaine. But when the Brethren and their ribaldes had espied them within their daunger, they ranne upon them, and made it raine such a shoure of clubbes and coulestaves upon the Monks copes, cowles, and crownes, that for a while the miserable men knew not what way to turne them. After a time, the Monkes called their wittes and spirites together, and then (making vertue of the necessitie) they made eache man the best shift for himselfe, that they could : some, traversing their ground, declined many of the blowes, and yet now and then bare off with head and shoulders : others, used the staves of their crosses, behaving themselves like pretie men : others made pykes of their banner poles ; and others (flying into their adversaries) wrested their weapons out of their hands : amongst the rest, one (saving his charitie) laide lode upon a married Priest, absolving him (as mine author saith) A culpa, but not A pivna : another, drave one of the Brethren into a deene diche : and a third (as big as any Bui of Basan) espied at ye length ye postern, or back doore of ye orchyard, whereat he ran so vehem- ently with his head and shoulders, yt he bare it cleane ROCHESTER downe before him, and so both escaped himselfe, and made the way for the rest of his fellowes, who also, with all possible haste, conveyed themselves out of the jurisdiction of the Hospital, and then (shaking their ears) fel afresh to their orgia, I should have said to their former orisons. After this storme thus blowen (or rather born) over, I do not mervail if the Monkes (as ye reporter saith) never sought to carrie ther procession through Stroud Hospital for avoiding of ye winde, for indeed it could not lightly blow more boisterously out of ani quarter. And thus, out of this tragical hystorie, arose the bywoord of Frendsbury Clubs, a terme not yet forgotten." {Perambulation of Kent, ed. 1576, pp. 290-1-2.) Before passing on we may refer to another episode which, as related by Master Edmund, casts a lurid light on the times. In 1292 the Justices Itinerant sat at Canterbury. A case was tried before them concerning the conflicting rights of the Bishop of Rochester and the Priory. One Solomon, "not the wisest man in the Bible, but he of Rochester," who had been deprived of office on account of his injustice and fined ^4000, did all in his power to prejudice the judges against the monks. His attempts were only too successful. The justices sided with the bishop. The jurors were intimidated. But wrong was speedily punished in a marvellous way. Gilbert, the bailiff of Mailing, while hastening to the bishop, " took a morsel of bread, and with the morsel tasted death." Henry of Higham, the bishop's seneschal, "who had always given the counsel of Ahithophel," sickened and died. Quickly the Sheriff of Kent ROCHESTER •37 (Richard de Cumbe) followed him to the grave. Solomon himself was poisoned "by an official of the Lord Bishop named Gynand," parson of Snodland.1 The Justices, "hearing of the aforesaid deaths, were greatly terrified." Some of them coming to Rochester, penitent and groaning, spake to the Prior and others of the convent — "Wickedly deceived by the craft of Solomon, we have acted towards you thoughtlessly and unjustly. Would that we had known your right and your charters ! But alas, we cannot retrace our steps. It may be the Lord will visit you before other judges at a fitting time." {Aug. Sac. vol. i. p. 354.) On the death of ^Bishop Thomas de Inglethorpe the monks elected their prior, Thomas of Woldham, to the vacant see. He refused the proffered dignity, in consequence of some injuries he had received at 1 "Pleas before the King, at Sandwich, Hilary 22 Edw. I. Kent — A precept was sent to John de Berewyk and William de Bereford, late justices in eyre in the said county, that they should send the presentations made before them concerning the intoxication of Solomon, of Rochester — who sent the pleas of the Crown before, etc., in the twenty-first year of Edward I., in these words: — The jurors of the Hundreds of Madestan, Middleton, and Brenchesle presented that Master Guynand, parson of the Church of Snodilond, on the eve of the Assumption of the Blessed Mary (14 August), in this year, came to the house of Solomon of Rochester, at Snodylond, and dined (comedit) with him, and put poison in the food and in the drink of the same Solomon, and poisoned him, owing to which he died thereof after fifteen days following." "Thomas, Bishop of Rochester, claimed the accused as a clerk, but was refused, as he did not sue for his delivery in the proper manner ; so the parson was delivered to the Prior of Christ Church, Canterbury, as ' Superior,' the See being vacant." ROCHESTER the hands of the archbishop's clergy, but being elected a second time, he accepted, and was consecrated at Chartham, near Canterbury, on the Feast of the Epiphany, 1292. While prior he had been a strenuous upholder of the claims of the monastery. The monks supposed that in choosing him they had secured a diocesan devoted to their interests, who would " correct the evils he had abundantly lamented, and against which he had fought." The expectation was not altogether realized ; for " he little remembered the bitter pressure he had borne in the time of his priorship." After a prolonged enquiry, during which some forgery of documents was detected, Archbishop Peckham had finally decided,' at Otford, in 1284, that the bishops were entitled to the authority they claimed over the monastery in the appointment of officers, and to the payment of the exennium on St. Andrew's Day, whether they kept the festival at Rochester or not, and had enjoined "perpetual silence " on the prior and convent as to these matters. But the endless controversy slumbered only for a season. John of Grenestreet, the prior, withheld the exennium, as did Prior Hamo for three yeais in succession. In each year, however, the bishop obtained a portion of his due and of the thirty years' arrears from the manors of Frindsbury and Stoke. At this period the affairs of the Priory seem to have been in a most unsatisfactory condition. A debt of j£6co had been incurred, property had been alienated, many of the brethren were in a state of rebellion, " but for Divine consolation the church ROCHESTER J39 had never been relieved." The prior, in conse- quence, had a great struggle with the bishop and Walter of Fynchynfeld for the recovery of what had been dissipated and the preservation of what re- mained. At length he wrested from Walter the lands of Foreshalle and Bedesham and the churches of Hartlip and Hoo. We are not told how all this had come about. In 13 14 John of Grenestreet resigned his office, on account of bodily infirmity. On the nomination of the bishop, Hamo of Hythe was chosen in his stead. The choice was displeasing to some, who, with the view of upsetting it, invoked the interfer- ence of the Metropolitan. He wrote to the chapter announcing his intended visitation and desiring them to provide for the hundred horses of his retinue. After the provision had been made, the archbishop (Walter Reynolds) excused himself from personal attendance, nominating three clerics to act in his name, William of Knapton, Archdeacon of Norwich, Thomas of Chartham, and Robert of Norton, the famous ecclesiastical lawyer, who subsequently became Dean of the Arches. Naturally unwilling to see his money thrown away, the prior resolved to " kill two birds with one stone." He therefore invited the neighbouring knights and men of substance, and arranged for what we may call his own house-warming on the day on which he was to receive the Commissioners. The bishop, however, influenced by the opposite party, declined to be present, notwithstanding the most pressing invitation. The refusal deeply wounded the prior; ROCHESTER the more that for seven years he had acted as his chaplain. When the Commissioners entered on their enquiry, it was asserted that, though only five had voted in Hamo's favour, he had been returned in preference to a candidate for whom twenty votes had been cast. The prior answered that he had been sufficiently nominated, and against his wish had been installed by the compulsion of the whole convent, who had all rendered him obedience as to their Superior. To the question, "Whether the facts were so?" an affirmative answer was unanimously -given. Then said the Commissioners— " Why do you trifle with us by saying such things of your prior?" {Aug. Sac. vol. i. p. 356.) The Visitation of the Chapter and Diocese of Rochester lasted from the beginning of July to the following Easter. It may be that the expenses incurred on this occasion contributed, with the inattention to business on the part of the ex-prior, to the pecuniary difficulties in which Hamo found himself involved. All this occurred in the latter years of Thomas of Woldham's episcopate. At an earlier period (1302) he ordained a perpetual vicarage at Burham, the parsonage of which Pope Boniface VIII. had appropriated to the Knights Hospitallers of St. John at Jerusalem. Vicarages, as is well known, originated in the possession of benefices by religious houses. If the parish happened to be in the neighbourhood, the parochial duties were performed by a priest, who went over for the purpose from the abbey, priory, or ROCHESTER college, to which it had been appropriated. If the distance were too great to admit of this, a deputy, or vicar, was appointed at a small salary and subject to dismissal at the pleasure of the body by whom he was nominated. As might be expected, this state of things produced many evils. The parish was either deprived of the constant care it required, or com- mitted to a clergyman too poor and too dependent to exercise his ministry with advantage. No com- petent or self-respecting man cared to accept the position of a vicar. The abuse was so obvious and so common, abroad as well as at home, that it could not be overlooked. Provincial councils complained. The synod of Westminster, in the year 1200, ordered that for the future no transfer of the endowments of a parish should be made without the consent of the bishop of the diocese, and then, only on condition that a suitable provision was secured for the support of a resident vicar, to be instituted, or formally admitted, to his office by the bishop, and so rendered irremovable except by due process of law. The Lateran Council under Pope Innocent III., in 1215, gave general effect to the wishes of the provincial synods, and decreed the establishment of perpetual vicarages in those churches which from their connection with religious foundations had been served by temporary substitutes. The result was to make the vicar a beneficed man, with a fixed income and an independent position. As we mentioned on a former page, the establish- ment of perpetual vicarages in the churches at Sutton-at-Hone and Wilmington, by Bishop Gilbert 142 ROCHESTER de Glanville, at some period between 1205 and 1214, is a very early instance of conformity with the new regulations. The monastic bodies were not too eager to comply with them, nor perhaps some bishops ; for in 1268 Cardinal Othobon found it necessary in his Legatine Constitutions to "strictly forbid all bishops to confer, by the right of appropriation, a church subject to them upon another bishop or a monastery : unless he upon whom it is conferred should be so miserably poor that such an appro- priation may be deemed consistent with piety," and to " decree that all the religious, whether exempt or otherwise, whether they belong to the Cistercian or to any other order, who have churches for their own use (/'. e. are the appropriators), shall, if vicars have not been appointed in them already, within six months present vicars to the diocesans to be instituted by them, to whom they must assign a sufficient portion, according to the value of the churches, or otherwise the diocesans shall take care to do so." (Wilkins, Concilia, vol. ii.) The settlement of the question what ought to be the portion of the vicar was made by a suit in the court of the Ordinary, to whom the adjudication belonged. The final decrees of the bishops in these cases were judicial determinations which, by a legal instrument, defined the duties and emoluments of the "appropriators" on the one hand, and of their permanent representatives, the parochial clergymen, on the other. As an example of what occurred, though by no means the first we may take, once for all, the case ROCHESTER 143 of Burhara, the documents relating to which are given in detail in the Registrum Roffense. With the consent of William de Tothale, prior, and the brethren of the Hospital of St. John, Bishop Thomas of Woldham ordained a perpetual vicarage in this church, assigning to it all small tithes, viz., of lambs, calves, pigs, geese, wool, milk, cheese, eggs, hay, flax, hemp, gardens, apples, and other fruit growing in gardens, and of land dug with the foot, and also all oblations and obven- tions of the altarage whatsoever, howsoever, whence- soever, and how oftensoever arising, together with eighteen acres of arable land, called Fogherelesland, and eleven acres of arable land, called Benecroft and Stonhelle, two acres of meadow, of which one lay between Hakewode and the court of Burgham, called Ocacre, and the other in a place called Landmede- diche; and he decreed, that the vicars should have those lands and meadows free from all tenths and every other service, in like manner as the rectors of this church held them free, before the said appro- priation. To the vicar he likewise assigned the tithe of sheaves arising from a tenement called Totyn- tonesyok, of the fee of Burgham, and two quarters of wheat, to be paid yearly on Michaelmas Day from the barns of the rectory ; also land and a house sufficient and decent, to be built at the ex- pense of the prior and brethren. He decreed that the vicar should at his peril keep and preserve the vestments and ornaments of the altar, and the books, which, if they should be at any time lost, burnt, or spoiled, casually or negligently, should be made good at the vicar's expense, and the lights round the great 44 altar, so far as belonged to the rector, and that he should provide bread, wine, and other necessaries for the celebration of divine rites, and pay the pro- curations to the archdeacon when he visited, and sustain all other burthens, ordinary and extraordinary. But the defects of the body of the chancel, as in the pavement, walls, and windows, in glass and iron, and the roof, should be repaired at the expense of the Hospitallers ; and if any part of it should fall down they should rebuild it and support the same for ever. And that no doubt might arise concerning this en- dowment, the bishop caused two copies to be made of his decree, one to be retained by himself, the other to be left with the prior. Nearly a century later, September 18, 1398, this decree, which is a sample of those made on such occasions, and is therefore illustrative of the history of the diocese and of the church in general, was produced by John Bryddesdale, Vicar of Burham, as the title by which he held his emoluments, at the visitation of Bishop William of Bottlesham in Rochester Cathedral.1 {Reg. Roff. pp. 196, 197.) William of Dene tells us that in the third year after the appointment of Hamo to the priorship, 1 At an enquiry held in 1445 it was found that the portion of the vicar after payment of burdens was estimated at eight marks yearly, that ten pounds would not be enough for the sufficient repair of the buildings of the vicarage, which were everywhere ruinous, excepting one chamber ; and that the vicarage was situated in a lonely place, remote from neighbours, by reason of which no vicar without a family could inhabit it alone with safety ; and that the vicar then presented, Robert Frodesham, was a priest of good fame, of sufficient age, and honest conversation. ROCHESTER '45 i3i67"about the time of the Purification of the Blessed Virgin, Bishop Thomas sickened. We are glad to hear that at the approach of death, "the great reconciler," the two chief ecclesiastics of the diocese laid aside their disputes and parted, as became Christians, with the words of peace on their lips. Prior Hamo went to Bromley, and, falling prostrate before the bishop, begged forgiveness for whatever he had done against him, asking absolution, and that the sentences pronounced on himself in the chapter- house might be revoked. The bishop "kindly" (betiignc) granted his requests. The next day, the last of February, he died. For three days the death was not made known. On the fourth the prior came to arrange with the executors as to the funeral, and then wrote to the Prior of Christ Church, Canterbury, and the neighbouring dignitaries, inviting their attendance at the solemnity. It probably took place in the Cathedral, but there is no evidence on the point. {Ang. Sac. vol. i. p. 357.) The bishop's will is made "in the Name of the Holy and Undivided Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit." He commends his soul to Almighty God and His most holy mother Mary, ever virgin, to the blessed Michael the Archangel, the holy apostles Peter and Paul and Andrew " my patron," and all the saints. His body to be buried in the cathedral church of Rochester or elsewhere, at the discretion of his executors. He leaves his costly mitre to the chief altar of St. Andrew at Rochester, all his timber at Hailing and elsewhere to replace the fallen roof and K i46 ROCHESTER repnir the hall of the manor-house at Hailing. To his " poor parishioners " at Frindsbury, Dartford, and Iselham, ten marks in each case. To the poor of Denton and Bromley eight marks. To the works at Chatham church ten shillings. To the lepers of St. Bartholomew's without Rochester 135. 4<f. To the work at the tomb of St. William ten marks. To the work at the church of St. Margaret without Rochester 135. 4<f., and to the poor of the same parish 125. To the lepers of White-ditch 65. Sd.1 To the lepers of Dartford 10s. To the sick at Strood Hospital 10s. There are bequests to friends, and the officials and servants of his household. The executors are John of Ditton and John of Cockermouth, rectors of Kemsing and Chalk, Warin rector of Fawkham, John Blundel, master of Strood Hospital, John of Frinds- bury rector of Bromley, and Robert of Lodesdone rector of Paul's Cray, to each of whom there is a legacy of 40s. if willing to undertake the burden of carrying out the testator's wishes. He has affixed his own seal to the will and procured that of his official also. {Reg. Roff. p. 113.) The period covered by these eight episcopates was marked by the persistent attempts of the Papacy to 1 This hospital, called like that on the east of the city St. Bartholomew's, stood in a field on the left side of the road leading to Cobham, at the top of Strood Hill, or Spitall Hill. In the last century the field retained the name of White-ditch. Thus at each main approach to Rochester was an establishment for lepers. Much litigation followed between Hamo of Hythe, the next bishop, and the executor John of Frindsbury, for non- payment of legacies and on account of "waste and dilapidation " on the property of the see. ROCHESTER '47 levy ever increasing "tithe and toll in this realm of England." Another feature of the period was the multiplica- tion of religious orders. As the more ancient had acquired so large a share of the land and wealth of the country, and as the civil law began to place some restraints upon the disposition to make over estates to the Church, it might have been difficult to procure endowments for the new orders, or to increase the number of the houses of the old ; but these new orders were sworn to poverty and were called mendicant Friars. The first of this class were the Dominicans or Black Friars. They entered England in 1221. A band of thirteen, sent from the General Chapter held in May, at Bologna, passing through Canterbury, and doubtless through Rochester, reached London August 10, and thence went on to Oxford. At Canterbury, by the command of Stephen Langton, Gilbert de Fresnoy, their prior, delivered the first sermon amongst the English, in a church where the archbishop had himself purposed to preach. The excellence of this discourse, and the religious bearing of the Friars, secured for them Langton's lasting friendship. The Franciscans, or Grey Friars, were established in 1223. Of many other orders which soon sprung up in imitation of these, and which carried still farther the principle of poverty and self-denial, none took a lasting root in England except the Augustines and the Carmelites or White Friars. " It is said," writes Bale in his Fourth Century, " that i48 ROCHKSTKR John Vesey and Richard Grey being in Palestine, fighting against the Turks, found some religious, leading a hermit's life there, two of whom they brought back to England, to establish that order in this kingdom in their two lordships of Alnwick in North- umberland and Aylesford in Kent." The Priory at Aylesford, therefore, founded by Richard Lord Grey, of Codnor, in 1240, of which some remains, long since converted into a mansion, still exist at a short distance from the village, was the earliest Carmelite foundation in the south of our island, and here, in the diocese of Rochester, was held the first general European chapter of the order in 1245, six hundred and fifty years ago. The mendicant Friars consisted for the most part of young men drawn from the humbler ranks of society. They had no lands, but begged from door to door for the food they ate, and the money where- with they bought their coarse dress and built, or maintained, the churches in which they worshipped. In appearance, and to a considerable degree in reality, they led a frugal, self-denying life, such as marked the first teachers of our holy religion and its great Author Himself. Naturally, their sympathies were with the class from which they sprang, whose feelings they understood, whose hearts they knew how to reach. Eor a time they exercised a beneficial influence on the people among whom they laboured. The Franciscans, in particular, distinguished them- selves by their unremitting attention to the poor ; preaching, administering the sacraments, visiting the ROCHESTER 149 sick, comforting the sorrowful, with a zeal and activity which far surpassed that of the old-established orders, and won for them the warm attachment of the populace, with a corresponding amount of ill-will from those whose indolence they put to shame. After a while, however, they degenerated in character and forfeited the esteem in which at first they had been justly held. It was soon found convenient to dispense with that part of their constitution which forbad them to possess anything as a community. From their wealthy patrons they obtained the advowsons of benefices, which they served by one of their own number, or by a secular priest, while they devoted the larger share of the income to the uses of the convent in which the patronage was vested, thus increasing the evil introduced by the older orders. As itinerant con- fessors they lessened the influence of the resident clergy, whose rights they invaded in many ways. As licensed beggars they preyed at large on the public. If it be asked what was the character of the teach- ing of the parochial clergy at this period, we can only refer to the Constitutions of Archbishop Peckham, at Lambeth in 1281, as showing what was expected of them by the Metropolitan — " We decree," said he, " that every priest who presides over the people shall four times a year publicly expound to the people in the vulgar tongue, without any fantastical subtlety, the articles of the faith" (as they are contained in the three creeds); "the ten commandments of the decalogue " (the second is omitted altogether and ROCHESTER the tenth divided into two) ; " the 2 precepts of the gospel " (viz., the love of God and our neighbour) ; "the 7 works of mercy" (viz., to feed the hungry; to give drink to the thirsty ; to receive the stranger ; to clothe the naked ; to visit the sick ; to comfort the prisoner; and to bury the dead); "the 7 mortal sins" (viz., pride, envy, anger, hatred, lust, avarice, and luxury) ; " the 7 principal virtues " (viz., faith, hope, charity, prudence, temperance, justice, and forti- tude) ; " and the 7 sacraments of grace " (viz., baptism, confirmation, penance, the eucharist, extreme unction, matrimony, and orders). If these directions were faithfully carried out the people would receive a large amount of useful practical instruction, mixed with some doctrinal errors. How far the archbishop succeeded in persuading the clergy to obey his injunctions we cannot tell. This is certain, that he complained that though there were " multitudes of priests there were few worthy," and the injunctions themselves were not new. The thirteenth century was marked by great activity in church building. The spirit of architecture was in the air. The style known as Early English, offer- ing in its slender columns, pointed arches, and deep- cut mouldings, so strong a contrast to its Norman predecessor, had been brought to maturity, and was everywhere in the ascendant. We have already spoken of the new choir and transepts of Rochester cathedral and of the beautiful church of Stone. Other examples may be found at Blasted, Cliffe, Darenth, Eynesford, Farningham, Hayes, Horton-Kirby, Leyborne, East Mailing, West Mailing, OfTham, Paul's Cray, and ROCHESTER Wrofham. It is not asserted that these churches do not contain earlier work and later, but they have features which prove them to have been built or altered at this period. Nor are these all the instances to be seen in the ancient portion of the diocese. In the new a fine example meets us in the church, which has been the scene of so many interesting events, and is destined, we may hope, to become in its renovated form a centre of spiritual life, in South London — ■ St. Saviour's, Southwark, known until the Reformation as St. Mary Overy. The nave, built after the great fire of 1207, was an exquisite specimen of Early English in its greatest purity. The arcade of the choir, which happily survived the demolition of 1838, is of five bays with alternate piers as in the nave. The Lady Chapel may be called one of the best productions of the age. Its eastern face, with four sharp gables and corner stair-turret, is unusually attractive. We find more or less Early English work in the churches of Bletchingley, Chaldon, Chipstead, Crowhurst, God- stone, Limpsfield, Merstham, Nutfield, Reigate, and elsewhere, showing how much was being done at the time in question. At Chaldon is one of the most perfect wall-paintings in England. The picture, in tempera, not in fresco, is 17 feet 2 inches long, and 11 feet 2 inches high. It represents the Ladder of the salvation of the human soul and the way to heaven, and is divided by a horizontal band into two parts. If the date (1170 — 11 90) assigned to this picture by Mr. J. G. Waller be correct, the wall on which it is painted must be a very early specimen of the style introduced in the closing years of the twelfth ROCHESTER century, and usually identified with the thirteenth. In its day the Ladder afforded by its startling illustrations a practical sermon on the consequences of virtue and vice, well fitted to impress an unlettered congregation. 53 CHAPTER VI We have a fuller account of the next Bishop of Rochester than of his predecessors, not only because we have reached the period at which the extant episcopal registers begin, but also because William of Dene has left us in his fragmentary history a record of the events occurring in the locality between 13 14 and 1350. A native of the Cinque Port, Hamo of Hythe had been a " brother " in the priory of St. Andrew, and became its head in 13 14. To govern the diocese, or to escape the worries of the convent, was evidently his great desire, but like many another he found, we may believe, that in exchanging a lower office for a higher he had only added to his cares. There were many aspirants to the bishoprick. The Archbishop, Walter Reynolds, urged the claims of his Chancellor. The lady of Baddlesmere pressed those of Thomas de Northwode. Other nobles favoured other candidates. Hamo felt that no stone must be left unturned, nor a day be .lost, if he was to secure the prize. The election was therefore fixed for the first moment at which it could legally be held, and the brethren from the dependent cell of Felixstowe were, 154 ROCHESTER contrary to custom, invited to participate in it. Of the thirty-live monks who were present twenty-six voted for Hamo, seven for Richard of Halstode, and Hamo himself for John of Buckton, Canon of Exeter. The successful candidate was presented to the archbishop as patron and received. But when the time came for the confirmation of the election Reynolds declared that " his hands were tied and he could proceed no further." Pope John XX. had "reserved" the see of Rochester for a Frenchman, John of Puteoli, the queen's confessor. What was to be done? After much consideration, the archbishop, by the advice of his Council, informed his Holiness that the election had preceded the " reservation " by one day. The matter had to be argued. While the see was vacant the temporalities as well as the spiritualities were in the hands of the archbishop, who doubtless found the income and patronage acceptable, and was suspected of not being averse to a prolongation of the controversy. Hamo, at any rate, afterwards at- tributed to this motive the advice he received not to go to the papal court in person. At the time, think- ing all to have been done in good faith, as perhaps it was, and forgetting the requirements of the Constitution CuJ>ientes,1 he sent his proctors to plead his cause. 1 Gregory X. having decreed concerning "presenting" or (in case of defective right) "postulating" at Rome, and allowed three months in which persons might have their election or postulation to vacant bishopricks or abbacies confirmed or quashed, a further allowance of time was made by the Constitu- tion, based on the variety in distances of places from the Holy See. Each person elect is within one month after the "con- ROCHESTER 1 5 5 In due course the case was laid before the pope, who, with the consent of the queen's proctor, delegated the decision to the Cardinals Gaucelinus and Lucas, then in England. If they found that a canonical election of a fit person had been made before the announce- ment of the " reservation," and that the elect had not forfeited his right by failing to appear at the Roman Court within a month after the reservation had been notified to him, they were to confirm the election ; if not, to void it. The commission reached Rochester in September, and was forwarded to the cardinals at Durham by two of the monks, with William of Dene, the notary. The cardinals fixed the next court day after the feast of St. Luke (Oct. 18) for hearing the suit. At the appointed time they sat in the palace of the Bishop of London. It was proved that the election was canonically made, and the elect was found to be qualified in point of learning. But the judges doubted as to the effect of the Constitution Cupi- entes. On that question they wished to consult the pope. So the suit was again to be prosecuted beyond the seas. Nicholas of Bereham and William of Dene sensus" electing him, or the notification thereof, to take up his journey to Rome under Gregory's allowance of time, unless his election happen to have been "presented" in due time. After that, allowance for distance being duly made, whether or no he have so taken up his journey, whether or no electors or opponents have appeared, he must appear in person before the pope with all acts, rights, archives, pertaining to his suit, within twenty days of the expiration of his time. Otherwise he will have to purge himself of "Contempt" within fifteen further days, under the penalty of forfeiting his benefice. The electors will also lose their right of election, ROCHESTER went to further Hamo's cause. The queen's proctor went to hinder it. The king, Edward II., wrote in his favour. The queen, Isabella of France, wrote against him. So vehement was she, that she begged the pope, if it were possible, by any straining of the law, per ali quern rigorem juris, to void the election. He, good man, was lost in wonder that the queen should dare to write in opposition to the entreaties of her husband ! The matter now waited for the return of the cardinals from England. In November it was again entrusted to them, and by them referred to their "auditors." One of them started fresh difficulties. Ought not Hamo to appear in person and seek the confirmation of his election ? His proctors urged him to come with all dispatch. With all dispatch he came. The summons reached him January i j on the Saturday after the 25 th he appeared before his judges and begged them to hasten the business. By this time the queen had persuaded the king to espouse the cause of her confessor. Under the same seal he sent letters of contrary import. The cardinals were astonished at his inconstancy. A letter written by the Earl of Pembroke disgusted the pope, who saw in it proof of the confessor's ambition, and determined from that day to assist Hamo. He therefore summoned sixteen of the " auditors " to advise him on the point in dispute. Twelve of them agreed that the election was valid. The Saturday in Passion Week was then named for further proceedings. But Gaucelinus had been won over in the interval by the English king and queen, I -.11 I J57 and telling the pope that a majority of the curia differed in opinion from the twelve, induced him to take the case once more into his own hands. All were now in despair. The monk who accom- panied Hamo left him. Many Englishmen tried by promises and letters from the king to obtain the bishop- rick, but in vain. The queen's proctor, John de Jargolio, vexed at the expense he had incurred, became unwell November 29, and died suddenly in the curia the following Sunday. John de Nanton, the queen's chamberlain, who also had been concerned in obtaining the "reservation," "by the just judgment of God fell from his horse at Dartford and died." When mention was made, April 30, in full consistory, of ending the affair, a cardinal proposed that both candidates be set aside. " Holy Father, let neither the elect of the chapter nor the queen's confessor obtain the bishoprick, let it be given to brother Laurence of Gloucester, prior of Boxgrove." " Cer- tainly not," cried the pope, "be it far from us so to do." Forthwith he committed the business to Cardinal Lucas alone. Lucas consulted six of the "greater auditors " of the palace. All wished the election con- firmed. In July the pope ordered the cardinal to do as he was advised. Meanwhile the unhealthiness of the city, with the heat and the worry, brought Hamo to the brink of the grave. For change of air he was removed in a litter to the castle of Ponserewe. In the hope that he would fail to appear, his enemies per- suaded the cardinal to summon him to receive con- firmation July 21. But Hamo rose to the occasion. He went to Avignon by water, and was carried by two men on a stretcher to the house of the cardinal. His eminence declared that the long-languishing church of Rochester must be allowed to languish no longer, and by the pope's authority confirmed him in his bishoprick. Hamo returned to his bed. For five weeks he was too ill to be consecrated. At this juncture Robert Wirsop arrived with letters from the king, queen, and nobles of England, re- questing that the see might be bestowed on him. To his chagrin he found he was too late, but buoyed him- self up with the hope that the death of Hamo would put him in possession of the coveted preferment. Hamo, however, recovered, and was consecrated by the Bishop of Ostia August 26, 1319, in the church of the Friars Preachers at Avignon. Even now his troubles were not over. He had no money to obtain the necessary bulls, but was finally permitted to give a bond for 1440 florins. Leaving his shield-bearer to bring the bulls, he reached Dover October 31. Three weeks he waited at Saltwood. When the bulls arrived he went to Canterbury, and 24th November repeated before the high altar of the cathedral the profession he had made at Avignon. The bulls were then pub- lished, and the next Sunday and Monday were read in the chapter-house at Rochester and in the Court of Arches at St. Mary-le-Bow. By Advent Sunday he found the archbishop at Sleaford, visiting the diocese of Lincoln, and received from him the temporalities and spiritualities which had been in his custody since the death of Thomas of Woldham. It only remained to go on to York to do homage to the king for the ROCHESTER '59 manors of Middleton and Cobhambury, which, being held by a different tenure, were in the Royal hands during the vacancy. The chamberlain, Hugh le Despenser, made this an occasion for extorting £10 from the already impoverished prelate. On Christmas Day Hamo reached Borstal. He was enthroned January 13, 1320, almost three years after his election. The next day he entered the chapter-house, and advanced John of Westerham to the office of prior. Then he started on a tour of inspection among the manors of the bishoprick, where he found everything " injured, out of order, and so badly cared for that in seven years the damage could not be made good." That first year must have been a trying time. What- ever his wishes, his temporal affairs required his constant attention. So he resided in his see with a very small establishment, labouring unceasingly for the repair of his buildings and the cultivation of his lands. Scattered manors, of which the produce was received in kind, and had to be consumed on the spot, necessitated many houses and barns, and these were a perpetual source of expense. And the fact that at each vacancy the property of the see passed for the time to the king or archbishop, who'_had no permanent interest in it, and were not present to con- trol their servants, was sure to produce waste, dilapida- tion, and quarrelling. It was so here. Litigation arose out of what happened during the interregnum. Com- plaint was made that the archbishop had presented to the rectory of Norton after the confirmation of Hamo, and that the agricultural implements on the manors had been removed, and not replaced as they should i6o ROCHESTER have been. One proof of good-will he received in the midst of his troubles must have cheered Hamo's heart in no slight degree. The clergy of the diocese rated themselves for his assistance to the extent of a shilling in the mark (135. ^d.), besides offering a gift in kind. There was need. He was obliged to sell Elmsted wood in Bromley for 200 marks in order to raise the 1440 florins for which his credit was pledged to the papal court, and to repay the 100 marks borrowed for the purchase of live stock on his farms. Throughout his career Hamo was a builder. At Borstal the new mill cost sixty marks. That at Hol- borough cost £10. His new hall at Hailing occupied a year and fifteen weeks in building, and entailed an outlay of ,£120. There he kept St. Andrew's Day, 1324, enter- taining a party, which included Henry of Cobham and many persons of distinction in the county, as well as abbots and priors. To the hall he added in the following summer a new chapel, a chamber, and a high wall to enclose the court on the side towards the grave-yard. At Trottescliffe he provided a new chamber for the bishop, another for his clerks, and a kitchen, taking care to surround his court with lofty walls, made only too necessary by the disturbed state of the land. But we are not to suppose that while improving his manors he was unmindful of the house of God. In Lent 1 33 1 he inspected the cathedral and priory. Finding that both needed repair, he placed ^200 in the hands of the chapter, in addition to 400 marks he had already contributed to the renovation of the buildings on the monastic estates. The style of the ROCHESTER 161 architecture and the documentary evidence prove that alterations were made in the cathedral during his episcopate, and in some degree at his cost. In 1343 the central tower was raised and surmounted by a wooden spire covered with lead. In it he placed four new bells, known as Dunstan, Paulinus, Ithamar, and Lanfranc. At Michaelmas 1344 he recon- structed the shrines of St. Paulinus and St. Ithamar of marble and alabaster, towards which he gave two hundred marks. To this period we may assign the Decorated tracery in the windows of the presbytery, and the door leading to the chapter- room, one of the glories of the cathedral, indeed of Gothic art, familiar by its reproduction in the mediaeval court of the Crystal Palace to thousands who have never visited Rochester. In the decoration, too, of the walls of the choir Hamo may have had a hand. The lions in this painting agree with those on the flag of England. They are lions passants, regardants, or, on a field gules. The lilies remind us of the shield of France, being fleurs-de-lis or, upon a field azure. Edward III. was the first of our kings who bore the French arms. On his first Great Seal, that in use from 1328 to 1338, he is repre- sented with one fleur-de-lis on each side of his throne. On his fourth Great Seal, used in 1340, he has on each side of the throne one lion. These facts point to the time of Hamo as that at which this pattern was painted — an undoubted production of the fourteenth century. The colours of the borders, red and blue, perhaps allude to the junction of 'the English and French flags by Edward IIP Until 1 783 L Dartford church contained a proof of Hamo's liberality. The great Decorated east window of five lights in the main chancel was that inserted at his own cost, which he went to inspect in 1333. In the north wall of the nave of Trottescliffe is a two-light window given by him. The glass is worthy of close attention. It represents the Holy Trinity, with the sun, moon, and stars as accessory details. Nor was he forgetful of his native place. Having " often observed how many worthy inhabitants of the seaport who in youth enjoyed ample means had, in their declining years, been brought, contrary to all expectation, even to beg their bread," twenty years before his death he founded an almshouse in the parish of St. Leonard Hythe, on the spot whence he and his parents sprang, for ten needy men and women, born in the town, or long resident, who by no misconduct of their own had been reduced to poverty. They were to be known as "the brethren and sisters of St. Andrews," to be clad in russet, to receive four pence each weekly for their food, to attend regularly the services in Hythe church, and to repeat the Lord's Prayer and the Ave Maria three hundred times a day for the welfare of founders and benefactors ! The charity still exists. Another of Bishop Hamo's benefactions, while creditable to himself, gives an unfavourable impres- sion of the acquirements of his clergy. In a docu- ment drawn up at Hailing, April 30, 1346, he says he has "noticed with sorrow that many of the clergy, though men of good lives and far from ignorant, are not able, through want of suitable books, to properly ROCHESTER 163 discharge their duties as penitentiaries and parish priests." " With the view of providing such a remedy as he can, he has presented the chapter of Rochester with a number of books," to be kept in the cathedral in a chest with two keys, one to be held by the sacrist, the other by the bishop's penitentiary. The books are to be produced on the application of any of the clergy, and returned to the librarians. The librarians are not to allow any book to be taken out of the cathedral, but are urged not by ill-will or churlishness to throw any impediment in the way of this effort for the welfare of souls. Among the volumes are Decretals, the Clementine Constitutions, On virtues and vices, On the articles of the faith, beatitudes, and prayers, The Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark with comments. The superstitions of his day seem to have had a strong hold on the mind of Bishop Hamo, but we cannot resist the conviction that he was a good man, who had the interests of religion at heart. It is possible that in some of his earlier years there had been a degree of laxity in his administration of the diocese which provoked, if it did not justify, the complaints made against him at the visitation of the metropolitan, Simon of Meopham. That visitation was as expensive as it was unpleasant in its results. The archbishop came to Rochester with eighty horses and stayed a day and a night. The cost of enter- taining him was ^24, no small sum at the time ; " nor did he give anything to the clerics and officials." The charges preferred were that the bishop allowed rectors in the diocese to be non-resident ; that he did ROCHESTER not defend the liberties of his church ; that he cut down woods at Cobhambury and Stone ; that he spent his time at Hailing and Trottescliffe instead of making the circuit of his diocese; that he neglected confirm- ation and preaching; that he appointed John of Speldhurst prior, though he knew him to be illegiti- mate ; that in the election of the prior he took the votes by two of his clergy without the help of a monk ; that when brother John of Woodstock was accused of incontinency he did not correct him; that he was impatient and hot-tempered, changeable in word, and did not fulfil his promises ; that he had deposed many monks from their offices and imprisoned them without sufficient proof of the crimes alleged against them ; that he placed more than twenty officials in the church of Rochester, whereas he ought not to have nominated more than four or five; that these officials were his relations and others who performed their duty by deputies engaged at a small salary ; that though he pretended he would more often keep the feast of St. Andrew at Rochester he observed it elsewhere, and yet received the exennium ; that he had let a tene- ment at Frakenham to his brother below its value ; that, contrary to the charter, he had entrusted the hospital at Strood to seculars, who had ruined it ; that he received half a mark of silver in a testamentary cause. "For these things and many other," says William of Dene, " he was called to account and justified his actions. The monks of his chapter were the authors of this and much more, though he had conferred many benefits upon them, and both as prior and bishop had laboured to relieve the church of ROCHESTER many and heavy burdens. But no wonder. For it is second nature with the monks of Rochester to harass and defame by all the means in their power those who have deserved best of them, and, if they can, to eject them from their position. So Thomas of Woldham, Thomas de Ingilthorp, and John of Bradefeld were attacked at the archbishop's visita- tion; and it is always needful that the bishops of Rochester have a staff at hand to defend themselves against the monks." {Ang. Sac, vol. i., p. 370.) There must, however, have been something in the charges, or the archbishop would not have imposed a fine on Hamo. "This," writes Hook {Lives of Arch- bishops, vol. iii., p. 505), " was resented by some of the bishop's adherents, but not by the bishop himself, who became the fast friend of Meopham, showing himself in times of trial to be a friend indeed, and remaining a friend to the last." We have abundant evidence of the insolence of the monks. Extraordinary was the scene when Hamo visited the chapter of Rochester in September 1336. One of the monks, J. of Hwytefeld, discoursed on the words in which Jesse commanded David to visit his brothers then in the camp with Saul. " The lord bishop has to visit the chapter as a brother, not as a ruler, because he is created and advanced by them. If he had not been a monk he had not been a bishop. The lord bishop cannot say to his chapter as John, Bishop of Norwich, said to his, 'Ye have not chosen me but I have chosen you,' because our brethren of the chapter elected him." In this way he continued to vituperate the bishop in the hearing of the convent and of a large assembly. i66 ROCHESTER " Perchance there was a reason ; for in the Infirmary the brethren hired him with a flagon of wine so to speak." When he ended Hamo said, "Our son took as the theme of his discourse, ' Thou shalt visit thy brethren.' Where he left off I will begin — ' and learn with whom they are ranged,' " from which words he showed they were to be visited as sons not as brothers, as disciples not as masters. To what had been said of his owing his promotion to them, he answered that " whatever trouble they took one day in advancing a man, they took tenfold more the next in trying by every species of false accusation to cast him down, so that he owed them nothing." Nor were some of the parochial clergy more re- spectful to their diocesan. At his visitation of 1329 Hamo had deprived John of Frindsbury, rector of Bromley, of his benefice for disobedience, and be- stowed it on Hugh of Penebregge. So far from yielding possession, John expelled Hugh by force. Not satisfied with this, he sent a chaplain to Rochester, who, abetted by some of the monks, made his way to the high altar of the cathedral, and with bell in hand and burning candle excommunicated the bishop by name ! The offence was of course visited with condign punishment, and the excommunication was revoked throughout the diocese, but John in the end retained the living. Notwithstanding the complaints made to the arch- bishop, there seems to be ample evidence of Hamo's attention to his duty. If he preferred to live else- where than at Rochester we cannot wonder, when we remember that there he must be brought into constant ROCHESTER I67 contact with the monks. Nor need we attach much importance to the grievance that he loved to remain at Hailing and Trottescliffe, since the animus of 'the objectors is betrayed by the remark that his mode of life " injures St. Andrew's Priory and ruins Strood Hospital." We find that in r32o he visited the chapter, professed eight nuns at Higham, held a Lenten ordination in the cathedral, consecrated the chrism on Maundy Thursday, and celebrated mass on Good Friday and Easter even. After Easter he spent a month in visiting the deanery of Isleham in Suffolk, and stayed a week with the monks of Felixstowe, who had been so instrumental in securing his election, returning by water to All Saints Hoo, which he reached June 28. In 1321 there was trouble at Mailing. The nuns complained to the king that the abbess, presuming on her relationship to Bartholomew de Baddlesmere, had by her ill-advised behaviour nearly ruined the house. Edward II. asked the bishop to interfere. Hamo knew the danger of offending the magnate, but finding, on personal enquiry at Mailing, that the abbess could not be justified, induced her, much against her will, to resign. In her place he nominated Agnes de Leyburne, a member of another of the baronial families of Kent. At Stone he admitted Roger of Dartford as Abbot of Lesnes. At Rochester he officiated at the funeral of John of Greenstrete, the ex-prior, and the next day, being Saturday in the Advent Ember week, ordained in the cathedral. Before long his presence at Mailing was again needed. In 1324 Abbess Agnes died. The nuns 1 68 ROCHESTER were eager to be under the rule of Laura de Retling. Hamo thought her ignorant and destitute of the tact required in a governor, yet he appointed her abbess, at the same time forbidding her to give a corrody to her maidservant as had been the custom, and sequestering the common seal of the monastery, that it might not be set to any document without his knowledge. "Her benediction," says the notary, "was the malediction of the abbey." March 19, 1326-7, a meeting was held in the chancel of Cobham church, Sir John de Cobham and other parishioners being present, at which the bishop enjoined the prior o Lewisham, the impropriator, to put it into a fit state of repair, with the books and vestments, before Easter under a penalty of forty shillings. In 1331 Hamo was again in Suffolk. On St. Luke's Day he dedi- cated the church of Isleham. where he had rebuilt the chancel at his own expense, and by the request of the monks of St. Edmund's held an ordination on the Ember day in Advent. The Bishop of Norwich took umbrage at what he considered an invasion of his rights, and began proceedings in the archbishop's court. As Isleham church was in the diocese of Rochester, though in the county of Suffolk, and there were many living in the town and abbey of Bury and the archdeaconry of Sudbury who had received orders from former bishops of Rochester, the complaint fell through. In 1341 it became necessary to take extreme measures with the Abbot of Lesnes. His abbey had been "visited" in the previous year, and the bishop finding him " disobedient and incorrigible, ROCHESTER I69 convicted of many faults, and so wasteful of the goods of the convent that his canons had neither food nor clothing," now deprived him of his office. The chapter of Rochester was " visited" in 1342 and the nunnery at Higham, after which Hamo went on a confirmation tour through the hundred of Hoo. He was at Hailing and at Trottescliffe, holding ordinations at intervals during the year of the plague (1348-9). A pestilence hitherto unknown raged in England. The Bishop of Rochester out of his small household lost four priests, five shield-bearers, ten attendants, seven young clerics, and six pages, " and so there did not remain any to serve him in any office." At Mailing he appointed two abbesses, who quickly died. There were left there not more than four professed nuns and four not professed, to one of whom was entrusted the care of the spirituals and to another the temporals, because there was no one suitable for the post of abbess. While the plague lasted many chap- lains and curates were unwilling to discharge their duty except at an excessive salary. By an order to the archdeacon, June 27, 1349, the bishop com- manded these clergymen, under pain of interdict and suspension, to perform their office at their usual stipend. Many, too, of the beneficed men, being unable to live on the offerings of the few parishioners who remained, left their cures. These he ordered to return to their parishes, and for the present gave permission to rectors and vicars whose income fell short of ten marks to receive such fees as would raise their benefices to the normal value. Besides his episcopal functions, there were duties ROCHESTER devolving on Hamo as a peer. We refer to them for the sake of the light they throw on the state of the country. The reign of Edward II. was a time of mis- government and consequent trouble. In the autumn of 1326 the archbishop called a meeting with the view of bringing about, if possible, a reconciliation between Edward and his queen Isabella, "the she-wolf of Prance." Hamo went to London as invited, and thereby nearly involved himself in very serious con- sequences. With a clear insight into the popular feeling, he advised the archbishop not to venture into the city nor to cross the Thames, since the hearts of the people were alienated from the bishops, to whose sloth, folly, and ignorance they -ascribed all the evils of the land. " All men," said he, " hate the king and love the queen." For himself, he positively refused to be one of the proposed deputation. The event too soon and too tragically proved the soundness of his judgment. On the Tuesday before St. Luke's Day (October 18) a -great assembly of Londoners at the Guildhall were planning how to seize the bishops of London and Exeter and the rest of the king's justiciars then in the house of the Friars Preachers. They wished also to plunder the merchants, on the pretext that every one who did not belong to the queen's party was a traitor to the realm. The Bishop of Exeter fell into their hands. He was dragged badly wounded from St. Paul's to Cheapside and beheaded. The noise of the tumult reached Hamo sitting at table in his chamber at La Place. He sent to his neighbour the archbishop to ask what it meant ; but the archbishop and his attendants were already on ROCHESTER the road to Kent. Hamo was in an awkward plight. It was not safe to remain, for the mob might cross the river at any moment. It was not easy to fly, for the archbishop had borrowed his horses. The only thing he could do he did. He started with his house- hold on foot, and reached Lesnes Abbey in Erith, a good walk for a bishop. There he spent the night. The next day he refreshed himself at Stone, and then made his way to Hailing. But he was not yet at rest. The country was disturbed. Bands of lawless men roamed about, carrying off the cattle and goods of such defenceless folk as they chose to call the queen's enemies. The bishop was thought to be wealthy, and was warned by John of Shepey, the companion of his flight, not to venture towards Rochester, since he would be captured on the road. The news was not assuring. Hamo got into a boat, and in the dark- ness crossed the Med way to Boxley. The following morning found him at the abbot's grange. In the evening, with a few attendants, he rode to Rochester, encountering on the way some of the evil-disposed citizens, who would have insulted him had they dared. He remained in the precinct a week, and kept the festival of All Saints by an entertainment to his neigh- bours. After dinner he started for Hailing. His departure was the signal for an uproar. A number of disorderly persons who had not been invited to the feast raised a tumult, in the hope of finding an oppor- tunity for pillaging the priory, but finally dispersed without accomplishing their object. His experience on this occasion probably suggested the desirability of strengthening his manor-houses, and led to the 172 ROCHESTER erection of the "high walls" at Hailing and Trottes- cliffe. The Bishop of Rochester was attached to the king, from whom he had received marks of favour. Edward, riding from Leeds castle with Hugh Despenser the younger, met him on Boxley Down. The three entered into conversation cn public affairs. When they reached Rochester the conversation was con- tinued in the prior's chamber. Said the king to the bishop, " Once on a time a queen who would not obey her lord was deposed from her dignity." " Small thanks to him who told you that," was the answer. Then they spoke of the rest of the story, how of the two councillors who hated each other, Haman was hung and Mordecai advanced. "I would have preached on it at Tonbridge before the king had he sent for me," added Hamo. "An extraordinary sermon it would have been, plainly aimed at me," cried Hugh. "The bishop would not have spared you, lord Hugh." " No," said he, " in preaching and hearing confessions every priest ought to speak the whole truth, and not spare the great more than the lowly." The next afternoon Hamo escorted the king towards Gravesend. " When are you going to ask something from me?" enquired Edward. "You have done many things for me and the lord Hugh, and I have never repaid you. I have conferred favours on many whom I have raised to high places, who are now ungrateful and become my chief enemies. Behold, lord Hugh, I command that whatever the Bishop of Rochester wishes shall be done for him." "Most willingly, my lord, for he is deserving, and ROCHESTER 173 has always behaved well to you." Then the bishop asked permission to turn aside to Hailing, and never saw the king again. We are glad to know that Hamo honourably adhered to the cause of his patron when the unhappy man's friends were few. On the last day of his reign, though the Archbishop of Canterbury declared "the voice of the multitude," clamouring for the elevation of the young Edward to his father's throne, to be "the voice of God," and the Bishop of Winchester exclaimed, " Where the head is sick the members grieve," the Bishop of Rochester, "standing on high among the prelates and nobles of the land," refused "at the risk of his life" to join in singing "glory, laud, and honour to the new sovereign." Hamo seems to have shown his good sense by keep- ing as much aloof as possible from the politics of the day. The Primate once remarked of him, "The Bishop of Rochester delights in quietude." "Yes," said an attendant, " he likes to be A only, solitary." When Hamo heard it he answered, "I had rather be A by myself than be spelt with other letters," i. e. with the prelates met in London to talk over the dangers threatening the king and kingdom, "how the king (Edward III.) rides about with armed men, laying the country waste, destroying his faithful peers, and seizing the property of his subjects, lay and clerical, contrary to Magna Charta and his coronation oath. For he wondered that the archbishop should be disposed to go to London in the depth of winter to discuss matters with young men of no experience and no weight." The same feeling was shown not 1/4 ROCHESTER long after. In Trinity week, 1329, he met Edward III. returning from abroad, and having celebrated mass in his presence on Corpus Christi day, dined at the royal table. The king invited him to Windsor. He excused himself, " It was enough for him to attend Parliament when it met in London. Be- sides the trouble and responsibility, the means of the poor Bishop of Rochester would not permit him to follow the king's Council wherever they might go." The cost was not small, as he had found in 1322 when he went to York. A third-class railway ticket was not obtainable in those days. His expenses came to ^33, at least ^350 of our money, and would have been more on account of the dearness of fodder that year, had he not carried provision by water for his retinue of eleven horses and their riders. After his illness at Avignon we are toid that Hamo was seriously unwell from June to November 1323, in consequence of taking too much to heart the ingratitude of his household. They liked to wander abroad at night, to play rather than work, and when reproved plotted against their master instead of mending their ways. We hear of his "infirmity" in 1328. In 1349 he is spoken of as "aged and decrepid," grieving because the buildings were decay- ing on all the manors of the see, which that year scarcely yielded ^100, while in the convent there was great poverty. The evil days had come whereof he might say, " I have no pleasure in them." So he tendered his resignation. For some reason the pope did not accept it. Death set him free in May or ROCHESTER 175 October 1352. In 1341 he had endowed a chantry near the shrine of St. William, where the Mass of the Virgin was wont to be said, and afterwards appointed that during his life the collect " Inclina Domine " should be repeated on their anniversaries for his father Gilbert, his mother Alice, and their children. He would probably wish to be buried not far from this altar. The tomb thought to be his stands in the passage by which the pilgrims went from the north- west transept to St. William's shrine, and might, when catching their eye, remind them to offer a prayer for the repose of his soul. It is a high tomb with panelled front, surmounted by a canopy. At the back of the canopy, within the arch, is the demi-figure of an angel holding a shield. If an effigy of the bishop ever existed it has disappeared. The prior and convent undertook to provide a priest in perpetuity to perform the service of the chantry, to find him lodging, such food on ordinary and festal days as a monk received, and to pay him yearly 24s. The consideration given by Harao was £200, of which half was to buy land or rents, and the rest to pay debts and repair the ruined dormitory. He further waived the repayment of £600 borrowed by the late prior for the repair of the refectory and other buildings. In his later years Hamo must have had private means. An enquiry was made, 17 Edward III. (1344), as to the foreigners holding benefices in the diocese. The bishop answered that the abbot and convent of St. Peter at Ghent were appropriators of the churches of Lewis- ham and East Greenwich, and that brother William i76 ROCHESTER Sergotz, their proctor, resided. Peter of Boyleau was resident on his vicarage of Eltham. The prior and convent of Bermondsey appropriated Cobham, Shorne, and Birling; residing, as it was said, in the priory. He knew of no other cases. In 1347 the enquiry was repeated with a question as to the value of the benefices. The reply was that Peter of Boyleau resided on the vicarage of Eltham, taxed at iooc. That the prior and convent of Bermondsey possessed Cobham, taxed at thirty marks, Shorne at thirty-six marks, and Birling at £1°, but did not reside on either. And that the abbot and convent of Ghent held the churches of Lewisham and East Greenwich, each taxed at twenty marks, and were non-resident. After diligent enquiry, it could not be found that these or other aliens had any other ecclesiastical benefices in the diocese.1 1 In time of war the king took the alien priories, i. e. those which were cells to foreign houses, into his own hands, that rents from England might not be used in the service of the enemy. Each monk received a weekly allowance of 181/. The surplus was paid into the Exchequer. When peace was made the property returned to its owners. The alien priories were finally suppressed by Henry V. The monastery of St. Saviour's, Bermondsey, was founded by Ahvin Child, a citizen of London. In 1089 four monks came to England from the Clugniac abbey of La Charite sur Loire in France. They were settled in the new convent, of which one of them, Peter, became the first prior. The first English prior was Richard Denton in 1 372. In 1380 he paid Richard II. 200 marks, that the house might be made "denizen," and thereby freed from all connection with the "alien" monastery. Pope Boniface IX. raised it, 1399, to the dignity of an abbey. At the Dissolution the clear annual income was ^474 14?. 4$<£ It is now almost useless to look for any remains of this once ROCHESTER 1/7 The next year, in answer to a royal enquiry as to the property of the Knights Hospitallers 1 within, the splendid abbey. Tlic great gate-house, the front of which was composed of squared flints and dark red tiles ranged alternately, was nearly entire in 1806, but was shortly after demolished with most of the adjacent building';. Adjoining to its walls, on ground belonging to the cellarer, a hospital for "indigent children and necessitous converts " was built by prior Richard in 1213. This was probably a provision for lay brothers (comoersi) who per- formed certain domestic offices, and others, not for converts from one faith to another. In 1233 Henry III. founded a house for converted Jews near the old Temple, London. 1 This order of military monks originated in the oppressions suffered by the pilgrims to the Holy Sepulchre. In the eleventh century they built a hospital, dedicated to St. John, within the walls of Jerusalem for the reception of pilgrims. At first they devoted themselves to the care of the sick and needy. Soon lands were bestowed on them, and men of high position joined their ranks. A warlike spirit was now communicated to the order. They became a military power. In 1100 a small body of Hospital monks arrived in England, and erected a house at Clerkenwell. Their establishments, known as commanderies, were rich and numerous. In this diocese they owned the manor of Sutton-at-Hone, and that of West Peckham, where they had a commandery, besides the impropriate rectories mentioned in the Return. Latterly they were called Knights of Rhodes and Knights of Malta. The Knights Templars date from 1 1 18. At first they were nine in number, who guarded the highways leading to the Holy Sepulchre, and protected the pilgrims. They took their name from the place of their abode, near the church and convent of the Temple at Jerusalem. By 1185 they had much property in this country. In that year they removed from Holborn to their new house at the west end of Fleet Street, the site of which is still called the Temple. About half-a-mile south of Strood church, on the banks of the Medway, is Temple Farm, one of their preceptories. Little remains of the ancient fabric except a spacious cellar vaulted with chalk and stone groins ; the walls are of considerable thickness. M i7? ROCHESTER diocese, the bishop replied, that after examining his own registers, and those of his predecessors, and making such enquiries as the short time at his disposal allowed, he found them to be possessed of the church at Tonbridge, with the chapels of Ship- bourne and Capel, taxed at twenty-four marks sterling ; of the church of Hadlovv, taxed at forty marks sterling ; of the church of Burham, taxed at twenty marks ; and a certain portion in that parish taxed at 100.?., which belonged to them before they became impropriators of the rectory. " They also receive a pension of ten marks from the church of Ashe (near Sevenoaks), but by what right does not appear, as no mention is made of it in the registers." While Hamo of Hythe occupied the see of Rochester, an addition was made to the religious houses of the diocese by the foundation of Dartford priory. The first step was taken in 1344. On Oct. 8 in that year Edward III. addressed a letter from Westminster to the bishop, requesting his consent to the establishment of a nunnery, in ac- cordance, as it was understood, with the wish of his father, the late king. It is clear that the proposition was not altogether acceptable. No answer had been returned on Jan. 28, when Edward wrote again. Either this application, or the former, was backed by a letter from the Archbishop of Canterbury. Thus pressed Hamo communicated with the prior and convent of Rochester. He forwards the letters he has received from the king and archbishop, and asks their advice, as interested parties, whether consent shall be given or the king shall be solicited to abandon ROCHESTER 179 the project. His fear was that the foundation would so injure the vicar of Dartford as to force him either to fail in paying the pension due to the convent, or to seek an augmentation of his income from the great tithes appropriated in the last century to the support of the bishop. At the same time he writes to the vicar, desiring him to consider how the pro- posal would affect himself and his successors. The Rochester chapter replied, Nov. 13, 1345, that inas- much as a royal foundation would promote the Divine glory they thought it worthy the approval of all Christian people, and believed that by the prudence of the bishop the evils he feared might be averted. We do not know what was the nature of the vicar's answer, but in Feb. 1346 Hamo, with many pro- fessions of respect, acquiesced in the scheme if security were given that no injury should be done to the bishoprick, the convent, or the vicarage. Some years passed before the foundation was completed. It was styled the "Monastery of St. Mary and St. Margaret, the Virgins, in Dartford, of the order of St. Augustine, under the government of the Friars Preachers," and was endowed with property in Surrey, Suffolk, Wilts, Hereford, and Wales, as well as in London and Kent. The Kentish property lay in Dartford, Stone, Wilmington, and Southfleet. Some of it had belonged to Alice Perrers, the king's mistress. It is said that the establishment was originally intended for twenty- four sisters and six brothers. Richard II. in his eighth year added lands in Norfolk for the mainten- ance of a chaplain to officiate daily in the chapel of the infirmary. Stoneham Place, about half-a-mile i3o ROCHESTER distant in the direction of Crayford, was sometimes used as a retreat by the ailing or aged nuns. The priory seems to have been from the first one of the more aristocratic institutions of its kind. Among the sisters was the Princess Bridget, fourth daughter of Edward IV. At the Dissolution Henry VIII. retained the buildings for his own accommodation. Edward VI. granted them to Anne of Cleves, and Queen Elizabeth made use of them when visiting Kent in 1573. Some slight remains, gate-house and garden walls, are yet to be seen to the west of the town. The priory of Rochester was not the only religious house in the diocese whose affairs were in a bad position at this period. Richard de Lucy, Chief Justice of England, founded n 78 an abbey of Canons Regular of the order of St. Augustine at Westwood, or Lesnes, in Erith. It stood on the edge of the marshes, about two miles from Erith church, at a spot known to railway travellers as Abbey wood. Either the endowment was inadequate or the man- agement faulty, for the institution was now in difficulties. The abbot and convent acknowledged, July 8, 1344, that they had given the priory of Rochester a rent of £4 6s. 8d., to be paid annually from their manors of Lesnes and Akholt for the main- tenance of a secular priest to say mass daily in the cathedral for the souls of Hamo, Bishop of Rochester, his predecessors and successors, the kings and arch- bishops, and the deceased priors and brethren. By so doing they obtained from Hamo 160 marks for the repair of their church, " by sudden chance become ruinous," "the protection of their land from the ROCHESTER Thames, and the payment of their heavy debts." They attributed their difficulties to the deficiency of the com harvest, the lawsuits in which they had been engaged, and the purchase of the advowson ot Elnethel. We may suppose that the relief was but temporary, for in T349 we are told that the bishop found everything at Lesnes and Mailing in such a deplorable condition, through long-continued want of care, that " while the world lasted it could scarcely be set right." The priory of Tonbridge was the scene of a lament- able fire. Founded by Richard de Clare, Earl of Hertford, a relation of the Conqueror, it occupied a site now used by the South-Eastern Railway Company as a goods station. Here once stood one of the finest monasteries in the diocese, consisting of a church, chapter-house, vestry, dormitory, refectory, library, and other offices, all destroyed July n, 1337, with the books, manuscripts, vestments, and furniture. In this emergency the prior and canons appealed to the pope and the bishop, praying that their possessions might be confirmed to them, and that the church of Leigh might be added to their endowments. At the same time a petition was presented to the king, to which he replied by granting his licence in 1349 for the appropriation. The archbishop at once gave an indulgence of forty days to all who should assist in re -building the edifice. Hamo instituted an enquiry into the facts, and with the approval of the archdeacon determined to sanction the arrangement as to Leigh. But there were obstacles to be overcome; his health was failing, and the matter was left unsettled at his death. John of Shepey, his 182 ROCHESTER successor, speedily took it up. On February 25, 1353, he issued a mandate setting forth that the church and many precious jewels, with the noble buildings, had been destroyed by a fire, which, without any fault of the inmates, had brought them to ruin. To add to their troubles, the river, on whose banks they dwelt, often overflowed their granaries, to the destruction of the contents. Further than this, their position near the king's highway, a thoroughfare much frequented by the nobles as well as by ordinary travel- lers, entailed an amount of hospitality their funds were insufficient to meet. They were therefore overwhelmed with debt. For these reasons he had resolved to carry out the intentions of his predecessor, and now granted these religious men, " devout, as he hoped, and dear to God, day and night serving the great Creator," the parsonage of Leigh, of which the annual value did not exceed twelve pounds of silver, reserving the rights of the church of Rochester and what is due to the bishop and archdeacon by custom, reserving also 20*. sterling for the entertainment of himself and his household whenever he or his successors should visit, to be paid within ten days of the visitation. By the same deed a vicarage was ordained, and the rights of the vicar defined. There are no records of the buildings erected immediately after the fire. Some remains of Tonbridge priory were in existence in 1838, but not a vestige is left. John of Shepey, Hamo's successor, was presum- ably a native of the island separated from the main- land of Kent by the Swale, and so often mentioned in connection with the incursions of the Danes. ROCHESTER I83 Nothing is known as to his parentage. In early youth he came under the notice of Hamo. The future prelate saw in the bright lad the promise of what was to be. He gave him the means of education, took him into the monastery, and on the resignation of John of Speldhurst in 1333 advanced him to the dignity of prior. By this time John of Shepey was a doctor in divinity, a man of blameless life and good address. As a preacher he obtained some fame. In 1336 he preached at Paul's Cross, in 1341 at the funeral of Sir Nicholas de Malmeyne, at that of Lady Cobham in 1347, and in the cathedral on Thursday in Passion week 1343, and on Ash Wednesday in 1353. Many of his sermons remain in the library of New College, Oxford. While prior he heartily seconded the king's efforts for the better defence of Rochester. The works at the castle and keep were carried out under his supervision. The monks also were active. They built a wall on the north of the priory, where their property adjoined the High Street, and in other directions isolated themselves from the city. The prior's gate, the deanery gate, and college gate belong to this period, though not identical in date. Whether any unusual ground for alarm prompted this work of fortification wc cannot tell. So far back as the summer of 1327 "all the inhabitants of Rochester conspired to plunder the cathedral, under pretence of desiring access by night and by day to carry the viaticum to the sick. When this was refused an armed multitude attacked the church ; they broke the doors, and for the whole night, even to the third hour of the next day, kept the monks shut up in a state of siege." ROCHESTER (Aug. Sac. vol. i. p. 368.) Perhaps some new cause for apprehension had arisen. The monks may have feared the citizens or the pilgrims. Prior John was one who knew the world. By showing kindness to the Earl of Eu and the Chamberlain de Kambreville, prisoners taken in Normandy and brought to England, he acquired the good-will of the pope and the King of France. The desire kindled within him of attaining to higher things than he had yet reached. For the present, as not sure of his ground, he is thought to have used such influence as he had to prevent the acceptance of Hamo's resignation. When Hamo died the convent elected him, and the pope appointed him Bishop of Rochester by a bull, pro- bably antedated in order to maintain the papal authority. He was consecrated at St. Mary Overy, now St. Saviour's, Southwark. According to one account he was appointed Chancellor of England in 1356, but it can hardly be doubted that the office he held was that of High Treasurer. His death occurred at La Place, October 19, 1360. He left 100 marks for his funeral expenses, the same sum for the repair of the cathedral, and £100 to the cellarer to provide necessaries for the convent. He had previously found- ed a chantry at the altar of St. John the Baptist. This confirms our belief that we are right in ascribing the tomb under the arch between the presbytery and the aisle of the north-east transept to Bishop John of Shepey. For the aisle is the chapel of St. John. It had been thought that the bishop was buried on the south of the altar, in front of the sedilia, but during the repairs of 1825 his monument was discovered ROCHESTER walled up in the easternmost arch on the north side. It is not only the most remarkable monument in the church, but one of the most interesting in England, for the recumbent figure retains the rich colours with which it has been painted, and affords a very perfect example of polychrome as applied to sepulchral effigies. From a return made in 1359, 33rd Edward III., we gather important information as to the value of the see of Rochester. It is said that in his own diocese the bishop holds The manor of Bromley with rents at Dartford taxed at ... ... ... ... ... 36 10 8 The manor of Hailing with its hamlet taxed at ... 38 6 o The manor of Borstal with its appurtenances taxed at 7 7 o The manor of Trottescliffe with its hamlet taxed at .. 15 3 10 The manor of Stone with its hamlet taxed at ... 35 8 7 The manor of Cobhambury taxed at ... ... 405 In the town of Mailing rents of assize ... ... 6 15 8 In the diocese of Lincoln, archdeaconry of North- ampton and deanery of Brackley, at Middleton, lands and rents taxed at ... ... ... 3 10 o In the diocese of Norwich, archdeaconry of Sudbury, deanery of Fordham, lands, rents, meadows, dues, young of animals, taxed at ... ... ... 39 18 4 And the church of Isleham in his peculiar jurisdiction taxed at seventy marks ... ... ... 46 13 4 In the diocese of Winchester, archdeaconry of Surrey, deanery of Southwark, a certain pension from the church of Lambeth of five marks ... ... 368 And John, Bishop of Rochester, being present in court, Nov. 22, 1359, acknowledged before the barons of the Exchequer that he held the church of Frindsbury with its chapel, and the church of Dartford, in his own diocese : and the church of KOCH ESTER Tadyntone with its chapel, in the diocese of Norwich, which of old were appropriated to his bishoprick. More careful search was then made among the rolls, and it was discovered in the par- ticulars of the taxation of the spiritual goods of the clergy of the diocese of Rochester that the church of Frindsbury was taxed at sixty marks ... 40 o o And the church of Dartford at forty-five marks ... 30 o o It also appeared that the church of Tadyntone was taxed at sixty marks ... ... ... ... 40 o o £347 o 6 But no mention was made in the rolls of the Bishop of Rochester in connection with the said churches. It seems from this return, when compared with that of 1255, that the episcopal manors had risen in value from about ^140 to about £1 80. In the former return no notice was taken of the income from the churches, and the property at Middleton and Cobham- bury had been acquired in the interval — hence the large difference in the totals. There were reasons why William Whittlesey should succeed to the vacant see. Archbishop Islip's health had failed. It would be a comfort to have his nephew at hand in a position to act for him. The Bishop of Rochester was the recognized deputy of the Primate in all diocesan business. Though the appointment was no longer at the archbishop's disposal, as it had been, he was still able to exercise a considerable amount of influence whenever a vacancy occurred. The cotigc d'clirc was issued in his name, and he invested the bishop-elect with the temporalities. Should he offer any obstacle to the investiture much ROCHESTER 187 trouble would be caused, and litigation in all pro- bability would follow. The chapter doubtless took the circumstances into consideration and elected William. Dean Hook thinks they made a bargain with Islip. At any rate, there is a charter, dated at Charing, 1363, by which the archbishop restores to the monks of Rochester the full possession of the church • of Boxley, given to them by Henry I. at the dedication of the cathedral, but since the time of Theobald in the hands of the archbishop, with the exception of an annual pension of 60s. {.Reg. Roff., p. 180.) Be that as it may, William was chosen, his election was con- firmed at Avignon, jure provisionis, July 31, 1361, and he was consecrated by his uncle, who wished to officiate, in the private chapel at Otford, February 6, 1362. He was not unworthy of promotion, for he had acquitted himself with credit in the situations in which he had been placed — whether as proctor at Rome, vicar-general of the province of Canterbury, and Dean of Arches, or as Archdeacon of Huntingdon and rector of Cliffe. Fuller calls him " an excellent scholar, an eloquent preacher," and says, " his last sermon most remarkable, to the convocation, on this text — ' The truth shall make you free.' It seems by the story that in his sermon he had a particular reflection on the privileges of the clergy, as exempted by preaching the truth from payment of taxes save with their own free consent. But all would not serve their turn, for in the • contemporary parliament the clergy unwillingly-will- ing granted a yearly tenth to supply the pressing needs of King Edward III." Let us hope that from other texts he drew sounder inferences, though not less i88 ROCHESTER practical. His stay at Rochester was but short. In 1363 he was removed to Worcester — the only Bishop of Rochester translated for 250 years. He became Primate in 1368, and after long suffering from a linger- ing disease, died at Lambeth 1374, and was buried in the nave of Canterbury Cathedral, where his remains were- found when the new pavement was laid in 1786. While at Rochester Whittlesey was deputed to act for the archbishop in the affair of the disturbances which had occurred in his former parish of ClifTe. The rector, John of Bishopston, had excited the animosity of his parishioners by some proceedings he had taken with regard to their tithes, and by certain penances he had imposed on them for breaches of the moral law. To such a height did the ill-feeling rise, that on the Sunday before Christmas, 1363, they sought to waylay him, with the object of taking his life as he went to church. The rector, though unaware of the intended attack, providentially chose another road, and reached the church in safety, with his chaplains, clerks, and household. When they found he had escaped an armed mob thronged the churchyard, interrupting the service with insolent shouts and open threats of violence. He himself was detained in a state of siege while his attendants were grossly ill-used, " to the injury of Holy Church, the disgrace of the whole clerical body, and the scandal of all Chris- tians." These lawless doings naturally resulted in an interview between the offenders and the authorities. The brawlers were cited to Charing, to the archbishop's court. Sentence was postponed until February, but as they would be debarred in the interval from religious ROCHESTER ordinances in consequence of the desecration of the church, they petitioned that the matter might be settled on an earlier day. At the first adjournment the rector was not present through ill-health, but thirteen of the chief parishioners appeared, of whom two were the representatives of the poorer people im- plicated in the disorder. All these on bended knees pleaded "guilty," and submitted themselves to the judgment of the archbishop. At the next adjourn- ment it was agreed that he should decide on the points in dispute between the rector and the parishioners, as well as on the penalties to be inflicted on account of the riot. The contention related on the one hand to the tithe of fish caught in the sea and marshes, and of cattle taken in to pasture by the tenants of the prior and convent of Canterbury, and on the other to the provision of two chaplains and a clerk to officiate, at the cost of the rector. Richard Ram at once con- fessed that he had not paid the tithe of his corn as he ought to have done, and was ordered to carry a sheaf on his shoulder to the high altar of Cliffe church, there to offer it, with the sum due for the tithes he had unjustly withheld. In February the Bishop of Rochester went to Cliffe to reconcile the church and churchyard. Arrayed in his pontificals he said mass solemnly, and then preached on the text, " I am sent to the lost sheep." After the sermon, in which the heinousness of their offence was convincingly set forth, he asked the parishioners, of whom a great number of both sexes were present, whether they approved of the persons chosen to act for them in the settlement to be made by the archbishop. He further explained in the I90 ROCHESTER clearest manner the terms of the reference, and invited objections. Many hands were held up in approval, none in opposition. Immediately the four who had been appointed on behalf of the inhabitants swore in their name, on the Holy Gospels, to submit to what- ever penance might be imposed. Then, at the bishop's command, the guilty knelt down, and "lay- ing aside all rancour, humbly desired absolution," which was forthwith pronounced. Among those per- sent were John of Hartlip, prior of Rochester ; the official, Master John of Swynesheved ; Robert of Bourne, " a clerk of the diocese of Winchester, learned in the law," and Richard Fode, clerk of the diocese of Sarum : as well as " that noble man Sir John Gray of Codnor, knight," and Robert, " the marshal of the said Lord Archbishop of Canterbury." No doubt the Sunday riot and the subsequent "reconciliation" and penance were long remembered in Cliffe, and formed the sub- ject of many a fireside tale. Thomas Trilleck, dean of Hereford, had been nom- inated to the see by papal provision, before his election by the monks, and was consecrated by Cardinal Guido in his private chapel, May 26, 1364. His register contains nothing beyond the usual entries as to ordination and admission to benefices. As heir to his brother, John Bishop of Hereford, he sold the premises known as Trilleck's Inn, Oxford, to William of Wykeham. On the site New Inn Hall was built, which had a high reputation in the seventeenth century, but has ceased to have an independent existence. He wished to be buried in St. Mary's Chapel in his own cathedral. A stone, robbed of its brasses, in the south- ROCHESTER west transept may cover his remains. His death occurred about Christmas, 1372. The chapter chose their prior, John of Hartlip, to succeed Bishop Trilleck, but Gregory XI. appointed Thomas of Brinton, a monk of Norwich, his peniten- tiary. In Holinshed's C/iro?iide(vo\. iii.,p. 417) we have an account of a sermon delivered by him on a great occasion. "On the morrow after the coronation of King Richard II. there was a general procession of the archbishops, bishops, and abbots then present, with the lords and a great multitude of people to praie for the King and the peace of the kingdom. At the going forth of this procession the Bishop of Rochester preached, exhorting them, that the dissensions and discords which had long continued betwixt the people and their superiors might be appeased and forgotten, proving by many arguments that the same highlie displeased God. He admonished the lords not to be so extreme and hard towards the people. On the other part, he exhorted the people in necessarie causes for the aid of the King and realme cheerfullie and without grudging to put to their helping handes, according to their bounden duties. He further ex- horted those in general that were appointed to be about the King, that they should forsake vice, and studie to live in cleanness of life and virtue. For if by their example the King were trained in good- nesse, all should be well ; but if he declined through their sufferance from the right waie, the people and kingdome were like to fall in danger and perish." This was sound advice, worthy of a patriot and a Christian. Happy for 'all had it been taken. Then 192 ROCHESTER had the prince escaped a wretched end, and the nation the disturbances and miseries in which our diocese so largely shared. For it was here that, a few years later, the smouldering fires of discontent burst into a blaze that threatened to pioduce a general con- flagration. Sir Simon Burley went to Gravesend with an armed force, claimed an industrious man living in the town as his bondman, and carried him off a prisoner to Rochester Castle. At Dartford one of the collectors of the poll-tax offered an intolerable insult to the daughter of Walter the Tyler, and was killed by the father on the spot. Then the commons of Kent rose. A strong body of the men of Essex crossed the Thames. Together they fell upon Rochester Castle and freed Sir Simon's serf. From Maidstone they marched to Canterbury, thence towards London. By the time they reached Blackheath their numbers were swollen to 100,000. Their wrongs, their crimes, their punishment, are matters of history. We only refer to them on account of the local connection of the revolt with the diocese, and because they proved the wisdom of Bishop Thomas of Brinton's warning, a warning as needful for our day as for his. Of his acts as Bishop of Rochester we may mention that in 1377 he consented to the appropriation of the church of Cudham to the prioress and nuns of St. Augustine's, Kilburn. They pleaded that they were burdened with debt in consequence of the decay of their buildings and their inability to maintain the hospitality expected of them in a much-frequented thoroughfare. In granting their request he says he has enquired by a jury as to the truth of their state- ROCHESTER 193 ments, and is satisfied that their difficulties are not due to their own extravagance or want of energy. He has consulted the archdeacon and the convent of Ro- chester, to whom some property in the parish belongs, as well as the rector and vicar, who made no objection to the arrangement. He has reserved power to aug- ment the vicar's portion, if necessary, and retains a pension of 10s. for himself and his successors in lieu of the profits derived from the benefice on a vacancy. (Reg. Roff., pp. 264-5.) I" r378, by commission from Gregory XL, he ratified the appropriation of the church of Horton Kirby to Cobham College ; and by authority from Urban II., 1388, confirmed to the same college the appropriation of the church of Rolvenden. This establishment, of which the great hall remains among the buildings of the later almshouses, in one of the most picturesque spots in Kent, close to the church with its unrivalled series of brasses, and not far from the park and mansion so well known among " the stately homes of England," owes its origin to John de Cobham, who in 1363 founded a charity for five priests to officiate in Cobham Church, for " the praise and honour of God and the health of his soul and the souls of his ancestors." One of the five was to be vicar of the parish and master of the college. When the rectory of Rolvenden was added to the endowment, the number of clergy was raised to seven, all of whom were to reside in the buildings provided for them, which seem to have included a school. The founder at the same time repaired the church "with work not a little sumptuous," and enriched it with books, vestments, and ornaments. N 194 ROCHESTER Thomas of Brinton died 1389, and was probably buried in the south-west transept of the cathedral. There is in Seal Church the brass of a bishop with the date 1389, which Weever supposes to be his. It is more likely that of Thomas of Rushook, Bishop of Kilmore. The monks were again to prove that in appealing from Canterbury to Rome they had not secured free- dom but changed masters. They chose John of Bamet to the vacant see. The pope had other views. He had two friends, whom from motives of gratitude he wished to promote. The opportunity now offered itself. William of Bottlesham, Bishop of Llandaff, had " remained with him in his trials," when he was besieged at Luceria. If he were translated, room would be made for Edmund Bromfield, who had suffered imprisonment in his cause. William was therefore appointed to Rochester, and Edmund was nominated to Llandaff. The bishop, a friar, bore a high character for learning and eloquence. He had been sub-prior of Anglesey, and titular Bishop of Bethlehem. In a sermon before the Convocation at St. Paul's, in 1399, he admonished the clergy at Court to return to their benefices and reside on them. Pluralists he compared to monstrosities in nature, with many superfluous limbs, who should have their hearts divided into as many parts as they had benefices. In the following February he died, and was buried in the church of the Black Friars, London. Once more the monks failed to secure the man of their choice. Thomas of Chillenden, Prior of Christ Church, Canterbury, declined to leave a posi- 95 tion in which he was honoured and useful. John of Bottlesham, chaplain to Archbishop Arundel, was therefore elected to the see of Rochester, and con- secrated July 4, 1400. The connection between him and his predecessor is not known, though both are supposed to have been natives of Bottlesham, or Balsham, in Cambridgeshire. Before his advancement John was vicar-general of the diocese of York. It has been said that he never visited his cathedral after he became bishop. Whether this was so or not, he was at Trottescliffe in 1400, 1402, 1403, in which years he there executed instruments relating to the diocese. From the first of these it seems that John Colepeper had founded a chantry in the new chapel of St. Mary, in Pembury churchyard. Either by design or by oversight, he appointed that when a vacancy occurred the parishioners of Pembury, who chanced to be at church the next Sunday, should elect a chaplain, though the congregation might consist of two or three poor people, or even one. The bishop thought such an arrangement absurd in itself, unjust to the founder's heirs, and likely to end in the destruction of the chantry. He therefore decreed that when needful the heir should present a fit person for institution. If he failed to do so within a month, the vicar, with the advice of four of the leading inhabitants, should nominate in twenty days. The chantry was, of course, suppressed at the Reformation, and the building was soon after pulled down.' 1 When the belief in purgatory was strong, it was natural that they who had the means should provide for the continual offer- ing up of prayer for the repose of their souls. With this object 194 ROCHESTER Thomas of Brinton died 1389, and was probably buried in the south-west transept of the cathedral. There is in Seal Church the brass of a bishop with the date 1389, which Weever supposes to be his. It is more likely that of Thomas of Rushook, Bishop of Kilmore. The monks were again to prove that in appealing from Canterbury to Rome they had not secured free- dom but changed masters. They chose John of Barnet to the vacant see. The pope had other views. He had two friends, whom from motives of gratitude hs wished to promote. The opportunity now offered itself. William of Boltlesham, Bishop of Llandaff, had " remained with him in his trials," when he was besieged at Luceria. If he were translated, room would be made for Edmund Bromfield, who had suffered imprisonment in his cause. William was therefore appointed to Rochester, and Edmund was nominated to Llandaff. The bishop, a friar, bore a high character for learning and eloquence. He had been sub-prior of Anglesey, and titular Bishop of Bethlehem. In a sermon before the Convocation at St. Paul's, in 1399, he admonished the clergy at Court to return to their benefices and reside on them. Pluralists he compared to monstrosities in nature, with many superfluous limbs, who should have their hearts divided into as many parts as they had benefices. In the following February he died, and was buried in the church of the Black Friars, London. Once more the monks failed to secure the man of their choice. Thomas of Chillenden, Prior of Christ Church, Canterbury, declined to leave a posi- 95 tion in which he was honoured and useful. John of Bottlesham, chaplain to Archbishop Arundel, was therefore elected to the see of Rochester, and con- secrated July 4, 1400. The connection between him and his predecessor is not known, though both are supposed to have been natives of Bottlesham, or Balsham, in Cambridgeshire. Before his advancement John was vicar-general of the diocese of York. It has been said that he never visited his cathedral after he became bishop. Whether this was so or not, he was at Trottescliffe in 1400, 1402, 1403, in which years he there executed instruments relating to the diocese. From the first of these it seems that John Colepeper had founded a chantry in the new chapel of St. Mary, in Pembury churchyard. Either by design or by oversight, he appointed that when a vacancy occurred the parishioners of Pembury, who chanced to be at church the next Sunday, should elect a chaplain, though the congregation might consist of two or three poor people, or even one. The bishop thought such an arrangement absurd in itself, unjust to the founder's heirs, and likely to end in the destruction of the chantry. He therefore decreed that when needful the heir should present a fit person for institution. If he failed to do so within a month, the vicar, with the advice of four of the leading inhabitants, should nominate in twenty days. The chantry was, of course, suppressed at the Reformation, and the building was soon after pulled down.1 1 When the belief in purgatory was strong, it was natural that they who had the means should provide for the continual offer- ing up of prayer for the repose of their souls. With this object 196 ROCHESTER The second document relates to a dispute between the rectors of Snodland and Wouldham, on the opposite banks of the Medway, as to the tithe of fish. The bishop decides that the inhabitants of Snodland fishing with boats, nets, and- other neces- saries, may draw their nets and take fish beyond mid- stream to the farther shore, but the half of the tithe of the fish so caught must go to the rector of Wouldham. The third is a licence to any prelate the king may name, to consecrate oil for ordination, confirmation, and extreme unction in the chapel of Eltham Palace, and in the royal presence, every Maundy Thursday, and gives him leave to confer both the greater and the lesser orders annually on Easter Eve. chantries were founded. A chapel was added to the church ; or a part of the church, usually at the east end of an aisle, was enclosed by a stone or wooden screen. Within the chapel or enclosure an altar was erected, at which a priest (sometimes more than one) was employed to pray daily for the founder and his friends during life, and for their souls after death. In some churches many such chantries existed. The spot may often be identified by the piscina in the outer wall of the building. Com- monly theservice was conducted by the priest and his acolyte with- out any congregation. Bishop Jewell, condemning these private masses, speaks of them as being "for the most part sayde inside ilcs alone, without companye of people, onely with one boye to make answer." The chantries, however, were not always in or adjoining a church. Here, at Fembury, the chantry was a separate building. That of St. Katherine at Shome is nearly a quarter of a mile from the church, opposite an old mansion by one of whose owners it was probably founded. These chantries were endowed and independent of the parish priest. Under Edward VI. they were dissolved, and their revenues were con- fiscated to the Crown. This fact goes far to disprove the popular notion that the clergy of the Church of England are in receipt of sums of money left for distinctively Romish purposes. ROCHESTER I97 In the Parliament of 1404 John of Bottlesham defended the ecclesiastical property with effect. Some knights of the shire proposed that all the temporalities of the Church should be devoted to the king's use for one year. Archbishop Arundel censured the knights for their cupidity, but the Bishop of Rochester clenched his. argument by sending for a copy of Magna Charta, and showing that, by its terms, the authors of such a proposition laid themselves open to excommunication. So quick-witted was he, and so prompt in speech, that he was called " My Lord of Canterbury's Mercury," because he put into ready words the ideas which passed through the Primate's mind ; himself by no means deficient in power of expression, though not so fluent as his suffragan. Bishop John, by his will, proved April 24, 1404, gave 100 marks (^66 13X. 4<f.), his mitre, and his pastoral staff to his cathedral, in which he was buried — where is not known. The century was marked by a growing opposition on the part of Englishmen to the claims of the papacy, especially to the disposal of benefices by " provision," an invention whereby the right of patronage was sus- pended in order that the pope might appoint his own nominee. Against this evil the statute of " Provisors," passed in 1351, was directed. In 1352 appeals to Rome were forbidden, and in 1392 the prohibition was extended to the obtaining any bulls affecting the king, his crown, and realm, under the penalty of a praemunire, which involved forfeiture of property and imprisonment. There were, too, an increasing number who raised their voices against the cor- 198 ROCHESTER ruptions both of doctrine and practice that prevailed in the Church. Among them three may be men- tioned, Richard Fitzralph, Archbishop of Armagh, author of the Defe7ice of the Curates; Thomas Brad- wardine, the Profound Doctor, consecrated Archbishop of Canterbury ; and the writer of the remarkable work entitled The Ploughman's Complaint, a very telling exposure of the errors of the times. The strongest opponent of the papacy, however, was John Wyclif, born in Yorkshire 1324. With much that he main- tained it would be impossible for us to agree. The impetuosity of his temper drove him to lengths subversive of order, civil and ecclesiastical. But he was a man of blameless life, of unwearied zeal, and one who rendered his countrymen the inestimable service of giving them a translation of the Bible in their mother tongue. Copies of the Holy Scriptures existed in Latin. Gundulf's Bible was in the library of Rochester priory. Anglo-Saxon translations of, and paraphrases upon, parts of the Bible were to be found, but these after the Norman Conquest would be less and less understood. Sir Thomas More expressly says, " Myself have sene and can shew you Bybles fayre and old, wryten in Englyshe, whych have ben knowen and sene by the Byshop of the dyocyse, and left in laymennys handys and womens, to suche as he knew for good and catholyke folk, that used it with de- vocyon and sobernesse." [Diatoge, book 3, c. 15.) Whether he means a complete translation is not certain. Be that as it may, Wyclif in 1380 put forth an entire Bible in English, and thereby awakened among the people an eager desire for scriptural knowledge ROCHESTER 199 When Courtenay became Primate he summoned Wyclif before him. On his refusal to appear, as hold- ing an office which exempted him from episcopal jurisdiction, articles drawn from his writings were referred to a body of jurors, including Thomas of Brinton, Bishop of Rochester, and William of Bottles- ham, then Bishop of Bethlehem. The jurors pro- nounced against Wyclif, whereupon the archbishop ordered that in all the cathedrals and churches of his province men should be warned neither to accept the new tenets nor to favour those who received them. Further, in the Convocation at Oxford, November 19, 1382, Courtenay announced that he "assigned" the Bishop of Rochester and others to enquire into the spread of heresy in the university. Not much came of the enquiry. The Wycliffites and Lollards, by no means identical, increased in numbers, and on the accession of Henry IV. a law was passed which con- stituted the bishop of the diocese the sole judge in cases of heresy, and condemned the heretic to be publicly burnt. The first to suffer was William Sautre. When he was "degraded," on Saturday, February 26, 1401, John of Bottlesham, Bishop of Rochester, was one of the prelates attending the Primate, and so consenting to the horrible scene which followed. We must not fail to notice another feature of the time, that so inimitably described by Chaucer in his Canterbury Talcs. Pilgrimages, indeed, were by no means peculiar to this country or to this century. Bat it may be thought most suitable to refer to them here, because it was at this period that Chaucer wrote 20O ROCHESTER the poem which, with the Colloquy of Erasmus, enables us to understand, as otherwise we could not, what a mediaeval pilgrimage was, how it was con- ducted, of whom it consisted. In such a pilgrimage every grade of English society except the very highest and lowest seems to have had its representative. And very enjoyable, no doubt, these pilgrimages often were, as the cavalcade moved along the leafy lanes in spring and early summer, " when April with his showers sweet, the drought of March hath pierced to the root, and small fowls are making melody." The 'Tabard' at Southwark, from which Chaucer's pilgrims started, is now in the diocese of Rochester and their path for many miles lay within its borders. " Up rose our host .... And gathcrd us together in a flock, And forth we riden a little more than pace, Unto the watering of St. Thomas." " Lo Depeford, and it is half-way prime; Lo Greenwich, there many a shrew is in." " Lo Rochester stondeth here fast by." "Before I come to Sidenbournc," the limit of the diocese has been passed, and we must follow our imaginary travellers no farther. In real life many of them would probably have repeated their prayer, and made their offering, at the shrine of St. William in Rochester Cathedral, on their way to Canterbury, and so have sought a double blessing. Nor can we doubt that there were instances in which a visit to a sacred spot, with the inspection of even questionable relics, had a good effect, for it appealed to a sentiment innate in the human heart, the associa- ROCHESTER 201 tion of ideas with persons and places. But the result of pilgrimages as a whole was not favourable to the growth of piety. The excitement, the mixed company, the conversation on the road, frivolous in most cases, if not worse, could hardly be productive of religious feeling. The danger of acquiring a taste for rambling from one shrine to another, to the neglect of home duties, is too obvious for remark ; while from the doctrinal point of view nothing could be more erroneous than the habit of representing such journeys as meritorious or necessary to salvation. A perusal of Chaucer and Erasmus must convince any candid reader that, however innocent pilgrimages may have originally been, the reformers were more than justified in objecting to them. Indeed, so early as 745 Boniface, Bishop of Mentz, requested that English- women, especially nuns, might be prevented from making pilgrimages to Rome, " because for the most part they perish, few preserving their integrity." And when Thorpe, in his examination by Archbishop Arundel, objected that "pilgrims have men and women with them who can sing wanton songs, so that every town they come through, what with the noise of their singing, the sound of their piping, the jangling of their Canterbury bells, and the barking of dogs, they make more noise than if the king came with all his clarions," the Primate, far from denying the fact, jocosely replied, " Thou seest not far enough in this matter. I say that it is well done that pilgrims have with them singers and pipers, that when one of them that goeth barefoot striketh his toe upon a stone, and hurteth him sore, and maketh him to bleed, it is well 202 ROCHESTER done that he or his fellow begin then a song, or else take out of his bosom a bagpipe, for to drive away with such mirth the hurt of his fellow. For with such solace the travel and weariness of pilgrims is lightly and merrily brought forth." Throughout Surrey and Kent, within the diocese and beyond it, there are roads called the Pilgrims' Way, from the belief that they were traversed by the thousands who for some 350 years flocked to Becket's shrine from all parts of England and the Continent. That they were so used may be safely assumed, but it would be a mistake to infer that they were made by the pilgrims or for their con- venience. They are, in fact, much older — older perhaps than the landing of Julius Cnesar. The course of such roads is frequently marked by ancient yews, and often ran mid-way down the hill-side on the verge of the earlier cultivation of the chalk downs. We find traces of these ancient ways, more or less distinct, in the neighbourhood of Boxhill, Reigate, Gatton, Merstham, Chaldon, Titsey, Tatsfield, in Surrey, and of Chevening, Kemsing, Wrotham, Trottes- cliffe, Otford, Hailing, and other places in Kent. The town-hall of Reigate, midway between South- ampton or Winchester and Canterbury, stands on the site of a chapel dedicated to St. Thomas, whither the pilgrims resorted when they descended from the hill- side to the town for lodging or provision. Tradition affirms that the pool called " Well-head" one of the sources of the river Mole, near Merstham Church, was covered in part by a canopy of stone (of which some traces were observed not long since in a very dry ROCHESTER 203 season), and served for their refreshment as they halted on their way. What is now the carriage drive of Merstham rectory is a portion of the road trodden by the pilgrims' feet. A little. out of Southwark was The Watering of St. Thomas, where the horses quenched their thirst. Not far from Cobham Park, a piece of standing water, known as St. Thomas's Well, may have been used for the same purpose. The fourteenth century may be called the age of Decorated architecture. In the latter part of the thirteenth a change from Early English had set in, and produced a style which lasted about a hundred years, and is considered by many to be the most beautiful of all. The flowing tracery, the graceful design, the admirable execution, by which it is dis- tinguished, render it infinitely pleasing. We have some fine specimens in the windows of the presbytery, and the magnificent doorway leading to the chapter- room, of Rochester Cathedral. Other examples may be seen in the churches of Ashurst, Cliffe, Higham, Ightham, Pembury, and Stone. The church of Detling contains a lectern of much beauty, to be ascribed to this period. 204 CHArTER VII One of the finest remains of antiquity in the neighbourhood of Rochester is Cooling Castle. In 1379 a force of Frenchmen and Spaniards ravaged the district of Kent lying near the mouth of the Thames. Lord Cobham seems to have been re-build- ing his manor-house at the time, and seeing the defenceless condition of the locality, determined to construct a stronghold that should be a protection to his neighbourhood as well as to himself. With this view he obtained, in Feb. 1381, a licence to crenellate, i. e. fortify, his residence. On one of the towers he placed an inscription in the shape of a charter with his seal appended, setting forth that his object in build- ing was "the help of the country." The castle was twice identified with the religious movements of the day, and so comes within the scope of our narrative. It was besieged by Wyatt, in the rising intended as the protest of the men of Kent against Queen Mary's marriage with Philip of Spain. And it was the abode of Sir John Oldcastle, husband of the Lady of Cobham, whose tragic fate, one of the best-known incidents in the earlier part of the fifteenth century, claims notice ROCHES! ER in a history of this diocese. We have spoken of the spread of WycliPs principles, and of the measures of repression to which Henry IV., in his anxiety to conciliate the clergy, lent the aid of the civil arm. Henry V., probably from conviction, for his was a noble nature, continued his father's policy. Among Wyclif's followers Oldcastle held a prominent place. It was likely that in his own neighbourhood his example would win many converts to the cause he had espoused, and that in the churches on his estates, or in the vicinity, clergymen would be found preach- ing the doctrines to which he was attached. That this was so is proved by the fact that Archbishop Arundel, April 3, 1410, laid the churches of Hoo St. Mary, Hoo St. Werburgh, High Halstow, and Cooling, under an interdict because " a pretended chaplain, John, staying with Sir John Oldcastle," -had preached in them, and ordered that a notice should be fixed to their doors citing the chaplain to appear in his court. Two days after the prohibition was relaxed, so far as Cooling was concerned, " out of respect to the nobility of both parties," in order that the marriage of the son and heir of Sir Thomas Brooke with the daughter of the Lady of Cobham might be solemnized. When the happy event had taken place the interdict was to be enforced. " The Convocation of 1 41 3 felt that if they were to succeed in purging the land from heresy, they must take active steps against its most influential supporters. " Of these," the archbishop wrote, " Sir John Oldcastle was, and is, the principal. Especially in the dioceses of London, Rochester, and Hereford, he has sent Lollards to 2o6 ROCHESTER preach, not licensed by the bishops, and has been present at their wicked sermons, grievously punishing with threatenings, terrors, and power of the secular sword, such as withstood him. Also he holds and teaches, touching the sacrament of the altar, the keys, penances, pilgrimages, and worshipping of saints, contrary to that which the universal Church of Rome doth teach." But it was necessary to proceed with caution. The lord of Cobham was strong in the affection of his neighbours and in the friendship of the young king. The archbishop and clergy therefore thought it prudent to lay their complaints before Henry in person previous to taking more active steps. For this purpose they went to Kennington, where the Court then was. The king desired them to deal leniently with Sir John, and promised to use his own influence to bring him to a better mind. With this view he summoned Cobham to his presence, and urged him to submit. "You, most worthy prince," was the answer, " I am always willing to obey, forasmuch as I know you a Christian king and the appointed minister of God. But as touching the pope and his spirituality, I owe them neither suit nor service, forasmuch as I know him by the Scriptures to be the great Antichrist." The reply shocked Henry, and induced him to leave Oldcastle to his fate. The archbishop thereupon cited him to appear before him, at the same time directing the messenger not to enter Cooling Castle without the owner's permission. As Sir John would neither give permission nor accept service of the summons, a ROCHESTER 207 citation, twice torn down, was fixed to the doors of Rochester Cathedral, requiring him to appear at Leeds, September 11. On that day his Grace, "sitting in the tribunal seat in his great chapel in the castle of Leeds, of his diocese, which he then inhabited, and where he kept residence with his court," caused Sir John Old- castle to be " openly called by the crier with a loud voice, and so being called, long looked for, and by no means appearing, judged him obstinate, and did then and there excommunicate him." A further citation required him to appear on the Saturday after St. Matthew's day, and " show reasonable cause why he should not be proceeded against to more grievous punishment." In this dilemma, Sir John drew up a written confession of faith and carried it to the king, in the hope of obtaining his support. When Henry declined to receive it, he claimed that the oaths of a hundred knights and esquires might be accepted to purge him of heresy, and offered to maintain his cause personally by wager of battle, protesting that "he would refuse no manner of correction that should be ministered unto him according to God's law." It was in vain. The king allowed a summons to be served on him in the Privy Chamber, and when he appealed to the pope was even more angry than before. Finally he was committed to the Tower. On September 23, 1 413, the archbishop sat in the chapter-house at St. Paul's, The lieutenant of the Tower produced his prisoner. Oldcastle desired leave to read the pro- fession of belief he had in substance submitted to the king. It was such a profession as might be made by a member of the English Church at this day, but not 208 ROCHESTER such as was likely to satisfy his judges. After ac- knowledging, therefore, that it contained much catholic truth, they drew up a series of questions, to which they demanded a plain answer by the following Monday. On that day, Sept. 25, the court sat in the house of the Dominicans at Ludgate. The archbishop began by offering to absolve Sir John from excommunication if he would even now submit himself. " Nay, I never trespassed against you, therefore I will not." Then was witnessed a startling scene. Dropping on his knees, with hands stretched forth to heaven, he cried, " I shrive me here unto Thee, my eternal living God, that in my frail youth I offended Thee most grievously. Many men have I hurt in mine anger, and done many horrible sins ; good Lord, I ask Thee mercy." And therewith weepingly he stood up again, and said with a mighty voice, " Lo, good people, for the breaking of God's law they never cursed me, but for their own laws most cruelly do they handle me ; therefore both they and their laws shall by the promise of God be utterly destroyed." A prolonged argument ensued between him and his judges. It turned on transub- stantiation, the authority of the Church, and the worship due to images and the material cross. As neither party was likely to yield, the result was a foregone conclusion. " I will no otherwise believe in these points than what I have told you before. Do with me what you will." " Well, then, I see none other but that we must needs do the law, and both judge and condemn you for a heretic." Sentence was thereupon pronounced. " With a most cheerful countenance," the Lord Cobham answered, "Though ROCHESTER 209 ye judge my body, yet am I sure ye can do no harm to my soul. He that created that will of His infinite mercy save it." Falling down he prayed, " I beseech Thee of Thy great mercy sake to forgive my pursuers if it be Thy blessed will." Sir John was re-committed to the Tower, and letters were sent to the bishops of the province, commanding that the sentence should be published by the parochial clergy in " cities, towns, and villages, at such times as they shall have most recourse of people." Before it could be executed, Oldcastle, who had many friends in the city, escaped into Wales, where he lay concealed for four years, not- withstanding the large reward offered for his apprehen- sion. At length he was seized and carried to London. On Dec. 14, 141 7, he was condemned as "an outlaw and excommunicated for heresy, a traitor to the king and the realm," to be " drawn from the Tower, through London, to the new gallows in St. Giles without Temple Bar, there to be hanged and burned hanging." Early in 141 8 "was he hanged up by the middle in chains of iron, and so consumed alive in the fire, praising the name of God so long as his life lasted." The Bishop of Rochester at this time was Richard Yong, who had been consecrated to the see of Bangor in 1400. In 1401 Henry IV. sent him on an embassy to Germany, to explain the circumstances connected with the deposition of Richard II. Either before his journey, or on his return, he was imprisoned by the Welsh. Boniface IX. translated him "by provision," July 28, 1404, but died before the trans- action was legally finished. Innocent VII. confirmed his predecessor's act, and like him died while the o 2 IO ROCHESTER formalities were still incomplete. Under Gregory XII., 1407, Yong obtained possession of the bishop- rick. We do not know how far he was actively engaged in the campaign against the Lollards. It appears that a certain Robert Holbech, chaplain to Sir John Oldcastle, though excommunicated for heresy three or four years previously, continued to celebrate mass and preach in the churches of Cobham, Cooling, and Shorne. Of course this brought him into fresh conflict with the authorities. He appeared, July 12, 1416, for the second time before Archbishop Chiche- ley and asked pardon. After some delay the Bishop of Rochester, having persuaded him to abjure his former opinions, absolved him on condition that he should not say mass without a dispensation from the pope, and by way of penance should confess his errors at Paul's Cross. Bishop Yong is said to have been a benefactor to Frindsbury church, not only contributing to the repairs, but glazing the windows at his own cost. When Lambarde wrote his figure in painted glass was to be seen in one of them. In 1412 he decreed a temporary union, made perpetual in 17 12, between the benefices of Lullingstone and Lullingstane. The document by which the union was effected is dated from his pa/ace at Rochester, one of the few allusions we find to an episcopal residence within the city. He died in 141 8. To Richard Yong belongs the credit of putting a tiresome controversy into a train for settlement. From the days of Gundulf, if not before, the inhabit- ants of a certain part of Rochester had worshipped, ROCHESTER not in a church of their own, but in the nave of the cathedral. Such an arrangement existed elsewhere. The parishioners of St. Oswald's occupied the south transept of Chester Cathedral. Bangor Cathedral is even now a parish church, in which the vicar holds services distinct from those provided by the chapter. The arrangement is always inconvenient and sure to occasion strife. We do not know the precise spot where " the parochial altar of St. Nicholas " originally stood. Somewhere outside the choir the- citizens resorted for divine service, performed by a priest to whom the care of them had been committed by the bishop. At the beginning of the fourteenth century, in the time of Thomas "of Woldham, a quarrel broke out between the monks and the parishioners. The latter complained that their altar had been removed to a new position contrary to their wish. It was then placed, we can scarcely doubt, to the west of the steps leading into the choir, at the point where the lower halves of the western piers of the tower show that some wall or screen has been erected against them. The dispute was taken into the archbishop's court. By the award given in the prior's chamber at Rochester, April 6, 13 12, in the presence among others of Henry of Cobham, the younger, and William of Cosynthone, knights, it was decided that neither the vicar nor his substi- tute should without notice celebrate mass at that altar except on Sundays and the festivals of All Saints, St. Nicholas, Christmas Day, and the Purification, and that even on those days he should officiate at an hour which would the least interfere with the monastic 212 ROCHESTER services. The vicar might preach, if he chose, on the specified occasions, but must do so immediately after mass and not before it. Nothing was to be set up in any part of the cathedral by which it could be injured or disfigured. If any one violated these rules he was to be fined 4s. for each offence, to be devoted to the holy war. The parishioners accepted the decree, and engaged that whenever a suitable church should be provided for them they would renounce their claim to the altar. So matters remained for many years. Then a beginning was made in building a church ; but for some reason the work was stopped. Either the prior and convent were unwilling, when it came to the point, to relax their hold on the parishioners of St. Nicholas, or the parties could not agree as to the terms. Bishop Yong with great firm- ness took the case in hand. In May 141 8 he en- joined the monks, under pain of interdict and suspension, not to hinder the completion of the church, and forbad the citizens to make themselves in any way obnoxious to the ecclesiastics. Sitting judicially in his chapel at Hailing, June 3, he, as a punishment to the prior for refusing to appear, delivered the key of the new building to the wardens of St. Nicholas, and charged them to proceed with the work in a peaceable spirit. The next day the prior and convent gave notice of appeal. . They objected to the proposal of the bishop to turn the chaplain of the altar, who had always been regarded as a vicar, into a rector, and claimed the tithes as their own property, observing that the church was being built on ground belonging to themselves. Finally the ROCHESTER matter was left to the decision of the archbishop. His award was not given until 142 1. He speaks in it of his affection for the church of Rochester of which he was patron, and his sympathy with its members on account of the inconvenience and loss they had long sustained. He then decrees that to put an end, once for all, to the disputes that have arisen, the parishioners of St. Nicholas shall have power, with leave of the convent, to finish the church begun on the north side of the burial-ground of the priory, but not to enlarge it without permission except by the addition of a tower. The church must be finished in three years ; walls, windows, and roofs, fit for the due celebration of divine service. It is to have a font, and a vestry for keeping books, robes, and ornaments. The tower is to stand at the north- west end and may contain bells, to be rung at proper hours, not before five in the morning nor after eight in the evening, except for, by chance, an early mass, when only one bell shall be used. As soon as the new church is ready the vicar and parishioners shall renounce their rights in the cathedral, but shall be entitled to bury in the church, in Greenchurch Haw, or in the other cemetery to the west of the cathedral. For burial in Greenchurch Haw payment must be made to the cathedral grave-digger of fourpence for every corpse above the age of ten years, and of two- pence for every child below, and no one is to be employed without his consent. As processions were considered of great im- portance, and the space available in this instance was but limited, the decree prescribes the route 214 ROCHESTER to be followed. Starting from the chancel, the parochial procession is to go to 'the west door, turn to the right, along a passage on the north, through the east gate of the church, towards the north door of the cathedral, which it is not to enter, by a gate into Greenchurch Haw, along the north wall, to the west, and through a new gate into the other burial-ground, returning as far as the west door of the cathedral, and back through the cemetery to the church. On such days as the prior and convent walk in procession the parishioners of St. Nicholas are not to begin their perambulation until that of the monks is finished. The fences of both churchyards are to be repaired by the vicar and wardens, who are not to interfere with the gates leading from the priory to the High Street. These, with the gate of St. William, continue under the control of the monks, to be kept open or shut at their discretion. The vicar and his successors must pay the accustomed pension of 40.?. annually to the monastery, but the pressure of business prevents the archbishop from going at present into the details of the provision to be made for the vicar's support, or of the expenses to be defrayed by him. On Palm Sunday the vicar is to carry the Host in procession with the monks as hitherto, and is also to accompany them on the Rogation days and Ascension Day, and to dine with them in the priory. The parishioners are still to keep the feast of the dedication of the cathedral. In due time the church was com- pleted. It was consecrated by John, Bishop of Dromore, under a commission which also empowered him to ordain in the cathedral. The ordination, a ROCHESTER 215 very large one, was held on Saturday, Dec. 18, 1423, and then, in the winter evening, a meeting took place in the nave, between five and seven o'clock, when, in the presence of the Bishop of Dromore, the prior, William of Tonbridge, the vicars-general, and other officials, the vicar of St. Nicholas, Thomas Chamber- lain, in person, and the parishioners by their repre- sentatives, John Potagere and John Draper, renounced their rights in the cathedral. The consecration of the church,1 if it had not been already performed, followed on the next day, or soon after, but there is nothing in the register to fix the time. Within a few years an attempt was made to break one of the articles of the agreement. The citizens began to erect a new porch to the church, on ground belonging to the priory, in such a way as to encroach on the road leading to the cathedral. Proceedings were taken against them on Easter Tuesday, 1447, and the obnoxious building was removed. In settling other questions then in dispute between the civil and ecclesiastical authorities, the bishop (Lowe), with the consent of the convent, accorded the bailiff (or mayor) of Rochester and his successors the privilege (still exercised) of having their maces borne before them, not only into St. Nicholas, but into the cathedral and its cemetery, on festivals and state occasions, and " at the reception and instal- lation of a bishop." John Kemp succeeded Yong by papal provision. He was born in 1380 at Wye, near Ashford, of the 1 This church was taken down in 1620, and the present building, erected on the same site, was consecrated by Bishop Buckeridge, Sept. 24, 1624. 2l6 ROCHESTER knightly family seated at Olantigh, and showed in his latter years his affection for the place of his birth by making Wye church collegiate, with suitable buildings for the use of the clergy and accommodation for scholars. A portion of his work remains, and is now part of the home of the South-eastern Agricultural College. From Rochester Kemp passed to Chichester and London, thence to York and Canterbury. In 1439 he was created cardinal of St. Balbina ; in 1452 cardinal of St. Rufina. He was also twice Lord Chancellor. Before Thomas Spofford, Abbot of St. Mary's, York, whom the monks elected, could be consecrated, the pope nominated him to the bishoprick of Hereford, and (1422) placed John Langdon at Rochester. It is said that he owed his preferment to his zeal in combating the Lollards. Undoubtedly he joined heartily in the measures for their repression. His name occurs in the proceedings against William Tailour and Ralph Mungyn. He preached at Paul's Cross in 1428, when Garrener and Monk abjured their heresies. Bishop Langdon was a man of literary tastes, and compiled some historical memoirs, of which the Winchester monk availed himself in his Chronicle. An anecdote, however, is related of him, which shows that he entertained a notion deemed extravagant even in that age. It was that a wafer intended for the Host might be applied as a remedy for fever. John Parrs, vicar of Mailing, when charged with having used incantations over the Hosts, and of having administered them to persons suffering from fever, confessed that he had taken unconsecrated ROCHESTER 217 wafers which he scored with a knife, uttering the words But Peter lay upon Peter, and given them to the diseased, who were to eat one a day. He added, in defence, that the late Bishop Langdon had com- mended the work, and desired that his servants might be instructed in the art ! Langdon died Sept. 1434 at Basle, where he had gone to attend the Council. The only entries in his Register worthy of notice are a licence, during pleasure, to John Hodesole of Kemsing to have mass celebrated in his private chapel, and there to hear all divine offices in the presence of his wife and children — and to Richard Branuspach, rector of Mereworth, to choose a confessor for him- self, subject to the bishop's approval, and to be absent from his benefice for two years, on condition that he passed the time at college, or continued in the service of the Bishop of Durham. Dr. Thomas Brown, Dean of Salisbury, had been nominated by Eugenius IV. to the see of Worcester, but Henry VI. insisted that it should be bestowed on his relation, Thomas Bourchier. The dean was told that unless he renounced his claims he would have no bishoprick in England, certainly not Worcester. The pope's power was not what it had been. Eugenius yielded, and, May 1, 1435, Brown was consecrated to Rochester. His chief acts in the diocese were the augmentation of the vicarages of Wilmington and Kingsdown ; a commendable exercise of authority, for the stipends of the parochial clergy were in many cases very small. And his admonitions to beneficed men to reside on their cures were well-timed. Nor need we question the motives which dictated his zeal 218 ROCHESTER against "heretics" and "preachers." He was trans- lated to Norwich, Sept. 19, 1436. Curiously enough, there is no memorial of him either at Norwich, where he was buried in 1445, or at Rochester, to which lie left ^20, thougli he gave particular directions that his name and arms should be set up in both cathedrals. William Wellys, abbot of St. Mary's, York, suc- ceeded by papal provision. In 1438 he was one of the few prelates who, despite the fear of the plague, attended the meeting of Convocation. Unquestion- ably he was very active in the discharge of his diocesan duties. In 1439 ne visited the priory of Rochester, and drew up some regulations for its better government. He urges a stricter observance of the rule as to silence at the prescribed hours, especially in the church, refectory, dormitory, and cloisters, and enforces by the text in St. James, a warning against impure, frivolous, or slanderous con- versation at the times when, in the cloister, the monks freely communicated with each other. The beds in the dormitory are as far as possible to be open and uniform, that the sleepers may be easily seen. They must remember that meat is not intended to minister to pleasure, but to support life. Women of good character are to be received at the hostelry only, and to leave at proper hours. Those of doubtful fame are not to be admitted at all except for the public services. To these directions were added some of less obvious value. The bishop thought the possession by a monk of any trifling article of personal property a species of idolatry, to be punished, if not detected ROCHESTER 2I9 till the approach of death, with the refusal of the eucharistic oblation and of burial among the brethren. He prohibited any monk, if he were not an official, from buying or selling any grain, goods, or animals, in his own name or in that of another. In H39 the inhabitants of Mereworth asked that the feast of the dedication of their church, which often fell on Trinity Sunday or Corpus Christi day, might be changed from June 4 to some more convenient time, when their services would not be superseded by those of a greater festival. Bishop Wellys transferred it to the Monday after the Exaltation of the Cross, Sept. 14, and granted an indulgence of forty days to all who, having confessed and being truly penitent, should visit Mereworth for the purpose of joining in the devotions of the anniversary. In 1441 he was sum- moned to a council at the royal manor of Richmond, Surrey, to "give good advice" on the affairs of the nation. The next year King Henry VI., in view of a renewal of the struggle in France, where his enemies were " disposed to make in thys season that is now at hande unto us as sore and mighty warre bothe by water and by lande as thei can deuise, in our duches of Normandie and Guyenne," sent a letter to the prelates which, whether it were his own composition or not, breathes the pious spirit that pervaded all he did. It sets forth in touching terms his belief that victory depends not on human strength or wisdom, but on the favour of God, favour to be sought by amendment of life and earnest prayer. The bishops are therefore desired to send "stirring preachers" throughout their dioceses, and to enjoin the use of special litanies, with the recital of psalms. They are also invited to grant an indulgence of forty days to those who shall take part in the processions or other acts of devotion. On the receipt of the letter Wellys forwarded a copy to the prior of Rochester, and called the clergy _ of the rural deaneries to meet at convenient centres — the cathedral March 27, West Mailing March 29, Dartford April 3 — that it might be read in their hearing by himself or his official, and its recommendations carried into effect. Complaint has been often made of the dilatoriness and indecision attendant on proceedings in causes ecclesiastical. It may disabuse the minds of those who cherish the notion that in this respect "the former days were better than these," if we refer to a case of which we have a full account in the act book of Bishop Wellys's consistorial court. Oct. 30, 1441, the parishioners of Ash near Wrotham complained that their rector, Laurence Horwood, did not provide at his own cost, as he ought, a clerk to officiate in the church on holy days. Both parties appeared in court Nov. 20; the rector in person, the parishioners by their proctor, Richard Letot. The particulars of the charge were handed in Dec. 18, when the rector's proctor received a copy, and asked time to answer. Jan. 8, 1442 he took "exceptions" to the statement. Feb. 5, both proctors appeared as well as Horwood in person. By consent the " bill " was amended by inserting the names of the parishioners and rector. Sittings were held March 5 and 26, and April 26 the complainants produced their witnesses — seven in number. May 7, Robert Golde ROCHESTER gave testimony for the defendant. June 4, the judge ordered copies of the evidence to be supplied to both sides. July 4 the rector's proctor made his objections to the adverse witnesses and their testimony. The court sits July 16 and 29, but makes no progress. Sept. 17 application is made to compel the attend- ance of William Broughton, vicar of Hoo, and others whose evidence is said to be material to the rector's case. The witnesses are sworn Oct. 29. When the parties appeared Dec. 10, for the publication of the evidence, the cause was adjourned, in the hope that a compromise might be effected. The expectation not being realized after three adjournments, the proctor of the parishioners petitioned the court to declare the rector " contumacious," and to fix a day for ending the suit. When the day came, April 1, 1443, the rector's proctor pleaded that he could not appear for his client at the last consistory, as he was engaged on the bishop's business, and applied for another hearing. Eight sittings followed, and then, Nov. 11, 1443, more than two years after the proceed- ings began, the bishop commanded the Official to take no further steps in the matter, which he reserved for his own decision. What his decision was, if any, cannot be known. Perhaps while he deliberated, death overtook him. That is not unlikely, for he died at Trottescliffe, Feb. 24, 1444. John Lowe succeeded. Born in Worcestershire, educated at Oxford, prior of the Augustine friary of London, confessor to Henry VI., he was raised, 1433, to the bishoprick of St. Asaph. A letter from him to the prior of Canterbury, respecting his consecration, 222 ROCHESTER speaks of "St. Asaph in the march of Wales, to which I am called, unworthy as I am, and an inexpert charioteer." By papal provision he was removed to Rochester in 1444, being the first Bishop of St. Asaph ever translated from that see. The love of literature seems to have been a distinguishing feature in his character, for he built the fine library of the Austin Friars in London and furnished it with many MSS., including copies of the Fathers, which were thus saved from destruction. In religious opinion there can be little doubt that he was imbued with some of the worst principles of his day. It is certain that he was greatly esteemed by the more rigid party in the Church. Bury calls him "a firm pillar in the temple of the Lord, a true Benjamin, who from his youth could expertly use the left hand as well as the right ; who had not paid so close an attention to the Scriptures as to occasion a suspicion of his having neglected the studies of humanity, nor was so deeply engaged in the pursuit of human literature as not to render it subservient to divine learning." {Dedication to Archbishop Bourchicr of Answer to Pecock's Re- pressour.) One of Bishop Lowe's legal instruments is dated March 27, 1459, from the new palace at Rochester. There are not many allusions to an episcopal residence in the city. We do not know where the Saxon bishops lived. Nor is it certain that Gundulf had other accommodation than that provided by the priory. Some have thought that he made use of the tower which bears his name. Probably there was a dwelling of some kind appropriated to the bishop, Gilbert de ROCHESTER 223 Glanville in 1184 rebuilt "the cathedral houses which had been destroyed by fire"- — a statement usually understood of premises for his own occupation. In 141 2 there was a palace beyond doubt; for Richard Yong dates from it. In 1459 it is described as new. At the south-west corner of the precincts stands a stone edifice about seventy feet long, looking on College Green, and now divided into two dwellings. The front, which is exactly on the line of a Roman foundation, has been modernized, but at the back a massive buttress occurs in the centre, and the outline of ancient windows may be clearly seen. Some features in this building indicate work of Lowe's date, but in the west and south faces are stones which must have come from an older edifice. We may conclude, therefore, that Bishop Lowe remodelled the palace of his predecessors, that Gilbert de Glanville, 250 years before, repaired with caen-stone a building injured by fire, and that the rectangular structure which still exists is the frame-work of an Early Norman erection, raised by Gundulf or Ralph d'Escures, while tufa was commonly used. The simple plan and the thickness of the walls are what might be expected at the period. It should be remembered that the house with the pargetted front in St. Margaret's, called the "Palace," was never an episcopal residence. It was the property of Francis Head, Esq., who, subject to his wife's life, left it in 1674, "to be settled on the Bishop of Rochester and his successors for the maintenance of hospitality near the cathedral, and for an invitation to preach once in every year in the parish church of St. Margaret's and the parish church 2 24 ROCHESTER of St. Nicholas." The house, however, which com- mands a pleasant view of the river and the country beyond, was always let on lease, and was finally sold by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. Many matrimonial causes came before Bishop Lowe's court. We may refer to them as not uninter- esting illustrations of the manners of the age. Thomas Ferby, Dec. 7, 1456, prayed to be released from the excommunication he had incurred for procuring the celebration of a clandestine marriage in St. Paul's Cray church. As a penance he was ordered to visit the shrine of St. Thomas of Canterbury on Easter Day, and there offer a wax taper of one pound weight. The like offering was to be made to St. Blaize at Bromley and in Chislehurst church. In addition he was to allow exhibitions to two scholars at Oxford for two years. Ferby afterwards came to an understand- ing with his diocesan, and was dismissed from the suit. In the next February, John, chaplain of Paul's Cray, doubtless the priest who had officiated on the occasion, swore before the bishop, in the cathedral, not to offend again, and was absolved. He redeemed his penance by taking an oath to pay a mark at Lady Day in that and the two ensuing years. A suit was begun in 1458 against John Andrew of Cobham and Margery Allyn, late of Shorne, for having clandestinely married while a matrimonial cause was pending between her and Richard Coke. They were sentenced, Dec. 20, to be whipped "after the manner of peni- tents" once in Rochester market and thrice round their parish church. Walter Crepehogg, who had pro- moted the marriage, was thought the worse offender, kOCHES l'lik 225 for besides six whippings he was condemned to carry a torch worth 6s. Sd. to the altar of the cathedral, and to make a similar offering to St. Blaize at Bromley. The Roman view as to the identity of natural and spiritual relationships was a fertile source of trouble. John Howthorn of Tonbridge, Feb. 28, 1462, con- fessed that he had married Dionysia Tomas, but had since discovered that his former wife had been her god-mother. He was sentenced to be whipped thrice round market and church. Pleading that he was not publicly defamed, the penance was commuted on both parties abjuring their sin under the penalty of 20J-., and on paying 6s. Sd. to the bishop. We have often mentioned the appropriation of parish churches to monastic and other foundations. The episcopate of Bishop Lowe furnishes two examples of the opposite process, examples rare in mediaeval times, and therefore worthy of notice. Kingsdown near Wrotham, originally a chapelry of Sutton-at- Hone, was given by Henry I. to the church of Rochester. Gundulf assigned it to the monks. Gilbert de Glanville reclaimed it for the bishop, except the usual pension to the priory. Benedict of Sansetun granted it to the monks for the support of the almonry, reserving the maintenance of a vicar. When that maintenance proved insufficient it was augmented by Bishop Brown in 1436. By the arrange- ment now made the benefice was constituted a rectory, and so, but for the patronage, dissociated from the monastery. At the Dissolution the advovvson passed into the hands of the king, who bestowed it on the newly-established dean and chapter of Rochester. 226 ROCHESTER The other case is that of Speldhurst. Sir John de Pulteney gave the manor and advowson to the college which, " inspired from above, he had founded to the honour of the most precious body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ," in Canon Street, London. Three years after, Hamo of Hythe, at his request, appro- priated this church to the college for ever, subject to the endowment of a vicarage and a payment to the bishop of 7-f. annually at the Purification. In the next century it became evident that the income of the vicar was not sufficient, and was likely to be less so in the future. The master of the college, there- fore, John Thurstan, and his chaplains, " desiring that the care of souls should be satisfactorily discharged and the parishioners more plentifully refreshed with spiritual food," renounced their title to the emoluments of the benefice, and, retaining only the patronage, consented that the parish priest should receive the whole. Bishop Lowe in 1448 accepted the renunci- ation and instituted the vicar, Richard Barker, to the rectory. The parish of Merston, between Rochester and Gravesend, close to the summit of Gad's Hill — the hill immortalized by Shakespeare, and deriving fresh interest from its connection with Charles Dickens — had become depopulated, nor had it a parsonage house. For these reasons the bishop, in 1455, dis- charged the rector from residence till there should be a conflux of people to the place, an event not yet come to pass. But as the church was then standing, the incumbent was ordered to keep it in better repair, and to perform service in it every year on Sept. 1, ROCHESTER 227 the feast of St. Giles, the patron saint. The ruins of the church were visible in 1649, but by the end of the century they had almost disappeared, for in a survey of that date it is said — " The place where the church stood is now a wood. In the eastern part of the wood some marks of the walls are still remaining. The church appears to have been about fifteen paces long and seven broad. There is now no way to this place but over ploughed or pasture lands." At the present time the parish does not contain even one house. A rector is still appointed whenever a vacancy occurs, and is inducted on the spot, marked by a few stones, where the church stood. It was usual for every parish priest to make an annual payment in honour of the cathedral, and as a sign of submission to the bishop's seat. It was also customary for him to appear in person, or by his curate, in the procession at Whitsuntide and offer at the high altar. The country clergy sought to evade the duty, the bishop and prior tried to enforce it. John of Bottlesham in 1402 granted all who should attend an indulgence of forty days from penance enjoined, and threatened the disobedient with suspension. In 1452, thirty-seven delinquents were cited to the court on this business. Some satisfactorily accounted for their absence. Others were fined 6d. to the sacrist for a pound of wax, and 8^. to the bishop for a flagon of wine. The rector of Speldhurst excused himself by saying he had two funerals to perform on the day in question (Whit Tuesday), and was expecting two christenings. The account of Bishop Lowe's last hours is given in 228 ROCHESTER the book of his Consistorial Acts. He died Sept. 30, 1467, at Hailing, about eleven o'clock, in the most peaceful manner. "All night he had laboured in prayer and watching. Then rising and sitting in his chair, as it were made new for the occasion, and placed before the chimney in his parlour, in the midst of his chaplains, servants, and officers, who were praying for, and in attendance upon him, he expired as if sleeping, and without a groan yielded up his spirit most purely to his Creator, whose soul may the same God receive to His glory. Amen." He was buried in the north- east transept of the cathedral. The tomb has no recumbent effigy. The side exposed to view contains seven square compartments, in each of which, within a quatrefoil, is a shield. One of the shields bears the arms of Lowe. On six others, one word in each, is " JHS. est amor meus Deo gratias. (Jesus is my love, thanks be to God.) Round the verge of the tomb is the inscription, Miserere Deus anime Johannis Lowe Episcopi. Credo videre bona Domini in terra viventium. Sanct. Andrea et Augustine orate pro- nobis. (Lord have mercy on the soul of Bishop John Lowe. I believe I shall see the good things of the Lord in the land of the living. St. Andrew and St. Augustine, pray for us.") During Bishop Lowe's episcopate events occurred in which our diocese, in common with the nation, was deeply interested. It was to a great extent the scene of Cade's insurrection, a rising supported by many in a higher rank of life than those who followed Wat Tyler seventy years before. As soon as the royal pardon was granted the bulk of the insurgents dis- ROCHESTER 229 persed, but Cade persuaded some to remain in arms, on the plea that the pardon, to be effective, required the sanction of Parliament. We are told that the lords who conferred with him " found him sober in talk, wise in reasoning, arrogant in heart, and stiff in opinion." When all was over, "despairing of succour, and fearing the reward of his lewd dealings, he put all his pillage and goods that he had robbed into a barge, and sent it to Rochester by water." It soon fell into the hands of the Chancellor, Archbishop Kemp. There was ^105 155. in money, and the goods produced ^274 Ss. 4d., of which ^40 was given to the citizens of Rochester to make the east gate of the city. After the commotion had subsided Bishop Lowe impeached J. Payn, Sir John Fastolfs servant, to the queen as one who had been concerned in the revolt. " So I was arrested into the Marshalsea, and there was in right great duress and fear of mine life, and was threatened to have been hanged, drawn, and quartered." Appearances were against him, for he was in the camp at Blackheath and in the fight on London Bridge. But his presence was far from voluntary. While collecting his master's property he had fallen into the power of the insurgents, who denounced him as a spy, stripped and robbed him, and then " put him out into the battle, where he was wounded and hurt near hand to death." What might have happened we cannot tell-, had he not fortunately possessed friends at Court. " My wife's and one cousin of mine own, that were yeomen of the Crown, they went to the king," the gentlest of men, "and got grace and one charter of pardon," in virtue of which Payn lived to 230 ROCHESTER tell the story, long after, in the Paston Letters. Within a few years the civil war broke out. None of the battles that determined the fate of the rival houses were fought in Kent. The county was Yorkist in its sympathies, but the Bishop of Rochester is believed to have remained a Lancastrian. His name is not to be found with the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishops of London, Lincoln, Ely, and Exeter, among the supporters of Edward IV., when in 1460 some thousands of them marched into London under Lord Cobham. The war occasioned a suspension of business in the Bishop's Court from July 7, 1460, to September 14, as he was absent, and his officers were living in London. Proceedings were again interrupted from April 22 to June 17, 147 1, when it is mentioned that the official, Thomas Candour, did not attend at Mailing May 27 "on account of the great body of archers who were going with the king against the sailors," i. e. with Edward IV. against Falconbridge, retreating to Sandwich after his attempt to surprise the capital. Thomas Scott, called Rotherham, from the place of his birth, held the bishoprick of Rochester for three years. He was translated to Lincoln and thence to York, where he died in 1500. It was to him that the widow of Edward IV., then in sanctuary at West- minster, delivered her son, the young Duke of York, so soon to perish in the Tower. Another short episcopate. The eulogies bestowed on John Alcock show him to have been no ordinary man, pious, learned, skilled in architecture. He became Bishop of Worcester 1476, and of Ely i486. ROCHESTER Of his doings at Rochester there is little to record. One incident may be mentioned. William Bek, of Cooling, was cited into his court in consequence of having been detected by his wife and neighbours in eating meat on Fridays and other fasts. Bek confessed his guilt, though he doubted if he had offended in Lent, but pleaded that he was not responsible for his actions, since his mind had been so much disturbed for three years that he only knew Sunday because his wife on that day offered him the consecrated bread.1 The plea did not avail. It was ordered that as a penance he should be thrice whipped round Cooling church, before the procession, clad in a white cloth, with bare head and feet, and carrying a taper of the value of a penny. Further, that on Friday he should be whipped in Rochester market in like manner, and should offer a taper at the shrine of St. William. The next bishop, John Russell, Archdeacon of Berks, the first chancellor of the University of Oxford who retained the position for life, was consecrated September 22, 1476. Sir Thomas More speaks highly of his piety and knowledge of public business. The only remarkable thing related of him during his stay here is, that in 1480 nine parishioners of Hailing and Snodland were summoned to his court for playing tennis on Thursday in Whitsun-week in time of matins and mass. They pleaded guilty, and took an oath to perform whatever penance the bishop might impose. The sentence was that those of Snodland should walk 1 Blessed bread (not the sacramental) distributed in church to the congregation after the celebration, which might be taken to those not present. 232 ROCHESTER barefoot after the procession on the following Sunday, each carrying a taper worth a half-penny, which they should offer at the Holy Cross. The Hailing men were to do the like, with this difference, that they were each to offer two tapers at the high altar and two at the altar of St. John. In the same year Bishop Russell was translated to Lincoln, and afterwards became Lord Chancellor. Edmund Audley had a longer connection with Rochester than either of his immediate predecessors. It extended over twelve years, from 1480 to 1492. The second son of James Touchet, Lord Audley of Staffordshire, at the time of his appointment he was canon of York and archdeacon of the East Riding. Wherever he went he left his mark — at Oxford, at Hereford, at Salisbury. St. Mary's chapel in Rochester Cathedral is of the date of his episcopate, and may have originated in his munificence. In i486 he united the churches of West Barming and Nettlested at the request of Thomas Hundbach, rector of Nettle- sted, and of John Pimpe, lord of the manor and patron of Barming. Their petition alleges, that as the tithes and fees of Barming are too small, on account of the fewness of the parishioners, the sterility of the land, the defective cultivation, and scarcity of husband- men, to support a rector, and there is no prospect of improvement, it is desirable that Barming should henceforth be a chapelry of Nettlested. In order to facilitate the arrangement the rector, Hugh, Abbot of Stratford Longthorne, had tendered his resignation. Another of Bishop Audley's acts was the augmentation of the vicarage of St. Margaret's, Rochester. The ROCHESTER 233 decree sets forth, that a dispute having arisen between the vicar, Edmund Hatfelde, and the prior and con- vent of Rochester, the impropriators, he orders that the vicar's portion shall be increased by the tithe of mills, a pension of five marks, and one more quarter of wheat and barley than was reserved in the former composition. On the translation of Audley to Hereford Thomas Savage, dean of the royal chapel at Westminster, " a great courtier and immoderately fond of hunting," was nominated by the pope to Rochester, and consecrated in 1493. He was advanced to London in 1496, and to York in 1501. We notice nothing of him but that he issued a commission of enquiry into the patronage, value, &c. of the prebend of the great mass of the high altar in the nunnery of West Mailing. It was found to be vacant by the death of Dr. Thomas Cook, the patrons being Johanna Moone, abbess of Mailing, and her convent. The endowment consisted of the great tithes of the demesne land of the nunnery and other crofts of land, the small tithes of the house belonging to the prebend, with the predial tithes of certain messuages, yards, and gardens at Holyrood Street and Stone Street, all in Mailing. It was reported that the house of the prebendary required at least six marks to put it into repair. The nominee of the abbess, John Whitmore, was a priest, of due age, competent in knowledge, and of good character. On this testimony he was admitted, April 7, 1493. Richard Fitzjames, warden of Merton and almoner to Henry VII., was consecrated to this see May 22, 1497. He was enthroned on St. Andrew's Day 234 ROCHESTER (November 30), when the proceedings began at the west door of the cathedral, in the presence of a great concourse of people, about 9 a.m. He held an ordination at Bromley, December 23, and by com- missioners "visited" the priory June 19, 1498. According to the return then made, the prior had not long before redeemed silver vessels pawned for 300 marks, and there were only twenty monks in the house. Fitzjames was transferred to Chichester 1504, thence to London 1507. Dean Milman describes him as " one of those high-born Churchmen, piously ignorant and conscientiously blind, with whom a hair's-breadth deviation from established usage and opinion is insolence, sin, worse than sin, heresy." We have reached the end of the fifteenth century — the end of the Middle Ages. The old nobility had perished in the Wars of the Roses. America had been discovered. Caxton had set up his printing press. The fall of Constantinople had proved the revival of learning, for it led the West to take a new interest in Eastern languages and philosophy. In religion men were dissatisfied with the existing state of things. The long schism had weakened the temporal power of the papacy and undermined the faith in its claims. The mendicant orders ceased to enjoy the public esteem they had ceased to deserve. Even the archbishop, Thomas Bourchier, when empowering his commissary to take measures for the establishment of an improved discipline, spoke of many of the clergy, both secular and regular, as men destitute of learning and capacity, as profligate as they were ignorant, neglecting their cures, spending their time in strolling about the ROCHESTER 235 country In the company of loose women, and their incomes in feasting, drinking, and other excesses. Everywhere the forces were at work which in the next century were to produce a great change. The architectural style of the period was that known as the Perpendicular. It was introduced about 1380, prevailed through the fifteenth century, and continued in use during the first quarter of the sixteenth. The name was suggested by one of its distinguishing features, viz. that the mullions of the windows and the divisions of the ornamental panels run in straight lines. There are but few of the ancient churches of the diocese which do not contain more or less work of this character. In many cases, where the walls themselves are older, perpendicular windows have been inserted, especially at the east and west ends, being adapted for the display of painted glass. Towers are often in this style as well as side chapels. As examples may be mentioned the tower at Birling and the north chapel at Foot's Cray. It has already been said that the Lady Chapel of Rochester Cathedral belongs to this period. To it may likewise be assigned the tower of St. Saviour's, Southwark. 236 CHAPTER VIII John Fisher, the beloved of More and Erasmus, whose devout life and tragic death have gained for him the respectful pity of succeeding generations, was the son of Robert Fisher, a mercer of Beverley, where he was born between 1458 and 1465. A student of Michael House, Cambridge, he became a fellow, probably master, of that society and senior proctor. The business of the university took him to Court, and introduced him to the Countess of Richmond, mother of Henry VII., who made him her confessor. It had been Lady Margaret's intention to bestow further endowments on the Abbey of Westminster, but Fisher advised her to employ her property in a more useful manner. Himself a favourer of the new learning, he shared the opinion of his friend Fox, that educational establishments would be of greater service to the country than monastic, and more likely to continue. The result of his advice was the foundation of the Margaret professorships of divinity, of Christ's College, Cambridge, and ultimately of St. John's, to which he was a liberal benefactor from his own resources. In 1504 the king, unsolicited-, nominated Fisher to the ROCHESTER 237 see of Rochester. His " register " ascribes his pro- motion to the pope ; " the Lord Julius II., by Divine Providence pope, has placed the aforesaid venerable father over the Church of Rochester for its bishop and pastor, as appears by bulls, &c." He was consecrated in Lambeth chapel, November 24, 1504, and en- throned by proxy April 24, 1505. "A sudden pro- motion," he calls it, " since he had but few years over his head, had never plied at Court for preferment, and had never been beneficed before." Writing to Fox, he says, " Though others may have and enjoy greater revenues, I have the care of fewer souls, so that as an account is to be given of both, I would not alter my poor lot for one more plentiful." Accordingly it is reported that when Henry VIII. would have translated him to Lincoln or Ely, he refused " to change his poor old wife, to whom he had been so long wedded, for the richest widow in England." Honours at this time fell thickly on him. In 1504 he was chosen chancellor of his university, a position to which he was re-elected in each of the nine following years, and then appointed for life. In 1505, through the influence of the Lady Margaret, he became President of Queen's College. In May of that year he began the visitation of his diocese. Unorthodox notions now and again called for censure. We hear of John Moress of St. Nicholas, who held opinions so whimsical that one is disposed to doubt his sanity. Richard Gavell, of Westerham (1507), was induced to recant before the bishop in Bromley Church. He had maintained that the feast of St. Thomas ought not to be observed, that the use of holy water and of offering-days is needless, and ROCHESTER that the curse of the Church is not to be feared. In 15 14 an inhabitant of Snodland was rightly punished for the irreverence with which he had spoken of the elements in the Eucharist, a fault into which one Paul Lomley, "a weddid man" of Gravesend, fell in 1526. Nor was it needless to correct the delinquencies of the clergy and monastics. In 15 18 (September 24) the bishop convened the rectors, vicars, and curates of the diocese. They met in the cathedral for the celebration of mass, and then adjourned to the chapter-room to hear his sermon. When it was ended the official read the "Constitutions" which had been put forth against their having and keeping concubines. The same thing was done nine years after. There is, however, reason to believe that in some cases the clergy were not deserving of the imputation cast upon them, as they were really married, though they did not dare to acknowledge their wives. As to the state of affairs at Higham there can be no doubt. The nuns had decreased from sixteen to three, and of these two were persons of bad character, whose partner in guilt was the vicar of the parish. The scandals had occurred in 15 n, when the bishop visited the house and put the offenders to penance. In 152 1 it was dissolved, and the endowments handed over to St. John's College, Cambridge. Bishop Fisher evidently knew how to maintain his dignity ; for when the churchwardens of Gravesend neglected to have the bells rung at his visitation in 1522, he cited them into his court, and forced them to compound for their omission. On all the doctrinal points in controversy with the ROCHESTER 239 reformers, Fisher held the Roman view. To him the pope was the representative of Christ on earth, and the papal teaching the embodiment of Christian truth. This is manifest from the treatises he wrote against Luther, and from the sermon he preached at Paul's Cross when Luther's books were burned in 1 52 1. But as a pious man he was keenly alive to the practical abuses of the day, and most anxious to correct them. At Wolsey's synod in ^17, he com- plained that no attempt was made to repress the incontinence of ecclesiastics : that the Church's goods were wasted in superfluous expenses ; and that the bishops were conspicuously guilty of the worldliness they reproved in others. " No man do I blame more than myself, for several times when I have settled to visit my diocese, and to answer the enemies of Christ, suddenly has come to me a message from the Court that I must attend such a triumph, or public entry, or receive an ambassador, whereas what have bishops to do with princes' courts ? What this vanity in temporal things may work on you I know not, but for myself I find it a great impediment to devotion. In the course of life they now lead there can be no likelihood of continence to the clergy, nor of safety." One measure he took was to promote the study of Greek, then little known even in the universities. So much in earnest was he, that at past fifty he set to work to learn it. Another step was the encouragement of preaching. As early as 1501 he procured from Alexander VI. power for the Chancellor of Cambridge to choose annually twelve graduates in priests' orders to preach throughout the kingdom. Soon after he 240 ROCHESTER advised the Lady Margaret to endow a public preacher, who should deliver at least six sermons every year in the dioceses of London, Ely, and Lincoln. At a later period he pressed Erasmus to write on Preaching, telling him that he had the care of three colleges, from whence his aim was there should come forth divines, " not so much furnished with weapons to maintain a fight about words, as instructed soberly to preach the word of God." He was himself a good preacher ; happy in voice and manner, and, unlike his con- temporaries, concerned rather with practical religion than scholastic subtleties or idle stories. His dis- courses on the penitential psalms were published in 1509. His funeral sermons for Henry VII. and the Countess of Richmond have also been preserved. Until the question of the divorce arose, Fisher held a high place in the esteem of Henry VIII., but his opinions on that subject led to the estrangement which ended in his death. The king, knowing how greatly he was respected, took pains to secure his approval of his intended proceedings, and was corre- spondingly annoyed at his failure in so doing. Fisher observed that " his Grace wrote him grievous letters, and after that spoke to him the most fearful words for showing his mind in this matter." The bishop was conscientious in his opinion. He deserves all praise for the boldness and constancy with which he main- tained it. But it may be thought that he listened too readily to those less honest than himself, if their views on this question, and others which grew out of it, agreed with his own. Among these was Elizabeth Barton, the holy maid of Kent. A servant in the ROCHESTER 241 house of Mr. Thomas Cobb of Aldington, she fell sick, and seemed to be in trances. When in this state she uttered what were regarded as inspired warnings. From the chapel at Court-at-Street, the scene of her visions and miracles, she was removed to the convent of St. Sepulchre at Canterbury. Her prophecies took the form of denunciations of the king, whom she threatened with speedy death, and of all who should favour the divorce or the impending changes in religion. For some time Henry treated her with contempt. But when he had avowed his marriage with Anne Boleyn he thought it needful to proceed against her. It is said she owned her predictions were "feigned." She and her advisers were ordered to stand during the sermon at Paul's Cross and con- fess their imposture. They were taken back to prison, condemned under an act of attainder, and executed at Tyburn, May 5, 1534. Fisher and Sir Thomas More were convicted of misprision of treason, as having known of her utterances without revealing them to the king. In a letter to Henry the bishop acknowledges that the nun had paid him three visits when passing through Rochester. On the first occasion she came uninvited, and told him she had herself informed the king he would not live seven months if he persisted in the divorce. He had therefore not thought it necessary to repeat what she said. This was an admission that, be his motive what it might, he had broken the law, and so become liable to the forfeiture of his goods and imprisonment during the royal pleasure. The offence was pardoned on the payment °f £zo0> three-quarters of a year's income of the Q 242 ROCHESTER bishoprick. But worse days were in store. It was enacted that all persons of full age should swear to the succession as established on the king's second marriage. This Fisher was ready to do so far as related to the main point, but declined the oath in the form it was proposed, because it implied that the union with Catherine was void from the beginning. He thus incurred again the penalties of misprision of treason. Henry was now thoroughly incensed, and determined to press him on the question of the supremacy. It is likely the bishop thought more was intended than was actually meant. At any rate he was inflexible in his refusal to acknowledge the king as supreme head of the Church, and being found guilty of high treason, was beheaded on Tower Hill, June 22, 1535. He was advanced in years, his health had long been failing, unwelcome changes were im- minent, and death appeared to him a friend rather than an enemy. It is believed that Bishop Fisher's fate was hastened by the ill-advised act of the pope in raising him just at that time to the dignity of Cardinal of St. Vitalis. Paul protested that in making the selection he thought he was doing what would be acceptable to the English king and people. It may have been so, but the Imperial Ambassador in England was in close cor- respondence with Rome, and in his letters referred to Fisher as the constant opponent of Henry's proceed- ings, and as the promoter of the intended rising of the Roman party. Mr. Froude asserts that since the publication of Chapuys's despatches there can be no doubt that the bishop had lent himself to treasonable ROCHESTER 243 designs, even urging an invasion as the only means of saving England for the Church. The statement is hard to reconcile with his professions and character. But if Henry had any cause for entertaining such a suspicion we cannot wonder at the course he took, however we may deplore it. Bishop Fisher is described as six feet in height, very thin though strongly made, with capacious forehead, black hair, tawny complexion, large dark-grey eyes, and grave aspect ; mild in address, somewhat sharp in controversy, and " very zealously affected in all matters into which he once entered." His head was set on London Bridge. The body was buried at All Hallows, Barking, and afterwards removed to St. Peter's-in-the- Tower. That he was much respected in Rochester is shown by the fact that on the day he started on his last journey to London, as he passed through the city, many citizens and countrymen assembled to bid him farewell, and to receive his blessing. When the old man rode along, bareheaded, some cried they should never see him more, others denounced woe to the authors of his trouble, others bewailed the wickedness of the age, and all lamented the prospect of losing him. What Erasmus thought of our bishop is a matter of history — " a man without comparison at that time for learning, greatness of mind, and integrity of life." On one occasion Erasmus spent a fortnight at Rochester with his friend. More joined them. Out of the visit grew " The Praise of Folly" the most witty of the author's witty writings. The palace did not commend itself to the guest. In a letter from 244 ROCHESTER Basle, September 4, 1524, he wrote of it as answer- able in a great degree for Fisher's bad health, being too near the tidal river. As for the " study," sur- rounded as it was with glass windows, admitting an unwholesome air, he should soon be ill were he to remain in it. How much better to have a chamber with boarded floor and wainscoted walls. Bricks and lime produce a noxious steam. The "study" so despised was, as Erasmus says, " a paradise ': in the eyes of the owner. In it he spent much of his time. There he collected a library, of which the equal could not be found in any private house in Christendom. When his goods were forfeited for misprision of treason the king's officers took possession of the palace, turned out the servants, and sent away the books in thirty-two large vats. They are also said to have carried off ^300 left by a former bishop as a deposit to meet any unexpected demand that might be made on the see. A strongly bound coffer standing in the oratory attracted their attention. With great difficulty it was forced open. The contents were a hair shirt and two or three whips with which the bishop scourged himself. Fisher seems to have usually ordained in the chapel of his palace at Rochester.1 And there in 1533 he received, on behalf of the Bishop of London, the profession of a hermit, which may be new to many of our readers. " In the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, I, Jeffrey Byrchere, layman, not married unto any 1 The Cathedral Library contains a very fine copy of Fisher's Refutation of Luther's Assertions, published in 1523. ROCHESTER 245 woman by contract or wife assured, make my promise and vow unto God and our Lady and to all the saints in Heaven, in the presence of you, my lord John, by God's sufferance Bishop of Rochester, that from henceforward, ever while my natural life shall endure, to live chaste of my body in voluntary poverty, after the rule of the holy St. Paul the hermit, and under obedience of you my lord and ordinary. And that I will have none other house nor habitation but such as shall be convenient and meet for a hermit to tarry upon. Furthermore, I bind me here by this my profession and promise to labour in amending high- ways, and doing such other good deeds and work with my body, and to observe such injunctions as you, my lord, will give me at this time. All the which promises aforesaid I shall truly observe, so help me God and His saints. In testimony whereof I have made with my own hand the sign of the cross." Soon after the execution of Fisher the king nominated John Hilsey to the see of Rochester. He was consecrated September 18, 1535. On the second Sunday in Lent, 1533, Latimer preached at Bristol. Hilsey, then prior of the Dominicans in that city, and others replied, defending purgatory, pilgrimages, the worship of saints and images, and maintaining that faith without works is dead. In conference Latimer convinced Hilsey that he had somewhat mistaken him, since his objection in many cases was to the abuse rather than to the thing itself. Hilsey henceforth appeared on the reforming side, and is called by Cranmer in 1534 "a man of good study, 246 ROCHESTER living, and judgment." He compiled a primer, in which he included the fifteen prayers said to have been composed by St. Bridget, and daily recited by her before the Image of the Crucifix in St. Paul's at Rome. Of these he observes that they are " right good and virtuous if they be said without superstitious trust, being a godly meditation of Christ's passion," though they have been disfigured by "prefaces promising the sayers thereof many things both foolish and false, as the deliverance of fifteen souls out of purgatory." He was one of the bishops who drew up the Institution of a Christian man, which appeared in 1537, and marks the culminating point of the Refor- mation in Henry's reign. Hilsey preached, February 24, 1538, at Paul's Cross, where the notorious image of the Rood of Grace of Boxley was destroyed. The mechanism by which the figure was worked had already been exposed in Maidstone market. The figure was then sent to London. While the bishop was speaking it stood before him. " When the preacher began to wax warm, and the word of God to work secretly in the hearts of the hearers, the wooden trunk was hurled among the most crowded of the audience. And now was heard a tremendous clamour. He is snatched, torn, broken in pieces, bit by bit split up into a thousand fragments, and at last thrown into the fire." {John Hoker of Maidstone?) Hilsey died in 1539- Before his successor was appointed the crash had come. In October 1535 a visitation of monasteries by Royal Commissioners began. It resulted in the suppression of 376 houses, whose annual income did ROCHESTER 247 not exceed ^200. In 1539 the same fate overtook the larger establishments — in number 555. Human nature being what it is, we may be sure that an unfriendly critic would have no difficulty in pointing to monks and nuns whose conduct fell far short of their profession. Erasmus, who had been the inmate of a monastery, had formed a very unfavour- able estimate of its inhabitants, and was astonished at the contrast between the ribaldry of the monastic table and the edifying conversation to be heard in the houses of the laity. But the gross scandals were almost confined to the smaller foundations, situated often in remote places where no public opinion existed, and objects of interest were few. It would be the height of injustice to forget that there had been a day when the convent was the home of whatever art or learning could be found in the land, and that to the last it was a centre of charity and hospitality. We may think that the " Dissolution " was on the whole beneficial, though we condemn the manner in which it was carried out, and regret that the confiscated property was not turned to better account. The monks and nuns were not, as is sometimes thought, sent adrift to beg or starve. When the priory of Rochester was surrendered, some of the members were appointed to offices on the new foundation ; others were pensioned. The payments were kept up at least until 1552. At that time Com- missioners were appointed in every county, who were to summon the recipients before them, and to learn whether any had assigned their pensions away, and what deaths had occurred in the interval. Few Returns 248 ROCHESTER have been preserved, but the parties mentioned in them uniformly acknowledge that they have been "fully and duly paid unto this day." Cardinal Pole '* Book carries the matter four or five years further. From it we learn that thirty-two persons belonging to the late monastery of Dartford were still in receipt of their allowances, two of Dartford Friary, eight of Mailing Abbey, six of Rochester Priory, and six of Boxley Abbey. The charter of the new foundation is dated June 20, 1543. In place of the dissolved monastery it creates a body corporate, viz. a dean and six prebendaries of "the cathedral church of Christ and the Blessed Virgin Mary," instead of St. Andrew " of Rochester " as heretofore. It is said the king intended to settle on this church the revenues of the old priory, with part of those of Leeds Abbey, but 'the design was abandoned, and the deficiency ill supplied from the possessions of Boxley Abbey and Newark Hospital in Strood. In 1545 statutes were framed by the com- missioners for the government of the establishment. The members of whom it was to consist are enumer- ated— a dean, six canons, six minor canons, a deacon, a sub-deacon, six lay clerks, a choir-master, eight choristers, an upper and an under master of the grammar school, twenty scholars, six poor men, a porter, who was to be the barber, a butler, a chief cook, and an assistant. A yearly exhibition of was to be paid to four scholars, two at Oxford and two at Cambridge. These statutes have been altered by Parliament. One of the canons named in the charter was John ROCHESTER 249 Symkins, the last prior of St. Gregory's, Canterbury. Being a married man he was deprived under Mary, but restored by Elizabeth. The dean was Walter Phillips, a native of Maidstone. He had become a monk of Rochester before 1528. Some time after December 1, 1536, he was elected prior. He signed the act of surrender April 8, 31 Henry VIII., 1540.1 During part of his life, at any rate, he seems to have been sincere in his attachment to the reform- ation, for in the Convocation at the beginning of Mary's reign he was one of the five or six clergy who opposed the re-establishment of Romanism. The first question under discussion was Transub- stantiation, to which he refused to subscribe, saying that in the consecrated elements the faithful truly, really, and substantially, by faith in the heart, eat the true body of Christ which sitteth at the right hand of God, and with the mouth eat the sacrament of the body of Christ. Soon after, either swayed by fear or anxious to keep his deanery, he retracted his opinion, but reverted to it on the accession of Elizabeth. It is said that when commissioners were about to search his house in the time of Edward VI. he burned a volume by Bishop Fisher on divorce, the loss of which he often lamented, and " wished it whole again, even though he should not have a groat to live on." He died dean in 1570. Nicholas Heath became Bishop of Rochester in 1540. A man of mild temper and moderate views, he was willing to go a certain distance on the path of 1 The value of the priory was ^486 lis. that of the bishoprick ^442 4s. 2d. gross, ^41 1 os. lid. net. 250 ROCHESTER reformation. Hence he assisted Cranmer in translat- ing the Bible and revising the service books, as well as in putting a stop to some superstitious practices. Bucer and Melancthon thought highly of him. It is certain, too, that he was employed by Henry VIII. in the negotiations consequent on his divorce from Catherine of Aragon. The result was his rapid promotion. At the time of his consecration he was archdeacon of Stafford and rector of Cliffe. He was destined to become, 1543, Bishop of Worcester, and, 1555, Arch- bishop of York. After the death of Henry, Heath threw his influence into the Roman scale, and, declin- ing to obey the order to take down altars and substitute tables, was deprived October 10, 155 1. Under Mary he was restored and advanced. Though not an active persecutor, the fact remains that while he held the Great Seal 217 persons were put to death for their religion, including Cranmer, his former patron. When Mary died he proclaimed Elizabeth the undoubted sovereign of these realms, but refused to officiate at her coronation. Objecting to the oath of supremacy, he lost his archbishoprick, and retired to Chobham in Surrey, where the queen sometimes visited him. He died in 1579. The next bishop, Henry Rands, or Holbeach, as he is usually called from the place of his birth, was strongly on the reforming side. Originally a monk of Croy- land, he is found, 1535, head of the house known as Buckingham College, Cambridge. Cranmer recom- mended him for the priory of Worcester, as fitted by his learning, judgment, and piety for a position of authority. In 1538 he was appointed suffragan bishop ROCHESTER of Bristol, and in 1542 first dean of Worcester on the new foundation. He was elected to Rochester May 3, 1544, being allowed for a limited period to hold the vicarage of Bromsgrove " in commendam? Holbeach proved an active ruler. He deprived the vicar of Wateringbury for neglect of duty ; cited the incumbents of Ditton, Kingsdown, Lamberhursr, and Paul's Cray for non-residence ; and put the curate of High Halstow to penance in his own church for advocating "in ale-house talk" conduct too gross to be described. And his "admonitions" tended to raise the standard of practice among the clergy. He orders those who cannot preach to read every second Sunday part of the Kings Book, and to see that their quarterly sermons are preached by none but able and authorized men. On Wednesdays and Fridays he tells them to go "in procession, using the English supplications," and "because the lay people are more absent in the week-day," to use the same on alternate Sundays instead of the Latin. If a sufficient com- pany be present let the supplications be sung, if not, let them be said "so loud and distinctly that the people may better understand and answer. It is reported," he adds, " that priests mostly frequent the ale-house, misspending their time in drinking and unlawful games, greatly to the offence of the congre- gation. They are therefore desired and required, for the future, so to occupy themselves in the study of Holy Scripture that they may avoid obloquy, and be more able to discharge their duty." Holbeach was translated to Lincoln 1547, and died 155 1. Were it not that Nicholas Ridley is commonly 252 ROCHESTER thought of as Bishop of London, we should class him with Paulinus, Gundulf, Walter of Merton, and Fisher, among the best-known prelates who have presided over this diocese. A member of an ancient family, famed in Border story, he was born at Willimoteswick, in Northumberland. He received his school educa- tion at Newcastle, and thence went about 1518 to Pembroke College, Cambridge, where he graduated and became a Fellow. As proctor of his university, he signed in 1534 the decree against the supremacy of the pope. Cranmer made him one of his chaplains in 1537, and the next year gave him the vicarage of Heme, that " worshipful and wealthy parish " in east Kent. Here he was so successful as a preacher that he attracted numbers to church who had hitherto neglected public worship ; nor was he less attentive to the other parts of his pastoral office. It was at Heme that in 1545, by reading Ratramn's book, he was led to abandon the doctrine of transubstantiation, and became the means of changing the views of Cranmer and Latimer on that subject. He had already been appointed master of Pembroke and chaplain to the king. Henry probably intended to raise him to the episcopate, but no opportunity offered until after the accession of Edward VI. The conge d'clire was issued to the chapter of Rochester, August 1, 1547, and Ridley was consecrated September 25 following. It is said that in this and other situations in which he was placed he preached every Sunday and holy- day in one church or another, except he were hindered by weighty affairs, "to whose sermons the people resorted, swarming around him like bees." A very ROCHESTER 253 pleasing picture is drawn of the piety and simplicity of his private life. And his appearance, comely and well-proportioned, corresponded with the amiability of his disposition. In the first year of Edward's reign the first Book of Homilies was put forth. It is thought to be the work mainly of Cranmer, Latimer, and Ridley, and was intended to be read in churches by those clergy- men who were unable to provide sermons of their own. Something of the kind was required, for many parish priests were illiterate, and many were ill-affected to the reformed doctrines, which they imperfectly understood. The discourses are twelve in number — some doctrinal, others practical — all vigorous and sound, with striking passages, but not suitable, as a whole, for use in the present day, though worth reading. The next year a commission, of which Ridley was a leading member, was appointed for the purpose of drawing up " an order of divine worship ; having respect to the pure religion of Christ taught in the Scripture, and to the practice of the primitive Church." The result was The First Prayer-Book of Edward VI., which was sanctioned by Convocation and confirmed by Parliament. It was derived chiefly from the ancient offices of the Church of England and the liturgy compiled by Melancthon and Bucer for Herman, Archbishop of Cologne, itself principally taken from the old liturgy of Nuremberg. The chief differences between the Communion Office and the Roman were that confession to a priest was left optional, there was to be no elevation or adoration of the Host, the elements were to be administered in both 254 ROCHESTER kinds, and the greater part of the service was in English. The new liturgy was first used on Whit- sunday, June 10, 1549. As Ridley was translated to London in April 1550, we must not refer to his sub- sequent labours and sufferings further than to add that, while in prison, he wrote a letter in which he took leave of our city and diocese in the following words : — "Farewell Rochester, sometime my cathedral see ! in whom (to say the truth) I did find much gentle- ness and obedience1 ; and I trust thou wilt not say the contrary, but I did use it to God's glory and thine own profit in God. Oh, that thou hadst and mightest have continued and gone forward in the trade of God's law, wherein I did leave thee ! then thy charge and burden should_ not have been so terrible and dangerous as I suppose, verily, it is like to be (alas !) on the latter day." In justice to his memory it should be said that, though bis name occurs in the Commission, he was at Rochester when sentence was pronounced against Joan Bocher. On his return to London he joined Cranmer in his attempts to reclaim her. Under the date of April 1548 Ridley's Register has a copy of the royal injunction against the embezzle- ment of Church goods, which shows that the object of the steps taken from time to time by Edward's Government was (with whatever ulterior view) to restrain promiscuous spoliation, not to encourage it. " We are informed that the churchwardens and parishioners of divers parishes do alienate and sell 1 While at Rochester Ridley " destroyed the altars of Baal " in the cathedral. ROCHESTER 255 away their chalices, silver crosses, bells, and other ornaments of the Church, which were not given for that purpose, to be alienated at their pleasure, but either to be used to the intent they were first given, or to some other necessary and convenient fruit of the Church. Therefore this is to will and require you, immediately after the receipt hereof, to give straight charge and commandment on the King's Majesty's behalf to every parish within your diocese, that they do in no wise sell, give, or otherwise alienate, any bells or other ornaments or jewels belonging to their parish church, upon pain of his Highness's displeasure, and as they will answer to the contrary at their peril." John Ponet succeeded Ridley. He was nominated by the king, and consecrated in the chapel at Lambeth, June 29, 1550. As a man of learning, skilled in languages, and an excellent mathematician, he enjoyed a high reputation, and by his ability in preaching was of great service to the reforming party. He is said to have given Henry VIII. a dial of his own device, showing the hour, day of the month, sign of the zodiac, planetary hour, change of the moon, and ebbing and flowing of the sea. About the time of his promotion an order was issued that no bishop should hold any benefice in commendam, but he was excepted because he had no episcopal palace, and was licensed to retain with his bishoprick, until Lady Day 1555, the vicarage of Ashford, Kent, to which he had been presented in 1547, as well as his canonry at Canterbury, and the rectories of St. Michael, Crooked Lane, London, and of Towyn in Merioneth. When ROCHESTER Gardiner was deprived in 1551 he was translated to Winchester. On Mary's accession he fled to Stras- burg, and died there in 1557. Another short episcopate. John Scory, a native of Norfolk, whom Cranmer had, 1541, appointed a six- preacher at Canterbury, succeeded Ponet. He was consecrated at Croydon, Aug. 30, 1551. The officiat- ing prelates were Cranmer, Ridley, and John, bishop suffragan of Bedford. At the same time Miles Coverdale, the translator of the Bible, was consecrated to the see of Exeter. " All wore their surplices and copes, and Coverdale," it was noted, was " so habited also." Scory was the preacher when, May 2, 1550, Joan Bocher was burned for heresy — to the disgrace of the Reformers. Preaching before the king in Lent 155 1, he dwelt on two of the evils of the day — the want of ecclesiastical discipline, and covetousness, whereby the poor were injured through enclosures and the conversion of tillage into pasture. We are told that in his letter to Edward, thanking him for his promotion to Rochester, he reminded him of the points on which he had spoken. In Nov. 155 1, the bishop and his wife obtained a licence from the king to eat flesh in Lent and on other fasting days. In Feb. 1552 Scory was made a commissioner for revising the ecclesiastical laws — in May he was trans- lated to Chichester — and in June received a royal licence to preach, and to authorize others to preach within his diocese. When Mary came to the crown, Dr. Day was restored to the bishoprick of Chichester. At this time Scory acted with indiscretion. The Romanists reported that Cranmer had promised to ROCHESTER 257 say mass for the soul of King Edward, or had done so at Canterbury. Annoyed at the rumour, the arch- bishop drew up a declaration in conformity with his opinions. While it was incomplete Scory came into his study, saw it lying in a window, read it, and asked for a copy. Soon copies were in circulation, for Scory had allowed the one he had received to go out of his possession. Cranmer was summoned before the Council. He owned the paper, but regretted its publication, as he meant to write it more fully and to fix it, with his seal appendant, to the doors of the London churches. It has been said that Scory after- wards appeared before Bonner, renounced his wife, did penance, was absolved, and took out a licence to officiate in the diocese of London ! He certainly escaped to the Continent and had a Church in Friesland. He returned to England soon after the accession of Elizabeth. He was elected Bishop of Hereford, July *5> I5S9- On Dec. 17 in that year he assisted at the consecration of Archbishop Parker in the chapel of Lambeth Palace, and preached on 1 Peter v. 1. At his death, June 26, 1585, he is thought to have been nearly or quite ninety years of age. " Not only was he the survivor of all Edward VI. 's bishops, but he outlived all but two of the original set of Eliza- bethan prelates. We surmise that he also survived all the other members of the old conventual establish- ments of this country." (Cooper, Athena Canta- brigienses, vol. i. p. 513.) There was an interregnum from 1552 to 1554. The Duke of Northumberland recommended John Knox, the Scotch reformer, then in England, for the R 258 ROCHESTER bishoprick, but he refused it, and soon the death of Edward VI. introduced a new world. We cannot give a detailed account of Wvatt's rebellion, but we must refer to it, because in its origin and incidents it was closely connected with the diocese. Allington Castle, the home of Wyatt, stands in a beautiful situation on the west bank of the Medway, about a mile from Maidstone, where the rising began on Thursday, January 25, 1554. Wyatt, sup- ported by Sir George Harper of Sutton Valence, and Sir Henry Isley of Sundridge, unfurled his banner on market-day and issued a proclamation. He assured the populace that his object was not to touch the queen, but to prevent her marriage with Philip of Spain. Hearing this they shook his hand, and promised to stand by him. One enthusiastic in- habitant declared, that "though he loved pottage well, he would sell his spoons and plate rather than the cause should fail." The next day Wyatt marched to Rochester with 1500 men. He made the castle his head-quarters, and broke down the west end of the bridge to check the advance of the royal troops. His proclamation was now published in Tonbridge, Ashford, Milton, and other places. Meanwhile Sir Thomas Southwell of Mereworth, the sheriff, and Lord Abergavenny were not idle. They mustered their adherents at Mailing on Saturday, the 27th, and on Sunday morning defeated a detachment of the rebels under Isley at Blacksole Field in Wrotham. Mary, at first, was under no alarm. At length she dis- patched the Duke of Norfolk with her own guard and 500 Londoners to Gravesend. Norfolk sent a herald ROCHESTER 259 to Rochester with the offer of a free pardon to Wyatt and his followers if they would lay down their arms within twenty-four hours. The reply was, " We have done no wrong and need no pardon." On Monday the 29th, Norfolk, whose force had been augmented by some 300 men under Sir John Fogge of Ripton in Ashford, advanced to Strood. The weather was rough. Wyatt's supporters were much disheartened. But a new face was suddenly put on his undertaking. As a gun was about to be fired on the insurgents, the Whitecoats, as the Londoners were called, changed sides. Turning round, the Duke saw Captain Brett with all his men advancing. " Masters," cried Brett, " we are going to fight in an unholy quarrel against our friends and countrymen, who only seek to preserve us from the dominion of foreigners; wherefore I think no English heart should oppose them, and I am resolved for my part to shed my blood in the cause of this worthy captain Wyatt." " A Wyatt ! a Wyatt ! we are all Englishmen," was the answer. Norfolk sprang to his horse and galloped to Gravesend. Nearly the whole force deserted. The guns, money, and baggage fell into Wyatt's hands. Immediately the waverers rallied to his side. Lord Abergavenny was forsaken. Wyatt determined to march on London, taking Cooling Castle on the way. On Tuesday he appeared before the castle at eleven o'clock at the head of 2000 men. Lord Cobham with a handful of retainers defended it until five. When some of his little force had been killed and others wounded, and his ammunition was almost exhausted, he felt obliged to surrender. Wyatt made him promise to join him at 260 ROCHESTER Gravesend. As soon as he was gone, Lord Cobliam, who knew that he was suspected of complicity in the rising, wrote a full account of what had happened to the queen. From Gravesend Wyatt advanced to Dartford, where he stayed the night. Had he marched on London forthwith he would have found a welcome. But he lingered, not reaching Southwark before Saturday. There he learned that Suffolk had failed to raise the midland counties, and that the rising in the west had been unsuccessful. Mary had now induced the citizens to espouse her cause. But the marriage was disliked, opinion wavered, parties of the trained bands crossed the river and joined the rebels. At midnight Wyatt by torchlight saw the Admiral, the Lord Mayor, and Sir Andrew Judde in consultation as to the defence of London. What he saw and heard convinced him that it would be useless to try to enter the city in that direction. He resolved therefore to make for Kingston, cross the Thames there, and advance by Hyde Park to London, where his friends promised to receive him if he reached Ludgate by daylight on Wednesday. On the Tuesday he reached Kingston about four. A guard of 300 Royalists, posted on the Middlesex bank, fled after a few rounds had been fired from his guns. Some thirty feet of the bridge had been destroyed to prevent his passage. Two or three Medway sailors swam across and secured a barge. While his men refreshed themselves the bridge was hastily repaired. At eleven they crossed without opposition. At Brentford he drove in an advanced post of Royalists. But it was too late for him to keep his engagement at Ludgate, and ROCHESTER 26l some of his chief supporters, concluding that the enterprise would fail, forsook him in despair. Bishop Fonet escaped to the Continent. Sir George Harper, hoping to save his head, rode to St. James's and gave the alarm. Consternation reigned in the palace, but Mary refused to fly. It was decided that Lord Pembroke should be stationed at Whitehall to protect her. At four the trained bands were summoned to Charing Cross. By eight more than 10,000 men were on the field sloping from Piccadilly to Pall Mall, The insurgents were to be suffered to advance into the city and there surrounded. At nine on Ash Wednesday morning Wyatt arrived at Hyde. Park Corner. His followers were wet, hungry, faint. During the night many had slunk away, the rest were appalled at the prospect before them. Pembroke had placed a troop of horse in a lane near the corner. When half the insurgents had passed this point the cavalry cut them in two. Of those behind 100 were killed, many wounded, and 400 made prisoners. With about 400 men Wyatt pressed on. His party again divided. Wyatt himself went along the Strand by Fleet Street to the old Belle Sauvage Inn, near Ludgate. The gate was instantly closed. Disappointed and fatigued he rode back to the inn and sat down on a bench. Then, fighting his way to Temple Bar, he found it occupied by a strong detachment of horse. " Sir," cried a herald, " ye were best to yield, the day has gone against you, perchance ye may find the queen merciful." Wyatt paused a moment, threw away his sword, and surrendered to Sir Maurice Berkeley. He was beheaded on Tower Hill, April 11. Sir Henry 262 ROCHESTER Isley suffered at Maidstone, the Knyvetts at Seven- oaks, Brett at Rochester, where he was hung in chains. It is impossible to say how far religious feeling entered into Wyatt's insurrection. He appears to have been " of the old religion," but much of his property had belonged to the monasteries, and he, and others in a like position, were in fear of a resumption of Church lands in case the Spanish marriage took place. According to the deposition of Anthony Norton of Trottescliffe, Mr. Rudston of Boughton Monchelsey said in consultation at Allington, on the Monday before the rising, where "Wyatt "was settynge by ye fyre in his parlor," that "the queen would give away the supremacy and the Bishop of Rome should have his power in England as he had before time, which to think on grieved him," so that higher motives did to some extent influence the insurgents, but the argument commonly used was, that the marriage would injure the nation by leading to the employment of Englishmen in Philip's foreign wars, while Spaniards were advanced to places of trust and profit in England. Among the queen's supporters "the Bishop of Rochester" is mentioned. The person intended is Maurice Gryffith, but as the conge delire for his election was granted March 19, 1554, when the rising was over, the description is not strictly correct. As archdeacon and chancellor of the diocese, and rector of St. Magnus, London Bridge, he may have aided the royal cause. Perhaps his elevation was the reward of his exertions. In any case he would sympathize with Mary, for, as the event proved, he ROCHESTER was a zealous Romanist, though he was indebted to Hilsey for his preferments, and held them through the reign of Edward. A Welshman by birth, Gryffith was educated in the house of the Dominicans at Oxford. His consecration took place April 8, 1554, at St. Saviour's, Southwark, Gardiner being the officiating prelate. On the Patent Roll, 1555, there is a grant to him of the right of appointing the six canons of Rochester cathedral as often as a vacancy shall occur. His register contains a copy of the bull of Pope Julius on the "reconcili- ation " of England to the holy see. Fuller says of him, "His diocese was but of small extent; but that flock must be very little indeed, out of which the ravenous wolf cannot fetch some prey for himself : Morris the bishop played the tyrant." His animus was shown at the first examination of Bradford — "I see well that not without cause this man was, and is to be, kept in prison." Soon the fires were kindled in his diocese. Three persons suffered in 1555 — Nicholas Hall, Margery Polley, and Christopher Wade. Two, Joan Beach and John Harpole, in 1556. One, Eagles, in 1557. Wade was a linen-weaver of Dartford, Polley belonged to Tonbridge. It was decreed that they should be burned on the same day in the gravel-pit on Dartford Brents, the common place of execution. The spectacle attracted a mob of sight-seers from all parts of the shire ; among them a young man, Richard Fletcher, destined to become Bishop of Bristol, of Worcester, of London, and as Dean of Peterborough to stand by the scaffold of Mary Queen of Scots. While the crowd waited fruiterers came along with 264 ROCHESTER horse-loads of cherries for sale. It was cherry month and cherry county. About ten the sheriff appeared with his retinue. In the midst were the victims, riding pinioned, and singing a psalm. When Margery Polley espied from afar the mob gathered about the place of martyrdom, she cried "loudly and cheerfully," "You may rejoice, Wade, to see such a company met to celebrate your marriage this day." Wade was the first to suffer. As soon as the preparations were finished, he uttered in a clear tone the last verse of the eighty-sixth psalm — " Show some good token upon me, O Lord, that they which hate me may see it and be ashamed ; because Thou, Lord, hast holpen me and comforted me." While he was praying a friar entered an extemporized pulpit, with a book in his hand. Wade began at once to exhort the by- standers to embrace the Gospel preached in King Edward's days, and not listen to the Romish doctrine. " Be quiet, and die patiently," interrupted the sheriff. " I am, I thank God, quiet, and so trust to die." The friar withdrew without a word. When the fire was kindled Wade showed no sign of suffering, but repeatedly commended his soul to Christ. As the flames gained the mastery he ceased to speak, and raising his hands above his head continued in that posture till death released him. The midsummer assizes of 1555 were held on College Green, Rochester, in front of the palace. The day being very warm a sail was stretched from the wall to shelter the judges from the sun. Two men of Strood were brought before the court for neglecting to attend mass. Fortunately for them, ROCHESTER 265 while their case was undecided, the wind rose and caused the sail to damage the wall, by which some persons who sat on the bench were injured. The judges thereupon broke up the sitting and the men escaped. On April 7, 1555, the bishop performed the congenial task of re-instating the Franciscans at Greenwich, where Henry VII. had founded a convent of Friars Observants. It is said that Katherine of Aragon, when residing at the neighbouring palace, usually rose at midnight to join in their devotions. Mary and Elizabeth were baptized in their church, and there, March 21, 1556, the day Cranmer was burned at Oxford, Cardinal Pole sjing his first mass and was consecrated the next Sunday as Archbishop of Canterbury. By their opposition to his divorce the Friars so enraged Henry VIII. that he suppressed their order throughout England. Mary, mindful of their devotion to her mother's cause, recalled them first of all, and rebuilt and enlarged their convent at her own cost. Their return was short-lived ; for Elizabeth expelled them June 12, 1559. After the restoration the buildings were removed to make way for King Charles's quadrangle in the Royal Hospital. Bishop Gryftith died in Nov. 1558, a few days after Queen Mary and Cardinal Pole. He was buried in St. Magnus's church with great pomp. Edmund Allen was nominated to the vacant see, but died before he could be consecrated. He had been chaplain to Elizabeth in 1549, and was re- appointed on her accession. During Mary's reign he lived abroad. 266 ROCHESTER In the October of 1559 Parker, with some of his suffragans, petitioned that the rectory of Cliffe might be permanently annexed to the bishoprick of Rochester, which was poorly endowed. The queen did not grant the request. The next bishop, however, held the two together as Dr. Heath held them. That bishop was Edmund Geste, Archdeacon of Canterbury, collated to Cliffe Jan. 29, 1560, the day he was elected by the chapter, a divine who took a leading part in the revision of the liturgy at the beginning of the new reign. The Prayer-Book as it left the hands of the revisers, with whom Geste's authority had been paramount, was too Protestant for Elizabeth. Some words were therefore introduced into the ornaments-rubric to meet her wishes. In its final form the book differed but little from that of 1552. The table of Lessons was slightly altered. The petition for deliverance "from the tyranny of the Bishop of Rome and all his detestable enormities " was left out of the Litany, and the prayer that the sovereign might be " strengthened in the true worship- ping of God, in righteousness and holiness of life," was added. The words used at the administration of the Elements in the two books of Edward VI. were com- bined. The rubric (since restored in substance) at the end of the Communion Service, which said that the direction to receive kneeling was not meant to imply adoration of either the elements, or any presence of Christ's natural body, was struck out. The explanatory letter which accompanied the draft of the revised book was written by Geste. Before the bill for restoring the liturgy was introduced, it was ROCHESTER 267 thought expedient to hold a disputation at West- minster between nine divines on each side on the points most likely to rouse opposition. Among those chosen to argue on the reforming side were Geste and Scory. The subjects to be discussed were three — the use of English in public worship, the power of a national church to vary ceremonies, the doctrine of the mass. The papalists soon retired from a con- troversy on matters which in their opinion could not be opened without leave from the pope. In such disputations Geste shone. He had written treatises against private masses, on the presence of Christ in the Sacrament, and on free will, and had translated the psalms for Parker's Bible. Though so decided a reformer, he remained in England through the reign of Mary. In those dark days he and Bulling- ham, afterwards Bishop of Lincoln, his constant com- panion, "often changed their holes and lurking-places where they hid themselves for their preservation." Bishop Geste's Register contains a great number of institutions to benefices, in many cases restorations of those who had been deprived under Mary or had fled. His Directions to his diocese enable us to see something of the state of things at the time. We gather that the supply of qualified clergy was but small from the command that " readers are not to serve in any great cure," and that "every non-preaching parson, vicar, or curate, shall learn without book the whole Epistle to the Romans against Mr. Archdeacon's next visitation, and that he shall then examine them of it, and that done, shall enjoin them to learn 1st Corinthians against the next visitation, and so forth on ! " 268 ROCHESTER Every precaution is taken to secure sound teaching ; for "no one is to serve in the diocese without ex- amination and admission in writing." With reference to the Holy Communion he says, children are not to be admitted to the Communion under thirteen or fourteen years of age, " being of good discretion and well instructed in the catechism." Nor is any adult to be received before "he can perfectly say" the Lord's Prayer, the Belief, and the Ten Commandments. "When there is no Communion a desk shall be set where the Holy Table should stand at the time of administration, and the priest shall read at the desk all the Communion Service with his face towards the people." "The Chalice in every parish is to be altered into a decent cup, taking away only so much as will pay for the alteration." 1 " No bell to be rung during divine service, nor at funerals in time of prayers." In the Questions addressed to the Chapter he asks — ■ Whether divine service is sung in the cathedral reverent- ly and distinctly, as it ought to be, and at convenient hours? Whether morning prayers are said between five and six, except on Sundays and holy-days, for the 1 Not one Chalice remains in any Kentish church out of the number that had been in use prior to 1560. Of Patens two are left; one (of about 1525) is at Clifie. At the Cathedral are two covered gilt Alms Basons, probably I'ixes or Ciboria to contain the Host, made 1530-3. The actual substitution of Cups for the old Chalices, in the majority of Kentish churches, took place in 1562. Kent quickly adopted the new Cups, designed for the Communion of the laity, and at least 140 pieces of Elizabethan plate are still used in the county. See Arch. Can/., vol. xvi. In Titsey Church, Surrey, the Communion Cup and Cover bears the date 1569. The Cup at Petersham was made in IS62. ROCHESTER 269 scholars and others of the college ? Whether the Holy Communion is administered on all Sundays and holy- days? Whether the dean and the prebendaries preach in their course, personally, or by some other learned and licensed man? Whether they wear a hood upon their surplice when they come to service ? Whether they use any other bread at Holy Com- munion but that appointed by the queen's injunctions, /. e. round wafer bread without any print upon it ? His first enquiry in 157 1 points to the activity of the papal party. " Whether any within your parish have in their hands, or have delivered to others, any Eng- lish book set forth of late by Harding, Dorman, Allen, Saunders, Stapelton, Marshall, or any of them, or by any other English papist, either against the queen's supremacy in matters ecclesiastical, or against true religion and Catholic doctrine now received and established by common authority within this realm, and what their names be ? " His orders are — That all communicants receive kneeling ; that all ecclesi- astical persons shall wear abroad and in church the apparel appointed by the Advertisements, and that the churchwardens shall present all who have destroyed any monuments in the church which were not monu- ments of superstition. The bishop had in 1568 himself met with a remark- able instance of the craft of the Romish emissaries. Thomas Heath, brother of the ex-Archbishop of York, was sent over by the Jesuits with instructions to mix, under the garb of a reformer, the doctrines of the foreign Anabaptists and Arians with those of the Puri- tans, and to disseminate them through the nation. 272 ROCHESTER Christian course. He encouraged the use, but guarded against the abuse. Writing to Parkhurst at Norwich, he says : " I must tell your lordship I hear of no com- mand to suppress the meetings either in my own diocese or elsewhere, but I have taken such order that no man shall have anything to do with any matter of controversy. By this means the exercise is con- tinued without offence, to the comfort of God's Church and increase of knowledge in the ministry. And so I doubt not it shall do within your diocese if you observe the like order." Elizabeth thought these assemblies of the clergy for the exposition of Scripture promoted discussions unfavourable to the peace of the Church, and that the needs of their congregations were met by the use of the Homilies, of which a second book, mainly written by Jewel, had been put forth. Many of the bishops, on the contrary, con- sidered that all means should be taken to encourage a preaching ministry, and that the Prophesyings had that effect. Something was required. Grindal complained in his letter to her Majesty, that the Church of England had by sacrilegious appropriations been so spoiled, that where one parish is able to yield sufficient for a learned preacher there are at least seven unable to do so. Had the case been otherwise, there was a scarcity of men properly educated and well affected to the established order. John Piers, D.D., rilled this see for a year only. In 1567 he had been appointed dean of Chester, and in 1570 had been elected master of Balliol. In 157 1 he became dean of Christ Church, where his portrait yet hangs in the hall. When he left Oxford the ROCHESTER 273 society extolled the liberality of their head, and testified that he was learned himself and the promoter of learning among them. Whether he was equally successful in Kent we cannot tell ; but his Visitation Articles in 1576 prove that he made the attempt, for he asks if all the ministers and members of the cathedral have the whole Bible in English and Latin, and " every day with good advisement confer at least one chapter of the Latin and English together"? Another enquiry points to an evil of the times — "Whether any preferred by the Prince or others have been admitted for gifts or rewards, or refused admittance because they declined to give them ? " In the course of the year Bishop Piers held fourteen ordinations, chiefly at Bromley, but the number ordained at once never exceeded two. After his removal to Salisbury he preached before Elizabeth at the thanksgiving for the defeat of the Armada. The last bishop of the sixteenth century, consecrated March 15, 1578, John Yonge, master of Pembroke College, Cambridge, was an able man. In 157 1 he was chosen to preach at Court instead of Dr. Bulling- ham, whom Parker thought not equal to the duty, since " the queen should have the best." Soon after his promotion we find him writing to Burghley on behalf of the hospital at Chatham, " threatened with ruin by the crafty proceedings of certain concealers." At his primary visitation he ordered the divinity lecture to be read in the usual place in the cathedral once a week for ten weeks in each quarter. It appeared that the Holy Communion had not been administered even monthly, but this was rectified before 1599. s 274 ROCHESTER Complaint was made that the burial-ground was so ill kept that " hoggs and kyne do come sometime into the church." In 1587 three of the canons attended service " in their habits," i. e. in surplice and hood, three did not ; twelve years after all conformed to rule " except Mr. Wyborne the precisian," who in his exile at Geneva had imbibed extreme opinions, and had been licensed in 1567 to preach as "a peaceable Nonconformist." The vicar of Higham was enjoined, 1588, to purge himself in time of divine service from suspicion of disloyalty. Aylmer, Bishop of London, was in 1581 anxious that Yonge should be translated to Norwich, being, "for quickness in- government, and readiness in learning, the fittest for that diocese, especially to bridle innovators, not by authority only but by weight of arguments." Yonge objected, on the ground that he could not acquiesce in the outrageous spoliation of the see. His refusal is supposed to have displeased Burghley, and led him to listen to complaints brought against him. Yonge defended himself from the charge of penuriousness and want of hospitality by showing that he consumed three-fourths of his income in meat and drink only. The clear value of the bishoprick in 1595 was £220, so that he could not maintain his dignity without additional preferments. These, in his case, were a canonry of Westminster and Southwell and the rectory of Would- ham, but they seem to have yielded on an average not more than ^120. He died at Bromley April 10, 1605, aged 70, and was buried in the chancel of the church, where, during some recent alterations, the coffin was found that probably contains his remains. ROCHESTER 275 Archbishop Whitgift desired his chaplain, William Barlow, dean of Chester, to write an account of the Hampton Court Conference, which not inaptly inaug- urated a century destined, like its fore-runner, to be fruitful in religious controversy. The Conference was held in 1604 in response to the Millenary Petition of 750 Puritan ministers. Whether they had modified their views, or thought it wiser to limit their requests for the present, they expressed themselves in very moderate terms, and asked for changes comparatively slight. In deference to their wishes a fewalterations were made in the Liturgy. The Thanksgivings for Rain, Fair Weather, Plenty, Peace, and Victory, and Deliverance from the Plague, were added after the Litany, as were the questions and answers relating to the Sacraments in the Catechism. The most important result of the Conference was a new translation of the Bible, the version now in use, of which the revised edition of our own times has, with all its merits, but served to show the general fidelity and matchless beauty. The dean, as requested, wrote the Summe of the Conference. He was evidently struck with the king's knowledge and readiness in disputation, for he calls James "a living library and walking study." Barlow was consecrated Bishop of Rochester June 30, 1605. His appointment as a member of the committee for translating the Epistles, which began its labours in 1607, proves his reputation for learning, but nothing is recorded of him in connection with his diocese beyond his performance of routine duties. He was promoted to Lincoln 1608, and died suddenly at Buckden, September 7, 161 3. 276 ROCHESTER Richard Neile, Barlow's successor, belonged to the new school of theologians, who did good service by calling attention to forgotten truths and promoting a more reverential manner of conducting divine service, but often failed in the patience and tact requisite for the attainment of their objects. A man of humble origin, an attractive preacher, though no great scholar, nor gifted with much judgment, he is remarkable for the number of preferments heaped upon him. He had been prebendary and treasurer of Chichester, vicar of Cheshunt, master of the Savoy, and was clerk of the closet and dean of Westminster, when, October 9, 1608, he became Bishop of Rochester. From Rochester he passed to Lichfield, Lincoln, Durham, Winchester, and York, where, happily for himself, he died October 15, 1640, before the storm burst which overthrew all he had laboured to build. It is said that James I. once asked him and Bishop Andrewes whether he might not take his subjects' money, when needed for public purposes, without the sanction of Parliament ? " God forbid, sire, but you should : you are the breath of our nostrils," replied he. " Well, my Lord of Winchester, what say you?" "Sire, I have no skill to judge." "No puts off," said the king; "answer me." "Then I think it lawful to take my brother Neile's money, for he offers it." From 1 60S to 1640 Neile was a close friend of Laud, and was included in the Parliamentary censure passed on the latter for " favouring Popish doctrines and ceremonies." He had made Laud his chaplain in 1608. In May 1610 he presented him to the rectory ROCHESTER 277 of Cuxton, and later in the year to that of Norton, near Faversham. The next bishop, Dr. John Buckeridge, elected December 29, 1610, belonged to the same school, but was a wiser man than his predecessor. The author of a treatise on the propriety of kneeling at the Eucharist, and chief tutor at St. John's College, Oxford, he was known to be a student of the Fathers, and therefore not in sympathy with the Calvinism fashionable in the University. Among his pupils was the son of the Reading clothier, William Laud, fated to make a stir in the Church and realm of England, of which the results are felt to this day. Between the tutor and the scholar a friendship existed for the rest of their lives. When in 1625 the Commons accused Montagu of Arminianism and popery, Buckeridge joined Laud and Howson, bishops of St. Davids and Oxford, in petitioning the Prime Minister to protect him. . They represented that some of Montagu's doc- trines were those of the English Church, and that others were questions on which a difference of opinion must be allowed. Nor would they recognize Parlia- ment as judge in spiritual matters. Bishop Buckeridge was translated to Ely, 1628. He died 1631, and was buried at Bromley. Walter Curie, at one time vicar of Plumstead, then dean of Lichfield and chaplain to James L, held the see of Rochester about eighteen months. He was removed to Bath and Wells, thence to Winchester. As a parish priest he has been highly commended for kindness and diligence. When Cromwell took Win- chester in 1645 he was deprived of his preferments. 278 ROCHESTER and having refused to subscribe the Covenant, was not permitted to compound for his estates. He must therefore have been reduced to poverty, but it is said that the respect entertained for his character saved him from personal insult. He died 1647. Dr. John Bowie, dean of Salisbury, was consecrated February 7, 1630. His episcopate of seven years seems to have been the reverse of vigorous. The state of his health would account for this. Laud reports -to the king in 1633 — "The town of Mailing and that whole deanery were very much out of order, but the archdeacon (Burgess), by the bishop's com- mand, hath settled them.1 My lord likewise brought Mr. Throgmorton, the vicar, into the High Com- mission ; where he submitted himself, and received a canonical admonition. I likewise certify your Majesty that the bishop complains that the cathedral church suffers much from want of glass in the windows, and the churchyard lies very undecently, and the gates down ; and that he hath no power to remedy these things, because the dean and chapter refuse to be visited by him, upon pretence that their 1 In 1633 the king instructed the bishops to see that "in all parishes the afternoon sermons be turned into catechizing by questions and answers, where and whensoever there is not some great cause apparent to break this ancient and laudable order — that where a lecture is set up in a market town, it be read by a company of grave and orthodox divines near adjoining and of the same diocese, and that they ever preach in such seemly habits as belong to their degrees and not in cloaks," having previously read the common prayer in surplice and hood. By Dec. 10, in each year every bishop was to report to the arch- bishop who was to make a return to the king by January 2. ROCHESTER 279 statutes are not confirmed under the broad seal." "This," writes the king in a marginal note, "must be remedied one way or another." The chapter deny that there is much wrong. Beyond the annual repairs they have spent more than ,£1000 on the fabric and the organ, so that the building, including most of the windows, is in good condition. The answer apparently satisfied the archbishop, for he only enjoins that the windows shall be repaired without delay, and the bells and frames put in order ; that there shall be a new desk in the choir, with new books ; and that the Communion table shall be placed at the east end, and a fair rail to cross the choir, as in other cathedrals. Ready obedience is promised, but it is clear the chapter was legally justified in disputing the claims of the diocesan, since in the reign of Queen Anne it was thought needful to pass an Act confirming the statutes of the cathedral bodies founded by Henry VIII. In Laud's Return for 1634 he states — "For Rochester I found no eminent thing amiss, but the bishop himself fell into a palsy, and was thereby forced to go to Bath, and so to be longer absent from his diocese than he otherwise would have been ; he is now returned, God be thanked, much better, though not perfectly well. In all the dioceses I find one great complaint. It is the general grievance of the poor vicars, that their stipends are scarce able to feed and clothe them. And, which is worse, the vicars in great market towns, where the people are very many, are for the most part worse provided for. But I humbly thank your Majesty some good hath of late been done for them ; and I shall pursue all fair and just ways to give them relief : 28o ROCHESTER humbly beseeching you to give your gracious assistance to me and them." It is impossible not to feel that Charles and Laud had the welfare of the Church at heart, and sought to promote it to the utmost of their power. Would that their methods had always been as judicious as their objects were admirable ! Dr. Bowie was "very ill of a palsy " in 1636, and died October 9, 1637. He was buried in St. Paul's, London. Among the firmest supporters of the constitution in Church and State, as it was understood by the Royalists of his day, was John Warner. He matriculated in 1599 at Magdalen College, Oxford, and in due course obtained a Fellowship. In 1614 he became rector of St. Michael's, Crooked Lane, London. About 16 16 Archbishop Abbot collated him to a stall at Canter- bury. He was preferred to St. Dionis, Backchurch, in 1625, and in 1633 was nominated dean of Lichfield. On January 14, 1638, he was consecrated Bishop of Rochester. Warner's career was marked from first to last by great generosity and an outspoken maintenance of what he held to be right in religion and politics. The silver flagon at St. Dionis, the font in Canter- bury Cathedral, the books in Magdalen Library, the college for clergymen's widows at Bromley, testify to this day to his liberality. In his lifetime he is said to have bestowed not less than ^8000 in relieving the clergy ejected by the Parliament. The gift would be munificent noiv, it was princely then. It had been his wish that his college should be ROCHESTER 28l erected near the mother church of the diocese, where it would be most appropriately placed, but as no " healthy or convenient " spot could be found near the cathedral, his executors were allowed to build at Bromley. It was the first foundation of the kind in the kingdom, and was intended for the support of twenty ladies and a chaplain. Perhaps it is needless to say that benefactions from other sources have been bestowed on the institution, which is open to candi- dates from all parts of England, with a preference for those belonging to the old diocese of Rochester. There are now forty houses. Each occupant has a pension of ^38, with her lodging. The adjoining " Sheppard's College" was founded early in the pre- sent century for five daughters of former widows in Bromley College, for each of whom a house and pension of ^44 is provided. As early as 1626 Warner's out-spokenness had offended some members of both Houses of Parlia- ment. In 1640 a sermon by him in Rochester Cathedral provoked an anonymous writer to say, "All Lent long his Majesty's chaplains, instead of fasting, preached fighting, and instead of peace, punishing of rebels ; among whom wily Warner, having got a bishoprick for making one sermon, gave the king another gratis, wherein he so railed at the rebels, that his patron hath promised him a better." The sermon, though disfigured by some strong expressions, was a spirited vindication of the Church from the attacks of the Puritans. It contained much sound sense, and gave some hard hits. "These great priests do not their duty, they preach not. Answer, Be preaching 282 ROCHESTER a part of the duty, yet not the whole. But what is preaching? Is it nothing but saying good words upon a text out of a pulpit ? Where then shall we prove that the apostles preached ? May not exhorta- tions, as weekly epistle, as word of mouth, publicly or privately, go for preaching? Or do ye not hold that he doth the work of the carpenter who directs and sets others to work, unless he be himself daily hewing of the logs ? Or when the Levite at fifty years of age was exempt from bodily service in the Temple, yet shall the chief-priest neither at fifty nor sixty have dis- pensation?" The Puritans urged the poverty of the apostles as a precedent to be followed. Says the bishop, " Be ye as the primitive Christians, who laid all at the apostles' feet, and we are content to be as poor as the apostles. Which if ye refuse, then I perceive your desire is to keep yourselves rich, and to make us poor ; and thereby prove us apostles, but yourselves no Christians." It is clear that Warner was far from a contemptible antagonist. His brethren thought they could not do better than put him forward to fight their battles. Twice, at any rate, they did so. Convocation having been called together at the opening of Parliament, should, it was contended, have closed its proceedings when Parliament was dissolved. Under a royal licence it continued to sit and framed some canons. As soon as the new House met this was made a ground of impeachment. The clergy deputed Dr. Warner to engage counsel on their behaif. He chose Chaloner Chute, who conducted the case with such ability that the prosecution was dropped. Again, in 164^, when ROCHESTER 283 the Act passed by which the bishops were deprived of their seats as peers, Warner defended their rights with great courage and force of argument. " In him episcopacy gave the last groan in the House of Lords." — Fuller. And his pen was as much at the service of the cause he loved as his voice. By the desire of Charles he wrote in 1646 a treatise against the sale of Church lands, and, at a later period, when the discovery of the authorship would have involved him in danger, published several sermons condemning the murder of his sovereign. So highly did Laud think of his integrity and discretion, that, on his impeachment, he entrusted him with his keys, that he might remove or destroy any papers of a compromising nature. Many troubled years passed, years of deprivation and peril. The King and the Primate perished on the scaffold. The Church was overthrown. At last a brighter day dawned. Unlike the majority of his colleagues, Warner at the age of eighty stood once more in his cathedral and, Feb. n, 1662, addressed his clergy. " It is twenty-five years since I visited in this place, and in twenty of these the bishop's power hath been utterly taken away, and in the two last much suspended ; no marvel then that the bishop hath work enough to set all in order that is left undone or clone amiss. Christ when He went into the temple to see the profanation thereof, did not correct all the same day, but took another time to do it, and so much more must I." There was much to be done. The dean and 284 ROCHESTER chapter state, in their answer to the bishop's enquiries, that the repair of the cathedral had already cost them ;£8ooo, and that ^5000 more were needed to put the fabric into proper condition. It does not, however, appear that this had suffered so much as some other cathedrals. The inhabitants of Rochester in Sept. 1641 were not prepared to go to such lengths as the men of Canterbury. The fanatics, therefore, who marched from the one to the other contented themselves with breaking down the altar rails, destroying the velvet coverings, and re- moving the Holy Table into the nave, without injuring the memorials of the dead or the seats in the choir. But it is said that saw-pits were dug in the body of the church, and that the troops under Fairfax stalled their horses within it. A resident who died in 1732, in extreme old age, is reported to have seen the soldiers amusing themselves by picking the inlaid pieces of ivory from the walls with their bayonets. Weever's account proves that the deface- ment of the monuments had occurred long before. The property of the see had been disposed of by the Long Parliament to various purchasers. Bromley was bought by Augustine Skinner for ^5,665. The manors of Middleton-Cheney and Cuxton fetched ^627. West Park, Hawgrove, and Compwood realized ,-£172. The rest was sold with property belonging to other bishopricks, so that its value cannot be determined. The palace went to C. Bowles and N. Andrews at ^556. It was described as "one great messuage where the" court is held," four rooms, a gallery divided into two rooms and four chambers, ROCHESTER the ward, a prison, wash-house, kitchen, and three rooms, with an orchard and garden. In Dec. 1640 churchwardens were required to make a return of all popish recusants in their parishes, and magistrates to imprison, or bind to good behaviour, any who, on enquiry, refused to give his name. By a further order of 1641, mayors and justices were instructed to disarm the recusants, under which title were included all who had not attended church more than once a month, or who kept two or more Roman Catholic servants in their house. The list presented by the knights of the shire for Kent contained nine residents in the diocese of Rochester, — George Littleboy and Ralph Loane of Birling, George Loane of Sevenoaks, Henry Whetenhall of East Peckham, Benjamin Wyborne of Pembury, Anthony Roper of Eltham, Sir Anthony and Henry Roper of Farningham, and . . . Stiche of Orpington. The Proceedings in Kent in connection with the Committee of Religion appointed by Parliament in 1640 throw some light on the state of the diocese in the time of Bishop Warner and his predecessors. In referring to the petitions we must, however, remember that they are ex parte statements, dictated to a large extent by personal feeling, and in some instances disproved by positive testimony. The parishioners of Yalding complain that their vicar, Francis Taylor, resides on his rectory at Clapham, and has not provided them with a settled curate for upwards of six months. Indeed for more than thirty years they have had "no preaching 286 ROCHESTER pastor to perform his office faithfully among them, whereby honest hearts are sadded and others are very ignorant and lewd." The new regulation as to the position of the altar was here, as elsewhere, a grievance — " Our Communion Table is set up close to the wall at the east end of the chancel," which is "new wainscoted with cherubims carved," and a "rail with two ascents thereto lately made." The former vicar usually bowed to the Table and adored it, " so that we, not knowing what the end and meaning of such things are, are much troubled and our consciences offended." The regulation had not been made before it was needed. For the Holy Table, moved to the body of the churches, or chancels, had been used as a deposi- tory for cloaks and hats, and even as a seat during sermon ! Mr. Wallis, vicar of Tudeley and Capel, did not reside at Capel, and was inattentive to his duties. "We are served every other Sabbath by a layman, and sometimes we have a sermon but once a month, and now and then we have neither prayers nor sermon." He was also addicted to ceremonies, and refused to administer the Sacrament to five or six intending communicants, because "we did not come to the rails where he doth cringe and bow," though we " presented ourselves on our knees in the chancel." His strictures against the Scots, in the pulpit and out, calling them "dogs and devils," was another cause of offence. It is admitted that the stipend at Capel is very small, but the petitioners are willing to mend that, "so we may have a preaching minister to ourselves." ROCHESTER 287 from Horsmonclen conies a complaint not of any neglect on the part of the rector, Jeffery Amherst, but of his superstitious observances — bowing to the Holy Table, where he reads great part of the service, and of his sermons, in which he urges the people to communicate "at the wainscot," refusing to administer to those " whose consciences are weak and dare not receive it in that manner." He has presented a poor man in the consistory court for contumacy in this respect. The Sevenoaks grievance is of another sort. Its many poor inhabitants are "through their poverty constrained to drink water instead of beer." The town stands on a hill. It is "watered only with three public springs." Two are out of the town, the third is on the glebe. Time out of mind the rectors gave their neighbours free access to the spring, whereby " they were refreshed and the rectors sustained no damage." Now Dr. Gibbon has built "a strong, high stone wall." The magistrates ordered him to carry the water by a pipe to the wall, but the pipe is defective and the supply often fails. So your petitioners, obliged to use well-water, are " become more infirme and subject to infection and sickness." Twenty-two inhabitants of Chatham were displeased with their incumbent, Thomas Vahan. He had been among them about five years, "a turbulent man, full of differences, very negligent in visiting the sick and catechizing the youth, much dignifying himself and vilifying others." But his opinions were, clearly, the head and front of his offence. He urged his 288 ROCHESTER hearers to bow at the name of Jesus. For more than two years he tried to induce them to place the Holy Table at the east end of the church and to rail it round, "complaining how he was abased in administering the Sacrament, going from pew to pew, as one that dealeth alms or a dole." He had said that to preach on Sunday morning was to preach in season ; on Sunday afternoon, to preach out of season. He often spoke against the Scots. Worse than all, he never prayed for the former Parliament, " nor for this, till of late." The charges against the vicar of Dartford are more serious. Not only is he accused of advocating stand- ing at the Gloria Patri and of preaching on Com- munion Sundays in surplice and hood, not very heinous offences, but his character for sobriety is impugned. He is said to be "excessively given to drinking of wine, insomuch that he many times reeleth in the street, and cannot go upright." Com- plaint is made in this, as in other cases, that only one sermon is delivered on Sunday. Laud thought that, as a rule, an explanation of the Catechism, which includes the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, and the Ten Commandments, was more likely to be useful to a congregation containing a large proportion of un- educated people than a second sermon. Hence he pressed the duty of " catechizing " in the afternoon, to the great wrath of the Puritans. The parishioners of Stone seem to have been unhappy in their rector, Richard Chase. In 1637, 1638, or 1639, William Garnons petitioned Bishop Warner to adjudicate in person on matters in dispute ROCHESTER 289 between himself and Mr. Chase, whom he accuses of committing, by means of his three brothers and their servants, "a foul and barbarous riot at Stone Castle," where they dragged a maidservant out of doors by head and shoulders, and kept possession for a fort- night until they had eaten up all the bread, beef, and poultry in store. In addresses to Parliament in 1640 and 1 64 1 Chase is said to have not only " starved the souls of his people for want of spiritual food, but endeavoured by his vexatious suits to take away their corporal." No sooner was he inducted than he began to pick a quarrel with the curate ; nor would he pay his stipend, though commanded to do so by his uncle Bishop Bowie, until the archbishop threatened him with suspension. Since the fire at the church, for nearly two years there had been no service whatever. He had previously allowed the chancel-roof and windows to get so out of repair that the congregation were often obliged to leave their pews for shelter from wind and weather, and the sacred Elements themselves were sometimes rained upon. Mr. Chase, who was also rector of Chisle- hurst, and an active member of Convocation, appears to have ingratiated himself with Dr. Warner, and relying on his favour and the support of his relation, Dr. Wood, the chancellor, to have acted in a very liti- gious spirit. But we hear only one side of the story. Complaints more or less similar were made from East Peckham, St. Mary Cray, and Tonbridge. Mr. Tray, rector of St. Mary's, Hoo, and curate of Bredhurst, came off with flying colours. He produced a certificate testifying that "our much-respected 290 ROCHESTER parson is a man of good sufficiency and note for his preaching, wherein he is and always hath been labori- ous; and is a man of honest, sober, and discreet carriage, who by reason of his age and constitution of body cannot reside amongst us, as he desireth, without apparent danger of his health, as he is certi- fied under the hands of learned physicians, our parish being situated in a marshy place, joining to the river of Thames : but such special care hath he of our souls, that he hath given us power to make choice of our curate ourselves, and alloweth him £20 a year, and the church duties (fees) for the same, who preacheth diligently every Sunday : and besides, either comes himself, or sendeth his son, a master of arts and well approved of, allowing for the same £20 a year more, and his diet; besides he every year liberally relieveth our poor. He liveth at a place called Bredhurst as a curate, by the dispensa- tion of his Grace of Canterbury." In 1637 Laurence Snelling, rector of Paul's Cray, was suspended by Dr. Wood, chancellor of the dio- cese, for not reading the Declaration of Sports. When the case was heard in the court of High Commission, Wood came up "staring and chafing," half out of breath, — " For the king's sake, somebody help me against this Puritan. I demand justice against this dunce." Bishop White asked, "What's the matter?" Snelling presented two answers, a longer and a shorter, of which the latter was received. After sentence of deprivation had been pronounced Laud said, " Are you conformable ? " " Yes, as far as is by law established." " Are you conformable to the new ROCHESTER 29I conformity?" Then, turning to the company, " There is no more believing this kind of man than a dog." " You may know him by his band," rejoined Bishop Wren, "that he has a wonderful tender conscience." In 1640 Dr. Wood was summoned before the Committee of Religion to justify his pro- ceedings. He produced the written orders of Dr. Bowie and of the Primate for the publication of the declaration, and said his duty was to obey. For suspending Mr. Snelling he had the verbal command of the late bishop, and of the archbishop, walking in his garden at Croydon, which he thought sufficient, though the king's book gave no such authority. During the Commonwealth, Sept. 18, 1652, Dr. Warner instituted Edward Archibald to the vicarage of Trottescliffe and John Lee to the rectory of Southfleet. It does not follow that his nominees obtained possession of their benefices, and the act was probably intended merely as an assertion of his rights. After the Restoration the first entry in his Register is the institution of Nicholas Cordell to Speldhurst, Aug. 22, 1660. The bishop died at Bromley, Oct. 14, 1666. He is buried in the chapel of St. John the Baptist in the cathedral, where is a monument to his memory with a long Latin inscription. He had wished that nothing should be put on his grave-stone but " Here lies the body of John Warner, twenty-nine years Bishop of Rochester, in hope of the resurrection." Warner's successor was a man of the same principles. John Dolben, born at Stanwick, Northamptonshire, in 1625, was educated at Westminster and Christ 292 ROCHESTER Church. While he was at Oxford the civil war broke out. Then her "groves were full of warlike stirs ; The student's heart was with the merry spears, Or keeping measure to the clanking spurs Of Rupert's cavaliers." Young Dolben took arms, became a "Major" of the king's troops in garrison at Oxford, fought as an ensign at Marston Moor and in the siege of York, and was so severely wounded as to be obliged to keep his bed for a whole year. When all was over he returned to college, to be ejected from his studentship by the parliamentary visitors in 1648. In r656 he was ordained, and assisted Dr. Fell in maintaining the proscribed service of the Church of England. At the Restoration he received his reward. On July 27, 1660, he was installed canon of Christ Church. He was one of the members of Convocation who signed the original Book of Common Prayer in December 1661 ; and in 1664 was chosen Prolocutor. Having held the archdeaconry of London he was appointed Dean of Westminster. In 1666 he was advanced to the bishoprick of Rochester, with which he held his deanery " in com men dam." The man on whom these honours were bestowed seems to have been worthy of them. His influence in the House of Lords exceeded that of any other prelate. As a debater and as a preacher he stood in the first rank. Of an imposing presence, ready wit, graceful elocution, and with the manners of a gentleman, Dr. Dolben made a favourable impression wherever he went. So little at a loss was he, that ROCHESTER 293 when a clergyman was taken ill in the pulpit of Westminster Abbey, after he had named his text and announced the heads of his discourse, the bishop took up the subject, and spoke on each of the pro- posed divisions to the great satisfaction of his hearers. In August 1683 he was promoted to the arch- bishoprick of York, but did not long enjoy his new dignity. At an inn he was allowed to sleep in a bed which had not been properly disinfected. The result was an attack of small-pox. It proved fatal, April 11, 1686. In the later years of Charles II. great efforts had been made to promote a Church revival. Under the auspices of Sancroft it had so progressed that when the king died the Church was beginning to nourish to an extent unknown since the Reformation, her rites were more uniformly observed, her services were better attended, the number of communicants had increased, and a more serious concern for religion might be remarked. Among those who aided the work was Francis Turner. His father had followed Charles I. as chaplain, in his triumphs and reverses, had been dean of Rochester and of Canterbury, and had lost and regained his preferments as the royal cause sank and rose. At Winchester the young Francis formed a friendship with Thomas Ken, a friendship cemented at Oxford and continued through life. He was ordained in 1669, became rector of Therfield in 1663, prebendary of St. Paul's 1660, and in 1670, though an Oxonian, master of St. John's College, Cambridge. He was also made chaplain to the Duke of York, afterwards James II., whom lie accompanied into 294 ROCHESTER Scotland, and whose esteem, notwithstanding the difference in religion, he seems to have secured. Early in 1683 he was nominated to the deanery of Windsor, and in November of that year to the bishoprick of Rochester. That he would readily co-operate with those who were trying to raise the standard of religious feeling is shown by an entry in the diary of Dr. Granville, written at Windsor April 1684: "I waited on the Bishop of Rochester. He thanked me for the letter I had sent him about the revival of the weekly Sacrament in his cathedral. He excused himself for not answering it, but declares that when he comes to Rochester he will set it up, telling me also that he intends to do the same at Windsor." There he had already begun a morning service daily at seven, and an evening at eight, for the servants and soldiers. In one of his own letters he asks, " Have you prayer every day in the week in your church, if by any means you can prevail with a few (to attend), which sure cannot be wanting in most parishes ? " What he might have effected in this diocese cannot be known, for in less than a year he was translated to Ely. As Bishop of Ely he preached at the coronation of James II. " The sermon," says Macaulay {History of England, vol. i. p. 472), "was made up of quaint conceits, such as seventy years earlier might have been admired, but such as moved the scorn of a generation accustomed to the purer eloquence of Sprat, of South, and of Tillotson. Towards the close the orator very timidly alluded to the new and embarrassing position in which the Church stood with reference to the sovereign." To his ROCHESTER 295 honour Turner was one of the seven prelates sent to the Tower, and equally to his honour, being who and what he was, he refused the oath of allegiance to William and Mary, and was of course deprived of his see. He died November 2, 1700, and was buried at Therfield. The next Bishop of Rochester was a man very unlike his immediate predecessors. Warner, Dolben, and Turner were cavaliers of the old school whose consistency it was impossible to question. With their party they triumphed, with their party they suffered. It was otherwise with Sprat. His conduct in public matters certainly lays him open to the charge of time-serving, but he lived in days when it was not easy to discern the path of duty. A fellow of Wadham College, Oxford, he became chaplain to the Duke of Buckingham. At his first dinner that witty profligate remarked that he "wondered why it generally happened that geese were placed near the clergy." " I cannot tell the reason," rejoined Sprat, " but I shall never see a goose again without thinking of your Grace." Buckingham felt at once that the new chaplain could hold his own, and henceforward sought his help in all his literary undertakings. For Sprat was a master of the English language, possessing " at once the eloquence of the orator, of the controversial- ist, and cf the historian." Having held the vicarage of St. Margaret's, Westminster, in 1683, he became Bishop of Rochester in 1684. On the accession of James II. he was Appointed Clerk of the Closet. When the Court of High Commission was illegally revived Sprat accepted a seat upon it. Prudence and 296 ROCHESTER good-nature combined to prevent his being an active member, and he resigned when it was proposed to punish the clergy who had declined to publish the Declaration of Indulgence. Himself he was one of the small minority who obeyed the command which brought matters to a crisis and cost James his crown. " The Westminster boys long remembered what took place that day in the Abbey. Sprat, Bishop of Rochester, officiated there as dean. As soon as he began to read the Declaration, murmurs and the noise of people crowding out of the choir drowned his voice. He trembled so violently that men saw the paper shake in his hand. Long before he had finished the place was deserted by all but those whose situation made it necessary for them to remain." (Macaulay, History of England, vol. ii. p. 351.) In the diocese the order was generally disregarded. Even the chaplain at Chatham wrote to the secretary of the Admiralty, " I cannot reasonably expect your Honour's protection. God's will be done. I must choose suffering rather than sin." The revolution followed in the autumn. Three of the Rochester clergy, Dr. Simon Lowth, the dean, Henry Barrow, vicar of Horton Kirby, and Robert Orme, rector of Wouldham, joined the ranks of the non-jurors. Sprat took the oaths to the new sovereigns, and carried the chalice at their coronation. His was the hand which added to the form of prayer for November 5 the paragraphs expressive of thankfulness for the arrival of William of Orange. He wal named one of the Commissioners to examine the Liturgy in 1689, but withdrew after the second meeting on the plea that ROCHESTER 297 he doubted the legality of the proceedings. Once more he came before the public in connection with politics. A skilful forger, Robert Young, a prisoner in Newgate, tried to ingratiate himself with the Govern- ment by discovering a pretended plot for the restor- ation of James II. He drew up a paper, to which he appended the signatures of Lords Marlborough, Cornbury, and Salisbury, and of Archbishop San- croft and Sprat. The next thing was to get the paper into a hiding-place in the house of one of the persons implicated. An accomplice was therefore sent to Bromley, who, unable to obtain access to any other apartment, dropped the paper into a flower-pot standing in a room near the kitchen. Then inform- ation was given to the Council. If search were made at Bromley, especially among the flower-pots, a treasonable document would be found. Thereupon Sprat was taken into custody and removed to the deanery of Westminster. Both his houses were over- hauled but nothing discovered. The next day he was brought before the Council, and in ten days allowed to return to Bromley. In the meanwhile the accomplice paid another visit to Bromley, and taking the paper from the place where he had hidden it, and where it had been overlooked, brought it back to Young, whose wife carried it to the Secretary of State. Finally, the bishop and his accusers were confronted and the truth came out. To the end of his life Sprat observed the anniversary of the day with gratitude for his escape.1 A copy of the Floiocr-pot P/ot, published by the bishop in 1692, is in the cathedral library. 298 ROCHESTER An instance of Sprat's too great readiness to fall in with the wishes of James II. occurred in connection with Rochester Cathedral. Dean Castilion died, October"2i, 1688. The king nominated Simon Lowth as his successor. Mr. Lowth was ineligible, not being at least a bachelor in divinity. But Sprat instituted him, and issued a mandate for his induction. In a few days he wrote to the chapter clerk, desiring him to request the canon in residence not to proceed with the induction. Lowth insisted on being installed, on which the bishop revoked the institution, and entreated the chapter not to admit him until he was duly qualified. Sprat's enemies attributed his action to the fact that William had landed, and a change of Government was seen to be imminent. His own explanation was that he had not known the degree of Master of Arts to be an insufficient qualification. The new dean took his D.D. at Cambridge, January 18, 1689, and the next Sunday was the last clergyman who prayed for James, before the university, as king. He did not take the oaths to William, and soon lost his preferments. Bishop Sprat's Register is remarkable for the number of faculties granted for the erection of family pews. The rights they confer are conditional on residence in the parish. There are also permissions to practise midwifery and medicine as well as to hold conventicles. The court-lodge Lamberhurst, the mansion of Elizabeth, widow of Sir John Hanby, is licensed, July 23, 1690, as a meeting-house for Pro- testant dissenters, and, 1707, the house of Alexander Lindsay of Sydenham Causeway for the use of Presby- ROCHESTER terians. An attempt was still made to enforce discipline. In 1698 the mother of an illegitimate Child was ordered to stand at the door of Deptford church, while the bell rang on Sunday morning, asking forgiveness of the congregation as they passed in. At the end of the first lesson she was to take her place near the reading-desk, and there, covered by a white sheet and bearing a white wand, as soon as the Gospel had been read, to make a public confession after the minister, ending with the Lord's Prayer, in which the assembly were invited to join. Very different accounts have been given of Sprat's character, and by men who must have been personally acquainted with him. Burnet accuses him of neglect- ing the duties, even the decencies, of his profession. Rawlinson calls him a learned, generous divine, and true primitive Christian. What are we to think ? That his Charge of 1695, still reprinted in the Clergy 'man's Instructor, is an admirable composition is beyond question. It affords evidence that he used discrimin- ation in bestowing holy orders, and is full of good feeling to the curates of the diocese, whom he exhorts the higher clergy to pay liberally, and treat as fellow- labourers and friends. He attributes much of the immorality and unbelief that prevailed after the Restor- ation to the neglect of catechizing during the Common- wealth. He lays much stress on the manner of performing divine service. " The reader of the prayers may give as it were a new soul to every petition in it. He may give the text of the Bible a very good clear exposition even by his way of reading it to the congregation." With regard to preaching he 3oo ROCHESTER emphasizes the same point — " I am persuaded that the sermons preached every Sunday in this one kingdom by the Church of England clergy in this age, are more excellent compositions of that kind than have been delivered in the same space of time through- out the whole Christian world besides. Only let me take the freedom to suggest, that perhaps it would add much, though not to the substantial part of such discourses, yet to their just popularity and more general acceptance, if we would addict ourselves a little more to this study of pronunciation." Dr. Sprat died of apoplexy at Bromley, May 20, 1 7 13, aged 76, and was buried in Westminster Abbey. 3oi CHAPTER IX Francis Atterbury, Sprat's successor in the deanery and bishoprick, enjoyed a high reputation as a preacher. His fine person, melodious voice, and judicious action, would have ensured his popularity, though the matter of his discourses had been far inferior to what it was. Steele's eulogy in the Tatler is. well known — "The dean we heard is an orator. He has so much regard to his congregation that he commits to his memory what he is to say to them, and has so soft and graceful a behaviour that it fnust attract your attention." At an early age he wrote a spirited answer to some Romish strictures on Luther and the Reformation. His vindication of the rights of Convocation was acknowledged by the university of Oxford, and led to his choice as pro- locutor of the Lower House. The correspondent of Pope and Swift and Gay, the friend of Addison and for a while of Prior, who all confessed the charm of " Atterbury's softer hour," he occupied a distinguished place among the chiefs of that Augustan age of English literature. But his active, intriguing temper delighted above all things in the strife of politics. ROCHESTER We remember the picture drawn of him by Thackeray in the last chapters of Esmond, imaginary as to the details but true to the life. From his deanery at Westminster he was ready to go forth in his lawn sleeves, so it was said, to proclaim James III. at Charing Cross, the morning after the death of Queen Anne. The critical moment was lost through the irresolution of the Jacobites, and Atterbury submitted to the inevitable. When the new king was crowned he tried to propitiate him by foregoing his perquisites as dean of the Abbey. George was not to be won. The Bishop of Rochester soon appeared as an opponent of the Government in the Lords and in Convocation. Finally he entered into a Jacobite conspiracy, and, June 18, 1723, was conveyed to France, a deprived and banished man. There he became the confidential agent of the Pretender. He died at Paris, February 15, 1732. The body was brought over to England and privately buried in the vault he had made at the west end of Westminster Abbey. Though his career was too political for a minister of Christ, Atterbury had a sincere belief in the doctrines of the Church, and an earnest desire to advance its interests. As Bishop of Rochester he declined, though much pressed, to promote his brother to the archdeaconry. When his friend Prior asked for the living of Dartford for his godson Clough, already a minor canon and vicar of Stock- bury, preferments he had no thought of resigning, he was told that " it is a vicarage in a great market town which requires perpetual residence. I can no way ROCHESTER 303 approve the scheme, especially in a young single man who does not want a tolerable support." Prior pro- fessed himself more than satisfied, but never forgave the refusal. The bishop was most anxious to restore the public administration of Baptism, which was falling into disuse. Writing to Dean Stanhope, Jan. i, 1719, he says, "My mind is much bent upon it." He had effected his purpose in some parts of the diocese, and hoped to do so in the rest. The dean assured him of his co-operation. Indeed, by the help of his curates, he had already largely reduced the number of private baptisms at Deptford and Lewisham. When Mr. Gibbins, the curate of St. George's, Gravesend, allowed the Dutch troops who had been brought over in 1 721 to use the church at an early hour, the bishop suspended him ; either on account of the breach of discipline involved in the proceeding, or because of his dislike to the existing Government. Of Atterbury's disinterestedness in pecuniary matters there can be no doubt. The see yielded him but ^500 per annum, yet he laid out ^2000 on Bromley palace, and declined to receive anything for dilapidations from the executors of his predecessor. Samuel Bradford obtained the dignities of which Atterbury was deprived. He left Cambridge without a degree in consequence of some scruples as to taking the oaths — scruples which for some years prevented his ordination. At length, on the recommendation of Tillotson, who entrusted him with the education of his grandsons, he was appointed minister of St. Thomas's, Southwark, and in 1707 became canon of 3°4 ROCHESTER Westminster. His Whig principles stopped his further advancement during the life of Queen Anne, but in 1 718 he was raised to the bench as bishop of Carlisle, and was translated to Rochester in 1723. From 1716 to 1724 he was master of C. C. C, Cambridge. His sermon on Baptism is still on the list of the S.P.C.K. He was buried in Westminster Abbey, May 22, i73r. Joseph Wilcocks was for some time chaplain to the English factory at Lisbon. While he was there the small-pox, a fearful scourge in those ante-vaccination days, broke out. Though he had never had the complaint, and the risk was great, he remained at his post, ministering to the sick and dying. On his return he was appointed tutor to the daughters of the Prince of Wales, afterwards George II. In 1721 the bishoprick of Gloucester was conferred upon him. In 1 731 he became Bishop of Rochester and Dean of Westminster, refusing further preferment, though offered the primacy of York. Under his rule the western towers of the Abbey were finished. " It is curious to remark the extreme pride which the aged dean took in commemorating, as a glory of his office, that which the fastidious taste of our time so largely condemns. On his monument, in his portrait, in the picture he caused to be painted by Canaletto, the unfortunate towers of Wren constantly appear." (Stanley, Memorials of Westminster Abbey.) One of his biographers says, that had there been a prospect of national assistance he would have been equally zealous in adorning and enlarging Rochester Cathe- dral. We may be thankful that the funds were not ROCHESTER 305 forthcoming for any great alterations. The bishop was fond of gardening, and kept his grounds at Bromley, as well as the house, in admirable order. He is said to have shown great interest in Warner's college, and when the income proved insufficient, to have often advanced the widows' pensions from his own pocket. Religious activity was not the feature of his day, but he appears to have been constant in his residence in the diocese, and his death is attri- buted to the fatigue caused by a visitation undertaken in his eighty-second year. In the early part of Dr. Wilcocks's episcopate, 1736-40, Joseph Butler, the author of the Analogy, held the third canonry in the cathedral. His house was that adjoining the deanery gate-way. It was, however, rebuilt by his successor. During this period Wesleyan Methodism sprang into life. The history of this movement has been so often related that we need only mention here a few circumstances connected with its progress in the diocese. As early as 1739 we find Wesley preaching at Deptford. Lewisham was a frequent scene of his labours, where the country house of a London banker, Mr. Blackwell, was at his disposal. On one occasion, in company with Whitfield, he addressed some 12,000 persons on Blackheath. Among those who subse- quently regarded the movement with favour was Lord Dartmouth, of whom George III. said, "They call his lordship an enthusiast ; but surely he says nothing on the subject of religion but what any Christian may and ought to say." At Bexley the vicar, Mr. Piers, invited Wesley to preach in his church, and so much u 3o6 ROCHESTER interest was aroused that on a certain day not less than 600 communicants presented themselves in that rural parish. The vicar of Shoreham, Vincent Perronett, in 1744 welcomed the Wesleys to his pulpit, and opened a room on his premises for the meetings of their societies. We hear of Wesley at Brompton in 1753. Twenty years later sixty-eight members of his connection were to be found at Chatham. Gravesend he visited in 1 7 7 1 . He was also at Tonbridge and Sevenoaks. Nothing is known of the attitude assumed by Bishop Wilcocks. For the greater part of the century the bishops were more enlightened than the clergy. Archbishop Potter gave the Wesley brothers an inter- view, in which he heard their statements, praised their zeal, and cautioned them to adhere in their sermons to the essential truths of the Gospel : other things, he said, must be left to time and the providence of God. Wesley did not intend to found a sect. Himself a clergyman, he wished to quicken and supplement, not to supersede, the work of the Church. It must ever be a source of the deepest regret that means were not found to retain him and his followers within her pale. Zachary Pearce was a man of considerable literary attainments, a circumstance which induced Queen Caroline to interest herself in his advancement, though he did not in fact rise to the higher offices of the Church until after her death. From the deanery of Winchester he was promoted in 1747 to the see of Bangor. According to the fashion of the time, he retained the vicarage of St. Martin-in-the-Fields, to which he had been appointed in 1723, thus adding ROCHESTER 307 the care of a London parish to the duties of a Welsh diocese. Rather against his will he was nominated Bishop of Rochester and Dean of Westminster in 1756. While at Cambridge in 1714 Pearce con- tributed two papers to the Spectator. One, No. 572, is an amusing essay on Quacks and Quackery, the other, No. 633, is a treatise on the advantage enjoyed by the Christian orator over the heathen in consequence of the superiority of his subject. At intervals he published editions of Cicero de Oratore and de Officiis, and of Longinus on the Sublime, as well as observations on the text of Paradise Lost. When he reached the age of seventy-three he proposed to resign his preferments, in order to secure more leisure for devotion and study. Legal difficulties prevented the acceptance of the offer. In 1768, however, he was allowed to vacate the deanery, but obliged to continue in the bishoprick for the rest of his life. His wife, to whom he had been united over fifty years, died in 1773. It is said that about a fortnight after her funeral he bewailed her loss, mentioned her again in the evening, and then spoke of her no more. Later in the year he held a confirmation at Greenwich. There were 700 candidates, for the ordinance was then rarely administered, and the young people were drawn from large areas.1 The fatigue was too great for the aged prelate. He lost his voice and never 1 A confirmation in those days was usually connected with the bishop's visitation. The market town in which it was held was thronged with country lads and lasses, who were admitted into the church in detachments. Except for the time spent in the sacred building, the proceedings more nearly resembled a fair than anything else. So at least it was at Ashford. 3°8 ROCHESTER entirely regained it. Soon the power of swallowing almost failed. Being asked how he could live with so little nourishment, "I live," said he, "upon the recollection of an innocent and well-spent life, which is my only sustenance." We could wish that the sentiment had been different, or differently expressed. As it stands it is too characteristic of the period. Dr. Pearce died at Ealing, where he usually spent the winter, in 1774, aged eighty-three, and was buried at Bromley. His epitaph, echoing the self-complacency of his words, ends — " He died in the comfortable hope of (what was the chief aim of all his labours upon earth) being promoted to a happier place in heaven." After his death his commentary on the Gospels, Acts, and First Epistle to the Corinthians was published, as well as a selection from his sermons. He left ^5000 to Bromley College. The next bishop, Dr. John Thomas, had succeeded Dr. Pearce on his resignation of the deanery of Westminster, and now inherited his mitre. He was born at Carlisle in 1712, and educated at Queen's College, Oxford. Taking a mastership in a school in Soho Square, he attracted the notice of Sir William Clayton, who appointed him tutor to his younger son. This paved the way for his advancement. He event- ually married I.ady Blackwell, Sir William's daughter ; was instituted to the rectory of Bletchingley, January 27, 1738, where for thirty-six years he chiefly resided ; became chaplain to the king 1748, and in 1754 was preferred to a canonry at Westminster. In 1766 he accepted the vicarage of St. Bride's, Fleet Street. We are told that on taking possession of his bishoprick ROCHESTER 3°9 he expended a large sum in repairing and rebuilding Bromley Palace, then in a dilapidated condition. He held two visitations of the diocese, viz. 1776 and 1780. The infirmities of age incapacitated him for exertion some years before his death, which occurred in 1793. In the style of the day we hear that "in this amiable prelate appeared all the efficacy of religious principle. In his manners the purity of the Christian was adorned with the urbanity of the gentle- man." It is probable that his taste for music led to the Festival in the Abbey on the centenary of Handel's birth. Mindful of his youth, he founded, by his will, two exhibitions at Queen's College for sons cf clergymen educated at Carlisle school or at St. Bees. He was buried at Bletchingley. In Samuel Horsley, the last bishop of the century, the see of Rochester had an occupant of a different stamp to either of his immediate predecessors. A man of vigorous intellect and strong will, he combated the errors of the time, whether practical or doctrinal, with firmness and ability. As archdeacon of St. Albans he vindicated the doctrine of the Trinity against Dr. Priestley in such a manner that Lord Thurlow remarked, "That man deserves to be a bishop, and he shall be one ; for they who defend the Church ought to be supported by the Church." The chancellor was as good as his word. He con- ferred a canonry at Gloucester on Horsley in 1786, and in 1787 was the means of raising him to the bishoprick of St. Davids. There the new prelate exerted himself with zeal in the correction of abuses, in enforcing the regular performance of divine service, 3io ROCHESTER and in improving the lot of the humbler clergy. In his Charge of 1791 he maintained the great doctrine of Justification by Faith, so emphatically taught by the formularies of the Church, but then so little regarded in the preaching of her ministers. "He won, it is said, his preferment to the deanery of Westminster and the see of Rochester by a sermon in the Abbey on January 30, 1793, before the House of Lords, on the anniversary of the execution of Charles, and a few days after the execution of Louis XVI. It was customary on these occasions for the lords to attend service in the Abbey. The temporal peers sat on the south side. The bishops were on the north. The solemn occasion, no doubt, added to the grandeur of those sonorous sentences. ' I perfectly recollect,' says an eye-witness, ' his impressive manner, and can fancy that the sound still vibrates in my ears.' When he burst into the peroration connecting together the French and English regicides — ' O my country ! read ths horrors of thy own deed in this recent heightened imitation, and lament and weep that this black French treason should have found its example in 'that crime of thy unnatural sons ! ' — the whole of the august assembly rose, and remained standing till the con- clusion of the sermon." (Stanley, Memorials of Westminster Abbey, pp. 474-5-) In the diocese of Rochester Horsley was as energetic as in that of St. Davids. Had such advice as his been generally given and acted on fifty years before, Wesleyanism had never acquired the hold it has gained on the English people, for by precept and example, by his own sermons as well as in his Charges, he urged the ROCHESTER clergy to adopt a more Scriptural style of preaching than the moral essays in which the Saviour's name rarely occurred, and which were powerless to reach the heart or control the passions. To his great credit he defended those who were reviled as Methodists, merely because they taught the truths revealed in the New Testament and enshrined in the Book of Common Prayer. From this see he was translated to St. Asaph in 1802. He died at Brighton, Oct. 4, 1806. The choir of Westminster Abbey attended his funeral at Stoke Newington, in order to testify their gratitude for the interest he had taken in their welfare as well as in that of the precentor and minor canons. In his lifetime Dr. Horsley published a new translation of Hosea with a commentary, and at his death left almost ready for publication notes on the greater part of the Old Testament and a Life of Sir Lsaac Newton. His famous sermon on the Descent of Christ into Hell long was, perhaps is now, the classic on the subject.1 1 "A fact to be noted is that during the eighteenth century, when the Church is popularly supposed to have been 'dead,' the quantity of Communion Plate presented to the churches of Kent was great." — Canon Scott Robertson, Arch. Cant. vol. xvi. p. 332. The same remark may, I think, be made of Surrey. 312 CHAPTER X The first quarter of the nineteenth century offers little worthy of remark in connection with the diocese of Rochester. Though religious apathy was only too prevalent, a better spirit was abroad. The Church Missionary Society, founded in 1799, began its work in 1804. The National Society for the Education of the Children of the Poor was established in 181 1. The Incorporated Church Building Society com- menced operations in 1818. But in 1809 it was stated in Parliament, that half the benefices in England and Wales were held by non-resident incumbents. This meant that the parishes were served by ill-paid curates, who, in many cases, officiated in two or three churches on the same Sunday. The fabrics themselves were for the most part in a state of decay. With few exceptions whatever spiritual activity existed was to be found among the Evangelicals. Of these the diocese had its share. Dr. Dampier, who succeeded Horsley, enjoyed much local popularity. He was no stranger, having been dean twenty years. During that time he resided much at the deanery, where he exercised a liberal ROCHESTER 3^3 hospitality. In 1809 he was translated to Ely, and died 1812. Walker King followed. For some years he had been preacher at Gray's Inn, and had long been private secretary to the Prime Minister, the Duke of Portland. His son, whom he appointed archdeacon on the death of Dr. Law, and who still lives in the kindly recollection of many, was father of the present Bishop of Lincoln. The Hon. Hugh Percy, Dean of Canterbury, became Bishop of Rochester in 1827. Later in the year he was translated to Carlisle. He died 1856. The episcopate of Dr. George Murray, extending over thirty-two years, was marked by many changes in the diocese as well as in the Church and nation. In the former part of his career the prospect was gloomy. The friends of the established order might well be apprehensive, for the success of the French Revolution of 1836 and the passing of the Reform Bill had raised the hopes of those who desired sweeping alterations in the institutions of the country. Change was in the air, and none could tell what the end would be. Some measures affecting the Church were carried through Parliament, of which the result has been beneficial, though exception might be taken to the details. The Tithe Commutation Act of 1836 provided for the extinction of the right of taking tithes in kind, and for commuting them into a rent-charge, payable in money according to the value of a fixed quantity of corn, wheat, barley, and oats, as annually ascertained by the average of the preceding seven years. If the ROCHESTER parties were unable to come to an agreement before October i, 1838, commissioners were to make an award which should be binding. The change was not advantageous in a pecuniary sense to the clergy, and it obscured the fact that the tithe is the part of the produce of the earth dedicated by our fore- fathers, the then owners of the property out of which it arises, to the service of the Almighty ; but it removed a fertile source of contention, and by the slow opera- tion of averages saved the parochial clergyman from the violent fluctuations of income to which he had been subject. Other measures provided for a new arrangement of dioceses with a fresh distribution of their revenues, the creation of the sees of Ripon and Manchester ; the suppression of many canonries and the appropria- tion of their endowments to the augmentation of poor livings ; and for the diminution of non-residence and pluralities. The ultimate result of these Acts on the diocese of Rochester was the suppression of two out of the six canonries founded by Henry VIII. at the dissolution of the priory ; the raising of the bishop's income to ^5000 per annum, so that it should no longer be necessary for him to hold other preferment "in commendam " ; the abolition of the archbishop's "peculiar" jurisdiction in the deanery of Shoreham, and in Cliffe at Hoo, and of the Bishop of Rochester's in the deanery of Fordham ; and a great alteration in the boundaries. By an Order in Council, August 8, 1845, made in pursuance of one of the Acts just mentioned, it was ROCHESTER 3^5 declared that from Jan. r, 1846, the diocese should consist of the city and deanery of Rochester, of the county of Essex, with the exception of nine parishes near London, and of the whole county of Hertford. In consequence of this extraordinary arrangement Bromley ceased to be the episcopal residence. In its place Danbury Park was purchased, inconvenient in situation and costly to maintain. To some of the projected measures of the day Dr. Murray was strongly opposed. He thought that although the holding of a plurality of benefices was in theory liable to many objections, it did not in practice produce all the evils ascribed to it, and that greater advantages would have been secured had an Act been passed requiring that a salary of £200 should be paid to each curate of a non-resident incumbent, and a larger stipend if the value of the benefice permitted, or the extent of the population demanded it. The Bill for regulating ecclesiastical duties and revenues he denounced with all the earnestness of conviction. "A more unprincipled act of spoliation was never attempted in the worst periods of our history." We may hesitate to accept the remark as we remember the new churches endowed and parson- age houses built by the commissioners with funds provided by the Act, but there is force in the argu- ment, " The oath taken by the bishop in this diocese when he is enthroned is, ' I swear on the holy Gospels that I will observe and also maintain, to the utmost of my power, the rights, liberties, and privileges of this cathedral church from this day forward.' How then can I join in any act for subverting the statutes, 3,6 ROCHESTER for invading the privileges, and for confiscating the revenues thus placed under my protection ? " The bishop's Charge of 1843 went to a second edition. It treated of "burning" questions, and won for him a large amount of public approval. Among Churchmen of the present day there is practically no difference of opinion as to the beneficial effects of the Oxford Movement as a whole. We can see that it supplied something the Evangelical lacked. But this was not so easily perceived fifty years ago, nor can it be doubted that some of the language used by the writers of the Tracts and their friends, was but too well fitted to alarm those who wished to remain faithful to the Reformation. The Bishop of Rochester was not a controversialist. In principle he belonged to what is called the " high and dry " school. Under the circumstances of the time it was impossible to remain silent, and he expressed himself as one who, admiring the Tractarians in many respects, and agree- ing with them, was forced to protest against some of their utterances and not a few of their practices. The clergy of the diocese, he says, are happily dis- tinguished for soundness of doctrine, nor are they likely to adopt the ceremonial novelties introduced elsewhere. He believes that the low notions enter- tained by some with respect to the sacraments and services of the Church have led to the adoption of extreme views in an opposite direction. Were he obliged to choose, he would prefer those who exalt to those who depreciate the value of those sacred rites. But he must take exception to the eighty-first and ninetieth Tracts, in the latter of which the Articles ROCHESTER are wrested from their plain meaning to mitigate the condemnation therein attached to certain Roman tenets, e.g. the invocation of saints, the sacrifice of the mass, and the infallibility of general councils. He is pained by passages apparently directed against the Reformers, and the implication that the bishops and clergy have long held unworthy notions of their religious duties. Referring to the use of the surplice in the pulpit, he wonders how it can have caused such excitement. It had always been worn in the cathedrals, and by himself, as a matter of convenience, when a curate in the diocese of Lincoln. With regard to ceremonies in general, his advice is to depart, in the present state of the public mind, as little as possible from the usages to which the congregation has been accustomed, provided nothing be done in a slovenly or irreverent manner, or so far in con- tradiction of the rubric as to give reasonable cause of offence. Leaving the question of daily prayer where the rubric leaves it, he trusts that on fasts, festivals, and saints-days service will not be omitted wherever there is a probability of obtaining a con- gregation. On one or two points the directions given strike us as odd. While approving the custom of turning to the east at the recital of the Creeds, he thinks the officiating minister ought not to do so, "because if, as I suppose, it is principally intended to evince the general assent of the people to the doctrines contained in the Creeds, there seems to be no occasion for such proofs of orthodoxy on his part. Moreover, as many persons cannot read, he ought so to turn as to be heard by them, that the articles of ROCHESTER our faith may by frequent repetition become im- pressed on their memory." What would be thought by a modern congregation of a recommendation to use Tate and Brady only in public worship? The Tractarians disliked psalms and hymns, partly because dissenters liked them, partly because they were not recognized in the rubrics. Says the bishop, "Another innovation which gives offence is the omission of the singing of the Psalms, at the periods in which it has been the custom to introduce this act of devotion. I am of opinion that, as far as regards the time for singing, there was a sufficient degree of uniformity in the practice generally observed in our churches; but we have had too much reason to complain of the introduction of unauthorized versions of the Psalms, and hymns often of an objectionable nature. I hope we shall adopt the new version of the Psalms published by authority in 1698." Such were the controversies by which the diocese of Rochester, and to a far greater extent the dioceses of London, Exeter, and Oxford, were agitated half a century ago. The Braintree church-rate case, which lasted for years, and was largely instrumental in bringing about the abolition of compulsory rates in i860, must be mentioned, as the diocese at that time included Essex. Another famous litigation was that between the Rev. Robert Whiston, head-master of the King's School, and the dean and chapter of Rochester, with the bishop as visitor. The point in dispute was substantially this, whether the revenue arising from the increased value of the property settled by Henry ROCHESTER 319 VIII. on his new foundation belonged exclusively to the dean and canons, or should be shared in due proportion by the other members of the establish- ment. The final decision was in favour of the latter contention, and led to a change in the practice of other cathedral bodies. Ur. Murray died in London, Feb. 16, i860, aged eighty-four. His successor, Joseph Cotton Wigrarn, Archdeacon of Winchester, secretary from 1827 to 1839 to the National Society, an evangelical in opinion, threw himself with great earnestness into the work of the diocese, and went far to realize what in the popular phrase of the time was described as a "gig-bishop," by visiting the remote villages of Essex in the most informal manner. On the last day of his life, April 6, 1867, he had been at a confirmation, and returned to London with the view of preaching at St. James's, Piccadilly, on the following morning. In the evening, while assisting the relation with whom he was staying, and who had been seized with a fainting fit, he fell forward and died without a word, at the age of sixty-eight. On the death of Bishop Wigram an alteration was made in the boundaries of the diocese as it had existed since 1846. The Essex parishes which had remained in the diocese of London were now added to Rochester, together with the populous parishes of Charlton, Lee, Lewisham, Greenwich, Woolwich, Eltham, Plumstead, and St. Nicholas and St. Paul, Deptford, which having originally belonged to Rochester, had been transferred to London ; so 320 ROCHESTER that the once little see of Justus and Gundulf embraced from 1867 to 1877 the most thickly inhabited part of Kent, and the entire counties of Essex and Herts. Thomas Legh Claughton, to whom this weighty charge was entrusted, was well known not only as professor of poetry at Oxford, but as the energetic and successful vicar of Kidderminster — the scene of Baxter's labours. No one acquainted with him will forget his gracious deportment or the fervour with which he delivered his addresses. A chief event of his episcopate was the re-opening of the cathedral on St. Barnabas' Day, June 11, 1875, after the restoration of the choir and transepts by Sir Gilbert Scott. The efforts to establish a see of St. Albans were at length successful. It was to consist of Hertford- shire and Essex. Dr. Claughton had the option of accepting it, or of continuing at Rochester with the territorial jurisdiction to be hereafter described. He chose the new see, influenced, it may be, in some measure by the opportunity thus afforded of with- drawing without loss of dignity from a ritualistic controversy in which he had become involved. He resigned St. Albans in 1890, and is since dead. In consequence of these changes the diocese was reduced for about three months to something less than its earliest dimensions. From May 4 to August 1, 1877, it consisted of the archdeaconry of Rochester only, but on the last-mentioned day the parishes, with two exceptions, wholly or partly within the parliament- ary divisions of east and mid Surrey, were added to it. ROCHESTER The arrangement was far from popular. Surrey resented its severance from Winchester, with which it had been immemorially connected ; resented being cut asunder, to the dislocation of its church agencies, well established and in good working order. If an attempt had been made at the time to form a new diocese, to consist of the county of Surrey, with St. Saviour's, Southwark, for a cathedral, the requisite funds would probably have been obtained without difficulty. The attempt was not made, and the feel- ing which would have ensured its success has died away. The task which confronted Anthony Wilson Thorold was almost overwhelming. His health was weak. His diocese, though it contained an enormous popu- lation, had no common centre, no common ties, not even a house of residence ; but he applied himself with unfailing perseverance and a courageous spirit to the work before him. He soon won the respect of his clergy and laity. They had learned to trust him, and were beginning to entertain a warmer feeling, when his translation to Winchester in 1891 severed the link between them. The more prominent features of Bishop Thorold's fourteen years' labour were the establishment of the Diocesan Society and Conference on their present basis, the Deaconess Institution, the Ten Churches Fund, and the re-building of the nave of St. Saviour's, Southwark, following on the efforts by which the patronage of that important parish was secured for the bishop and the evils attendant on the election of an incumbent by the votes of the whole body of 322 ROCHESTER parishioners averted. To him the diocese is indebted for whatever cohesion it possesses. Of his successor in office, Randall Thomas David- son, Dean of Windsor, it suffices to say that he was his successor in spirit and as far as strength permitted in labour. Dr. Davidson took a house near Ken- nington Park, and settled among the humble folk who constituted his charge in South London. In all his endeavours he was ably supported, as is the present diocesan, by the suffragan-bishop of South- wark, Huyshe Yeatman, D.D., consecrated in 1891, to whose exertions the Church owes two very useful institutions — the College of Grey Ladies and the College of Clergy, at Blackheath. The 25 th of July, 1894, the feast of St. James, was a great day in the annals of Rochester Cathedral. The restored west front, after an outlay of £7000, was dedicated by the Primate in the presence of the bishops of Winchester, Lincoln, Salisbury, Rochester, and South- wark, as well as of Earl Stanhope, Lord-Lieutenant of Kent, and other dignitaries, civil and ecclesiastical. A hymn composed by Archdeacon Cheetham was sung on the occasion. The sermon was preached by the Bishop of Lincoln. The state of Bishop Davidson's health made it desirable that he should be translated to a see not requiring the kind of work demanded by South London. He was therefore removed to Winchester in 1895. Edward Stuart Talbot was enthroned Nov. 12, 1895. The marked success of his career as Warden of Keble College, Oxford, and as vicar of Leeds, had ROCHESTER 323 raised an expectation, now abundantly justified by experience, that he would prove a true Father in God to those over whom he had been called to rule. Two events remain to be noticed. One is the consecration, June 26, 1896, of the chapel of the new bishop's-house, a pleasant and convenient residence, built by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, on the east side of Kennington Park, from the proceeds of the sale of Danbury Palace. The other event is the opening of St. Saviour's, Southwark, in its renovated form, on Tuesday, February 16, 1897, in the presence of the Prince of Wales, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Lord Mayor, and many persons of distinction, thus bringing to a happy conclusion the work in which Bishops Thorold and Davidson, as well as Bishop Talbot, took so warm an interest. It is intended that the Lady Chapel shall be used for parochial services, while the main building "provides for South London a great central church, which may both focus and radiate spiritual force, and give both clergy and laity opportunities of various kinds to gather for worship and for edification." The bishop of the diocese acts as dean of the Collegiate Church, the suffragan as sub-dean, and four clergy, including the rector, as canons, with whom, for certain purposes, representative laymen have been associated. We have thus traced the history of the diocese of Rochester from 604 to 1896, through almost thirteen centuries and one hundred episcopates. The popu- 324 ROCHESTER lation increases at the rate of 35,000 annually, but it may be confidently affirmed that there were never so many agencies for good at work within its boundaries as at the present time ; never more earnest efforts on the part of the bishop, the suffragan, the archdeacons, the dean and canons, the parochial clergy, as well as laity of all ranks and both sexes, to extend Christ's kingdom and promote God's glory. BISHOPS OF Those marked with an asten Justus A.D. 604 Romanus . 624 *Paulinus. 633 *Ithamar . 644 Damian 65S Putta 669 Quichelm . 676 Gebmund . 678 Tobias 693 Aldulf . 727 Dunno . . - 74' Eardulf . 747 Diora before 775 Weremund before 785 Beornmod about 803 Tatnoth . 844 Bedenoth . Godwyn I. Cuthwulf . 868 Swithulph 880 897 Cheolmund Chineferth 926 Burrhic . 934 Alfstane . 964 Godwyn II. 995 Godwyn III. . 1046 Siward . 1058 Arnost 1076 *Gundulf . 1077 Ralph . 1 108 Ernulf ins John of Canterbury . 1125 John of Seez . .' 1 137 Ascelinus . 1 142 ROCHESTER, sk arc buried in the Cathedral. W It fC nterburv 1 148 *\V derm 1 1 82 *Gilbcrtde Glanville 1 185 "^Benedict ^Hcnry de Sandford 1227 Richard of Wendover 1 - jO ^Laurenceof St. Mar- 1 —5 1 *\Yaltcr of Alerton *John of Bradfield . 1278 *Thomas de In(rlc- 1283 *Thomas of Wold- izy- ^Ilamo of Hythc I3'9 *John of Shepey 1 353 vviiiiaiu vvuLicaey lib-* *Thomas Trilleck j/j William of Bottles- ham 1389 *John of Bottlesham 1400 Richard Yong . 1404 John Kemp 1419 John Langdon . 1422 Thomas Brown 1435 William Wellys 1437 *John Lowe 1443 Thomas Scott . 1468 John Alcock . 1472 John Russell . 1476 Edmund Audley 1480 Thomas Savage 1493 Richard Fitz-james . 1497 326 ROCHESTER John Fisher A.D. • I504 Francis Atterbury . A.D. 1713 John Hilsey • 1535 Samuel Bradford 1723 Nicholas Heath • I540 Joseph Wilcocks 173' Henry Holbeach • 1544 Zachary Pearce 1756 Nicholas Ridley • 1547 John Thomas . 1774 John Ponet • I550 Samuel Horsley 1793 John Scory • IS5I Thomas Dampier . 1802 Maurice Gryffith • 1554 Walker King . 1809 Edmund Geste . I560 Hugh Percy . 1827 Edmund Freake . 1572 George Murray 1827 John Piers • 1576 Joseph Cotton Wig- John Yonge • 1578 ram i860 William Barlow . I605 Thos. Legh Claugh- Richard Neile . . I608 ton 1867 John Buckeridge . l6l I Anthony Wilson Walter Curie . . 1628 Thorold 1877 John Bowie • I63O Randall Thomas I638 1S91 John Dolben . ! 1666 Edward Stuart Tal- Francis Turner • 1683 bot . . 1895 Thomas Sprat . . 1684 ARCHDEACONS OF ROCHESTER. For several centuries there was but one archdeacon in each diocese. So late as the twelfth century the arch- deacon was usually a deacon. Becket, who had for some years been archdeacon of Canterbury, was ordained priest the day before his consecration as archbishop. Anschitillus "the priest" is described in Domesday as holding Longfield of the bishop. It had been given by Birtric of Meopham to the church of Rochester about 950, and recovered at Penenden by Lanfranc (p. 43), soon after which it was appropriated to the archdeaconry. At the knighting of the king's son, 1253-4, among the holders of Fees in Kent the archdeacon of Rochester was returned as possessing Longfield "in pure alms." In 1287 the archdeacon's temporalities at Longfield were valued at £5. The court lodge, near the church, is called " a strong ancient building with arched doors and windows of hewn stone," and was doubtless the residence of the arch- ARCHDEACONS OF ROCHESTER 327 deacons, who had no house in the city before 1639, when the sixth canonry was annexed to the archdeaconry. The house assigned to the canonry stood at the west end of Minor Canon Row, but it became ruinous, and in 1661 the present house, at the entrance to the Vines, was substituted for it. Anschitillus was certainly archdeacon of Canterbury, and in that capacity, in 1075, subscribed the decrees of a provincial council immediately after the bishops and before the abbots. He may have been archdeacon of Rochester, for his name heads Rawlinson's list, but I know of no proof that he was so, beyond his connection with Longfield. The fact that he is described as a " priest " is worthy of notice. Herewyse, in the time of Ernulf, 1 115 — 1 125. Robert Pullen, about 1140. Paris, nephew of Pullen, 1 144. He had some houses in London, near the Thames, which in 1 196 Osbert de Longchamp and Aveline his wife, perhaps heiress of the De Alingtons, released to the convent of Boxley. Roger of Weseham, about 1238, also dean of Lincoln ; bishop of Lichfield 1245; died 1257. "A man of graceful manners and learning" (Matt. Paris). William of Trippolaw, 1245. In 1259 the archdeacon of Rochester went to Rome on behalf of Richard, king of the Romans. William of St. Martin, 1267-74. In I273 Andrew, the ex-prior, tried to enter Winchester by force. William went to Winchester as if he were a judge in the matter. Refusing to answer seven articles exhibited against him by Roger Mortimer, the justice itinerant, he was taken to the castle and there confined for many days as a disturber of the peace and despiser of the king's authority. At the intercession of bishops and many clergy he was liberated by royal warrant, and soon after died. John of St. Dionysius in 1280. Chaplain to the king and Master of the Rolls. Roger Lovel, 1307. William Read, provost of Wingham, bishop of Chi- chester, 1 369. H e built " a fair library " at M erton College, Oxford, one of the earliest and perhaps now the most genuine ancient library in the kingdom, " furnishing it with books and astronomical tables of his own making, which they say are still to be seen therein with his lively picture 328 ROCHESTER inserted." He also built Amberley Castle in Sussex. Died 1395. (Fuller's Worthies) Roger Denford in 1394. Richard Brown, alias Cordon, died archdeacon in 1452. Roger Rotheram in 1472. Henry Sharpe, LL.D., in i486. He had been rector of Merstham, Surrey. Henry Edyall in 1494. Nicholas Metcalfe, D.D., chaplain to Bishop Fisher, archdeacon in or before 1515, canon of Lincoln, master of St. John's College, Cambridge, 1518-37. In 1529 he dis- sented in Convocation from the opinion expressed as to the king's divorce. Preached against Latimer. A good man of business and patron of learning. Buried at Wood- ham Ferrers, Essex. Maurice Gryffrth, 1537. Bishop of Rochester 1554. John Kennall, LL.D., 1555, resigned 1559, and became archdeacon of Oxford and canon of Christ Church. John Bridgewater, 1560. Chaplain to Leicester, then chancellor of Oxford, and by his influence, though statutably ineligible, intruded into the rectorship of Lincoln College, which under him, who was doubtless a papist in disguise, became a Romish seminary. In 1574 he was forced to resign all his preferments, including a canonry at Wells, and retired to Douay, where, latin- izing his name into Aquapontanus, he became famous as a theologian. His co-religionists still visit Lincoln in the hope of seeing his portrait or handwriting. John Calverley, 1571. Chancellor of Rochester 1553, vicar of Darenth 1557-61, rector of Stone 1559-76, rector of Cliffe 1572-6, canon of Rochester 1576, rector of Beckenham 1561-76, where he was buried July 4, 1575. Ralph Pickover, D.D., 1576. Sub-almoner to the queen, canon of Christ Church, Oxford, 1580 ; archdeacon of Sarum 1 593. Thomas Staller, D.D., 1593. Rector of All-hallows, Lombard Street. In 1595 he was much offended with the dean and chapter for having erected near his stall a pew for the wife of Peter Buck. With the vicar-general he therefore came to the east end of the choir, and by his archidiaconal authority, backed by a special mandate from the Archbishop of Canterbury, the bishops of London and Rochester, and other ecclesiastical commissioners, ARCHDEACONS OF ROCHESTER 329 under the great seal, required the removal of the seat. The requisition and warrant were in Latin, but the dean, Dr. Blague, asserting in plain English that he had a discharge of the archbishop from the said warrant, Dr. Staller was obliged to suspend his purpose for the present. The archdeacon's stall was near the throne, that which he now occupies belongs to him as canon. Thomas Sanderson, D.D., 1606. Richard Tillesley, D.D., 1614. Chaplain to James I. and Bishop Buckeridge, whose niece he married. Rector of Cuxton 1614, of Stone 1615, canon 161 5. He wrote Animadversions on Seidell's History of Tithes, died 1624, and was buried in the cathedral. Elizeus Burgess, D.D., April 21, 1624. Rector of Cuxton 1624-8, vicar of St. Nicholas, Rochester, 1628-30, vicar of Canewdon, Essex, 1628, canon 1639, as were all his succes- sors, rector of Southfleet 1628-52, prebendary of Ely 1630-52. Deprived by the Parliamentarians. Died 1652, and was probably buried at Southfleet. John Lee, D.D., 1660. Grandson of Bishop Warner, whose name he took. Rector of Milton, next Gravesend, 1642-63 ; rector of Southfleet 1652 and 1660-79, having probably been deprived on the first occasion ; rector of Bishopsbourne 1662-79. Died June 12, 1679, aged 74; buried in the cathedral. Thomas Plume, D.D., 1679. Born at Maldon, Essex ; of Christ's College, Cambridge; Sept. 22, 1658, vicar of East Greenwich on the nomination of Richard, the Lord Protector. At the Restoration he subscribed the declar- ation, July 28, 1662. Died Nov. 20, 1704, aged 74 ; buried at Longfield. He founded the Plumian professorship at Cambridge, and a school and library at Maldon, as well as a Wednesday lecture at Maldon and at Dartford and Gravesend alternately. He bequeathed Stone Castle and farm to trustees for the augmentation of poor livings in the diocese of Rochester. Thomas Sprat, M.A., 1704. Son of Bishop Sprat. Vicar of Boxley 1705-20, rector of Stone 1707-20, canon of Win- chester 1712-20, canon of Westminster 1713-20. Buried in the abbey May 15, 1720, aged 41. Hon. Henry Brydges, D.D., 1720. Second son of James eighth lord Chandos, rector of Amersham, Bucks, 1721-8 ; prebendary of St. Paul's 1722. Died at Bath, May 9, 1728, aged 53 ; buried at Whitchurch, Middlesex. 550 ROCHESTER William Bradford, M.A., 1728. Son of Bishop Bradford ; vicar of Newcastle-on-Tyne 1721. Died July 1 5, 1728, aged 31 ; buried in Westminster Abbey. John Denne, D.D., F.S.A., 1728. Born at Littlebourne, educated at Sandwich and Canterbury. Fellow and tutor of C.C.C., Cambridge. Son-in-law to Bishop Brad- ford ; vicar of St. Leonard's, Shoreditch, 1723-67; vicar of St. Margaret's, Rochester, 1729-31 ; rector of Lambeth 1731-67 ; Boyle lecturer 1725-8 ; prolocutor in Convoca- tion. Died Aug. 5, 1767, aged 74; buried in the cathedral. John Law, D.D., 1767. Chaplain to the Earl of Shel- burne ; fellow of Emmanuel College, Cambridge ; vicar of Shorne 1770-6; rector of West Mill, Herts, 1771— 1827; rector of Much Easton, Essex, 1776 — 1827 ; perpetual curate of Chatham 1784— 1827. Buried in the cathedral Feb. 12, 1827, aged 87. Walker King, M. A., 1 827. Son of Bishop King ; vicar of Frindsbury 1822-5 > perpetual curate of Bromley 1824-7 ; rector of Stone 1822-59. Died at Stone, March 13, 1859. Anthony Grant, D.C.L., i860. Fellow of New College, Oxford ; vicar of Romford 1838-62 ; Bampton lecturer 1843 ; archdeacon of St. Albans 1846-84 ; vicar of Ayles- ford 1862-78. Died 1884. Dr. Grant discharged the duties of archdeacon of Rochester until 1882, and retained the canonry until his death. The archdeaconry had been suppressed by the Act 6 and 7 William IV. c. 77, but was revived by the London Diocese Act and united to the archdeaconry of St. Albans, from which it was separ- ated in 1882. Samuel Cheetham, D.D., F.S.A., 1882. Fellow and assistant-tutor of Christ's College, Cambridge ; vice- principal of the Theological College, Chichester, 1 861-3 ; professor of pastoral theology, King's College, London, 1863 ; chaplain of Dulwich 1866 ; archdeacon of South- wark 1879 ; Hulsean Lecturer 1896. By an Order in Council dated April 18, 1878, the portion of Surrey transferred to the diocese of Rochester was formed into an archdeaconry of Southwark. 331 ARCHDEACONS OF SOUTHWARK. Edmund Henry Fisher, M.A., 1878. Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge ; Vicar of St. Mark's, Kennington ; Hon. Canon of Winchester. Samuel Cheetham, D.D., 1879. John Richardson, D.D., 1882. Trinity College, Dublin. Vicar of Camden Church, Camberwell, 1874; Hon. Canon of Rochester 1880. By an Order in Council dated August 14, 1879, the arch- deaconry of Southwark was divided, and the new arch- deaconry of Kingston-upon-Thames was constituted. ARCHDEACON OF KINGSTON-UPON-THAMES. Charles Burney, M.A., 1879. Magdalen College, Oxford. Vicar of St. Mark's, Surbiton, 1879; Hon. Canon of Rochester 1857. PRIORS OF ROCHESTER. Ordovinus, before 1089 — 1096. Arnulfus. Radulfus. Ordovinus re-elected. Letardus. Brianus occurs in 1 145 ; he procured from Pope Euge- nius a confirmation of the lands belonging to this church. Reginaldus is mentioned in 11 54, and died in the same year. Arnulfus II. William of Borstal. Sylvester occurs in 1178; he built the refectory, dormitory, and three east windows of the chapter-house. Richard, elected prior of Burton Abbey, 11 82, died Alfred, made Abbot of Abingdon by Henry II. ROCHESTER Osborn of Shepey, previously sacrist. Radulfus de Ros, first sacrist, then prior. While sacrist he built two chambers for the use of the priors, and other buildings, and leaded part of the great church. Helias leaded the rest of the church and the cloister near the dormitory. William. Richard of Darenth, 1225. William of Hoo, sacrist, built the choir from the offer- ings at St. William's shrine, elected prior 1239. Alexander de Glanvil, 1 242. Simon of Clyve, 1252. John of Rainham, 1262, deprived 1283, re-elected 1292. Thomas of Woldham, 1283, bishop of Rochester Thomas de Schulford, alias Shelford, 1294. John of Greenstreet, 1301. Hamo of Hythe, 13 14, bishop of Rochester 1319. John of Westerham, 1320. John of Speldhurst, cellarer of the monastery, 1321. John of Shepey, 1333, bishop of Rochester 1352. Robert of Southfleet, 1352. John of Hartlip or Hartley, 1361. John of Shepey, previously sub-prior, 13S0. William Tonbridge, 1419. John Cardone occurs in 1445. Richard Peckam. William Wode in 1468. Thomas Bourne in 1479. William Bishop occurs in 1496. William Frysell, 1509. Celebrated by Dr. Robert Wakefield, chaplain to Henry VIII. and Greek lecturer at Cambridge, as a distinguished judge and encourager of critical literature. In a window of the chancel of Had- enham Church, Bucks, was an inscription (in Latin), " Pray for the soul of William Fresell, prior of Rochester, who caused this window to be made, A.D. 1 521." Laurence Dan or Mereworth, 1532. Walter Phillips after Dec. 1, 1536. ROCHESTER DEANS. Walter Phillips, 1543, late prior of Rochester. Edmund Freake, 1570. Bishop of Rochester 1572, Worcester 1584. Thomas Willoughby, 1574. In 1553 he was deprived under Mary of his canonry at Canterbury and other preferments. John Coldwell, M.D., 1585, bishop of Salisbury 1 591, "was chiefly remarkable for three things : (1) as having been a physician before he became a bishop ; (2) as having been the first married bishop that ever filled the see of Sarum ; (3) as having alienated Sherborne Castle from the see to Sir Walter Raleigh." His wife was a Toke of Godinton. There is a tablet to her memory on the exterior of the east wall of Great Chart Church. Thomas Blague, 1591. Master of Clare Hall, Cam- bridge. Richard Milbourne, M.A., 161 1. Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. Bishop of St. David's 161 5, of Carlisle 162 1. Robert Scott, 1615. Master of Clare Hall, Cambridge. Godfrey Goodman, 1620. Master of Clare Hall. Bishop of Gloucester 1624. In 1640 he was suspended by Arch- bishop Laud for refusing to subscribe the Canons, and was committed to the Gate House, "where he got by his restraint what he could never have got by his liberty, namely, of one reputed Popish to become for a short time popular" (Fuller). He subsequently subscribed. He probably died a Romanist. A copy of his Fall of Man, dedicated to Anne, queen of James I., whose chaplain he was, is in the Library of Rochester Cathedral. Walter Balcanquhall, 1624, afterwards Dean of Durham. A member of the Synod of Dort. John Richardson. Henry King, canon of Christ Church, Oxford. Bishop of Chichester 1641. A poet of some reputation. Thomas Turner, 1641. Dean of Canterbury 1643. Benjamin Lancy, 1660 (July). Bishop of Peterborough 1660, Lincoln 1663, Ely 1667. One of Charles I.'s chaplains, who attended him at the Treaty of Uxbridge, and afterwards shared the exile of Charles II. 334 ROCHESTER Nathaniel Hardy, 1660 (Dec). " By will a good bene- factor to the members of this cathedral and their suc- cessors as well as to the parishes of this city'' (Hasted). Peter Mews, 1670. Bishop of Bath and Wells 1672, Winchester 1684. Had fought in the royal army during the civil war, and accompanied Charles II. to Flanders. Thomas Lamplugh, 1672. Bishop of Exeter 1674, Archbishop of York 1688. John Castilion, 1676. Simon Lowth, 1688; Henry Ullock, 1689. Samuel Pratt, 1706. Nicholas Clegett, 1723. Bishop of St. David's 1731, Exeter 1742. Thomas Herring, 1731. Bishop of Bangor 1737, Arch- bishop of York 1743, Canterbury 1747. William Barnard, 1743. Bishop of Raphoe 1744, Deny 1747- John Newcome, 1744. Master of St. John's College, Cambridge, and Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity. William Markham, 1765. " He was a great benefactor to the deanery house, the two wings of which were erected by him, but were not finished before his quitting this preferment for the deanery of Christ Church, Oxford (Hasted). Bishop of Chester 177 1, Archbishop of York J777- Benjamin Newcome, 1767. Died July 22, 1775, a»ed 58; buried in the cathedral. Thomas Thurlow, 1775. Master of the Temple. Bishop of Lincoln 1779, Durham 1787. Brother to Lord Chancellor Thurlow. Richard Cust, 1779. Dean and Canon of Lincoln 1781, Brother to Speaker Cust. Thomas Dumpier, 1782. Bishop of Rochester 1802, Ely 1809. Samuel Goodenough, 1802. Bishop of Carlisle 1808. William Beaumont Busby, 1808. Robert Stevens, 1820. The excellent mannerun which Dr. Stevens read the service and delivered his sermons attracted the notice of Speaker Abbot, afterwards Lord Colchester, who appointed him Chaplain to the House of Commons. It is due to him, and to the canons of the day, to record that practically they saved the fabric of the cathedral from destruction. It was their misfortune, not DEANS OF ROCHESTER 335 their fault, that the principles of Gothic architecture were so imperfectly understood at the time as to render their work unsatisfactory to a better instructed generation. Thomas Dale, 1870, held the office but three months. He had a high reputation as a parochial clergyman in London, and was a very effective preacher. Robert Scott, 1870. With Dr. Liddell, afterwards Dean of Christ Church, he published the well-known Greek Lexicon. Master of Balliol College, Oxford, 1854-70. Under his auspices, and mainly by his exertions, a restoration of the choir and eastern transepts of the cathedral was carried out between 1870 and 1876. The sum expended exceeded ,£20,000, including ,£10,000 from the chapter, ,£4000 from the late Canon and Mrs. Griffith, and £2400 contributed by Bishop Claughton and members of the Cathedral body. Samuel Reynolds Hole, 1888. Dean Hole has success- fully continued the work inaugurated by his predecessor, and brought to a happy termination the restoration of the beautiful West Front, at a cost of upwards of £7000. He has also accomplished what probably no other man of his age and position would have attempted — the raising by means of a lecturing tour in the United States a sum of .£500, which has been applied to the provision of vestries for the clergy and choir, and the further im- provement of the crypt. 336 INDEX Addincton, 56 Aldington, 241 Alien I'riories, 176 Allen, E., 265 Architecture— Saxon, 26, 56; Nor- man, 56 ; Early English, 106, 116, 150 ; Decorated, 203 ; Per- pendicular, 235 Ash, 178, 220-1 Ashford, 255-8-9, 307 Ashurst, 203 Aylesford, 13, 56, 71, 86, 90, 148, 330 Bapchild, 34 Harming, 56, 232 Barton, Elizabeth, 240 Bearsted, 33 Bermondsey, 115, 176 Bexley, 305 Bicknor, 56 Birling, 30, 176, 235, 285 Birtrick, 29-31, 326 Blackheath, 192, 229, 305, 322 Bletchingley, 151, 308 Boley Hill, 17, 26-7 Borstal, 29, 159-60, 185 Boxley, 66-9, 71, 86, 171, 187, 246-8, 327-9 Brasted, 150 Bredhurst, 290 Bromley, 29, 31, 80, 104, 115, 145, 166, 185, 224, 234-7, 273-4-7. 280-4, 291-7, 300-3-S- 8-9. 315. 33° Burnam, 88, 143-4, 178 Cade's Insurrection, 228 Canterbury, 8, 9, 10, 18, 19, 20-2- 3-5-9, 30-8, 41-4-7. 55. 60-1-2-4- 5, 73-4-6-7-8-9, 81-2-6, 92, 101- 2-3-4-5-8-9-io, 117-18-19, 122-8, 130-1-6, 145-7, 158, 187-8-9, 192-4, 200, 221-4, 241-9, 255-6, 266, 280-3, 293. 3!3. 327. 33° Archbishops of — Augustine, 8, 9, 10, 18 Laurentius, 18 Mellitus, 8, 9 Justus, 19 Honorius, 20 Deusdedit, 22 Theodore, 22-4, 33 Birhtvvald, 33 Cuthbert, 35 Jaenberht, 40 Wilfred, 40 Odo, 31 Alphege, 25 Lanfranc, 42-7-8-9, 52-3, 61 Anselm, 47, 54-5, 61 Ralph, 60 William de Corbeuil, 51, 65 Theobald, 73, 92 Becket, 74, in, 202-3, 326 Richard, 75-7 Baldwin, 75-7-8, 81-2-4 Hubert Walter, 82-7, 92 Stephen Langton, 96-7-8-9, 101-3, 147 Richard Grant, 103 Edmund Rich, 104-14 Boniface, 108-11 Kilwardby, 123-5 Peckham, 109-10, 127-9, x32- 3-8, 149 Reynolds, 140, 153-4-S-9, 170 INDEX 331 Archbishops of (continued) Meopham, 163-4-5 Bradwardine, 198 Islip, 83, 186 Whittlesey, 188 Courtenay, 199 Arundel, '195-7, 205-6-7-8 Chicheley, 210 Kemp, 216, 229 Bourchier, 234 Cranmer, 245, 250-3-6-7, 265 Pole, 265 Parker, 257, 267, 273 Grindal, 272 Whitgift, 274 Abbot, 280 Laud, 276-7-8-9, 283-8, 291, 333 Sancroft, 293-6 Tillotson, 303 Potter, 306 Herring, 334 Benson, 322 Temple, 323 Archdeacons of, 65, 74, 99, 101-4-5. 327 Capel, 178, 286 Chaldon, 151, 202 Chalk, 146 Chantries, 195 Charing, 187-8 Chartham, 138-9 Chart, Magna, 333 Chevening, 202 Chipstead, 151 Chislehurst, 85, 224, 289 Church Plate, 268 Cliffe at Hoo, 37-41, 82, 150, 188- 9, 190, 203, 250, 266-8, 314, 328 Clovesho, 35-7-9, 41 Cobham, 32, 123, 131, 159, 164-8, 176, 185, 193, 203-10, 224 Cooling, 5, 204-5-6-10, 231, 259 Crayford, 20, 180 Cray, Foot's, 235 Cray, St. Mary's, 289 Cray, St. Paul's, 20, 146, 150, 224, 251 Crowhurst, 151 Cudham, 192 Cuxton, 29, 115, 276, 284, 329 Danes, 24-5-6-7-8 Darenth, 26, 82-7, 102, 150, 328, 332 Dartford, 56, 75, 85, 114, 162, 179, 185-6, 192, 220, 248, 263, 288, 302, 329 Denton, 29, 44-9, 86-7 Deptford, 200, 298, 303-5 Detling, 56, 203 Dissolution of Monasteries, 238, 246 Ditton, 5, 6, (Kent) 56, 251 Eltham, 107, 176, 196, 285 Erasmus, 200, 240-3-4-7 Exennium, The, 86-9, 138 Eynesford, 150 Farleigh, East and West, 56 Farningham, 150, 285 Fawkham, 29, 30, 44, 146 Freckenham, 44, 80, 107, 115, 164 Frindsbury, 14, 29, 49, 66, 85-6-7, 114, 134-8, 185-6, 210, 330 Gatton, 202 Gillingham, 122 Godstone, 151 Grain, Isle of, 5, 82 Gravesend, 172, 192, 238, 258, 260, 303-6, 329 Greenwich, 175-6, 200, 265, 307, Hadenham, 49, 51, 62, 73, 86-7, 332 Hadlow, 178 Hailing, 29, 99, 108, 115, 145-6, 162-4-7-9, 171. 185, 228, 231 Halstow, High, 205, 251 Hampton Court Conference, 274 Hartlip, no, 139, 190-1 Hayes, 150 Hermit, Vow of, 244 Heme, 252 Higham, 38, 69, 167-9, 203, 238, 273 Homilies, Book of, 253, 272 Hoo, 31-2-8-9, 40, 139, 167-9, 205, 221, 289 Horsmonden, 286 Horton Kirby, 193, 296 Hythe, 162 338 INDEX Ightham, 203 Interdict, The, 92 Isleham, 114, 146, 168, 185 Kemsing, 146, 202, 217 Kennington, 206, 322-3, 331 Kings : /Ethelbyrht, 8, 9, 10, 14, 18 ^Ethelbyrht II., 14 .<Eadbald, 20 Earconberht, 22 Ethelred II., 24 Wihtred, 33-4 /Ethelbald, 40 , Offa, 40 Kenulf, 41 Edward the Confessor, 43 William I., 43, 53, 181 William II., 51-3-4, 73, 81 Henry I. , 54, 60-5-6, 70, 22= Stephen, 68-9 Henry II., 67, 75 Richard I., 82-3-4, 103 John, 84, 92-6-9, 100-1 Henry III., 103, 122, 177 Edward I., 118, 122 Edward II., 156, 167, 170-2 Edward III., 161, 173-4-8, 187 Richard II., 176-9, 191, 209 Henry IV., 199, 205-9 Henry V., 176, 205-6-7 Henry VI., 217-19, 221-9 Edward IV., 180, 230 Henry VII., 233-6, 240, 265 Henry VIII., 83, 180, 237, 240-1-2-3-6-8, 250-5, 279, 314 Edward VI., 249, 252-3-4-5- 6-7, 263 Mary (Queen), 204, 250-6-8, 260-1-2-5-7 Elizabeth (Queen), 80, 250, 265-6, 271-2-3 fc.me,S L' T275-6-7, 329. 333 Charles I., 278-9, 281-2-3, 293. 3io. 333 Charles II., 293, 333 James II., 293-4-5-7-8 William III., 298 Anne (Queen), 302-4 George I., 302 Kings [continued) George II., 304 George III., 305 Kingsdown, 86-9, 217, 225, 251 Kingston, 6, 260 Knights Hospitallers, 140-3, 177 Knights Templars, 177 Knox, John, 257 Lamberhurst, 251, 298 Lambeth, 5, 49, 53, 73-7, 80-1- r l?i5, I25, l85'33° Leeds (Kent), 172, 207 Leigh, 181-2 Lesnes, 167-8, 171, 180-1 Lewisham, 115, 168, 175-6, 303-5 Leyborne, 56, 150, 167 Limpsfield, 151 Longfield, 29, 30, 326-9 Lullingstone, 210 Maidstone, 81, 101, 129, 192, 246-9, 258, 262 Mailing, 29, 55-8, 150, 167-9, 181-5, 216, 220, 233, 258, 278 Marian Persecution, 263-4 Mendicant Friars, 147, 234 Meopham, 29, 30 Mereworth, 217-19, 258 Merstham, 151, 202, 328 Merston, 226 More, Sir Thomas, 198, 231 241-3 Nettlestead, 232 Non-jurors, 296 Norton, 86, 159, 276 Nuffield, 15 1 Odo, 1 of Baieux, 42-3-4-5, Oldcastle, Sir J., 204-5-6-7-8-9-10 Otford, 78, 138, 187, 202 Paddlesworth, 56 Peckham, East, 285-9 Peckham, West, 177 Pembury, 195, 203, 285 Penenden Heath, 42-3-5, 326 Petersham, 268 Pilgrimages, 116-17-1 Plumstead, 131, 277 Recusants, 284 -19, 199 tNDfcX 339 Reigate, 151, 202 Rochester : Archdeacons of, 69, 70-1-2-3, 91, 144, 181, 262-7, 278, 302, 326-7-8-9, 330 Bishoprick — Foundation of, 8, 9. 14. 15 Bishops of— as on page 340 Bridge, 120-4 Castle, 13, 17, 51-2-4, 68, 99, 100- 1, 192 Cathedral, 14, 15, 16, 21-2-3- 4-7-8, 46-8-9, 50, 65, 84, 101- 2-6, 1.16-18, 120-4-8, 145, 160-1-3-6, 180-3-4, 190, 203, 211-12-13-14- 15-18, 220-4-7, 232-5-8, 268-9, 272-3-8-9, 281-3- 4, 291-4-7, 304, 315, 320- IJerivation ot, 11, 12, 13 Palace, 17, 49, 80-3, 210, 222-3-4, 244, 255, 264 Priors of, 82, 102-6, 138-9, 140-5, 159, 164-7, l83> 220, 331-2 Priory, 48-9, 53, 61-2-7, 72- 5-7-9, 82-4-5-6-7-8-9, 91-9, IO4-5, II2, 126, I3I-2-3-4 5-6-8, 153-4-8. 160-5-6-7, 171-2-5-8, 180, 194, 211- 12-14-15, 233, 247-8-9 Priory, Library of, 57, 93-4- 5. 198 St. Margarets, 71, 86, 90, 146, 223, 232-3, 330 St. Nicholas, 71, 86, 211- 12-13-14, 224, 237, 329 Solomon of, 132-6-7 Rolvenden, 193 St. Bartholomew's Hospital, 55, 146, 273 St. William, 106, 1 14-16-17-18-19, 120-8, 146, 175, 214, 332 Seal, 194 Sevenoaks, 262, 285-7, 3°6 Shoreham, 7, 306 Shorne, 176, 196, 210, 224, 330 Sittingbourne, 61, 103, 110, 200 Snodland, 29, 31, 137, 196, 231, 238 Southfleet, 29, 49, 71, 85-6-7, 179, 291, 329 Southwark, 5, 151, 184, 200-3, 235, 260-3, 3°3> 321-2-3, 330-1 Speldhurst, 183, 226-7, 291 Stoke, 29, 49, 85-6-7, 138 Stone, 29, 80, 115-16-17, 129, 150, 164-7, 171-9. 185, 203, 288, 328- 9. 33° Strood, 83-6-9, 90, 134-6, 146, 167, 177, 259, 264 Sutton at Hone, 88, 141, 177 Swanscombe, 26 Sydenham, 298 Tatsfield, 202 Texius Roffensis described, 62-3-4 Teynham, 78, 92 Titsey, 202, 268 Tonbridge, 43, 87, 115, 172-8, 181-2, 225, 258, 263, 289, 306 Trottescliffe, 29, 56,80, 115, 160- 2-4-7-9, 185, 195, 221, 291 Vicarages, origin of, ! 140 Wad ringbury, 30, 251 Wesley anism, 305, 310 Westerham, 159, 237, 332 Wilmington, 88-9, 141, 179, 217 Wouldham, 15, 26-9, 49, 86-7, 196, 274, 296 Wrotham, \^\, 202, 258 Wyatt's Rebellion, 258 Wyclif, 198-9 Wye, 215-16 Yakling, 285 340 BISHOPS Justus, 9, 18, 19 Romanus, 19 Paulinus, 19 Ithamar, 21 Damian, 22 Putta, 22 Quichelm, 23 Gebmund, 23, 33 Tobias, 23, 34 Aldulf, 40 Dunno, 35 Weremund, 17 Swithulf, 24 Alfstane, 24 Godwyn II., 24 Godwyn III., 25 Siward, 25, 42 Arnost, 42 Gundulf, 46, 222 Ralph, 60 Ernulf, 60 John of Canterbury, 65 John of Seez, 69 Ascelinus, 71 Walter, 74 Waleran, 75 Gilbert de Glanville, 77 Benedict de Sansetun, 96 Henry de Sandford, 101 Richard of Wendover, 104 Laurence of St. Martin, 10S Walter of Merton, 121 John of Bradfield, 125 Thomas de Inglethorpe, 128 Thomas of Woldhani, 137 Hamo of Hythe, 153 John of Shepey. 83, 181 William Whittlesey, 186 Thomas Trilleck, 190 Thomas of Brinton, 191 William of Bottlesham, 194 John of Bottlesham, 195 Vong, 209 Kemp, 215 Langdon, 216 Brown, 217 Wellys, 218 Lowe, 221 Scott or Rotheram, 230 Alcock, 230 Russell, 231 Audley, 232 Savage, 233 l itzjames, 233 Fisher, 236 Hilsey, 245 Heath, 249 Hoi beach, 250 Ridley, 251 Ponet, 255, 261 Scory, 256 Gryffith, 262 Geste, 266 Freake, 270 Piers, 272 Yonge, 273 Barlow, 274 Neile, 275 Buckeridge, 276 Curie, 277 Bowie, 277 Warner, 280 Dolben, 291 Turner, 293 Sprat, 295 Atterbury, 301 Bradford, 303 Wilcocks, 304 Pearce, 306 Thomas, 308 Horsley, 309 Dampier, 312 King, 313 Percy, 313 {, Murray, 313 \\ igram, 319 Claughton, 320 Thorold, 5, 6, 321 Davidson, 6, 322 Talbot, 322 [/?. Clay &> Sons, Ltd., London <S~ Bungay. PUBLICATIONS OF TMS Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge. £f?urcfy MstoxQ (Laxtoons. From Pictures drawn by W. J. Morgan. Each picture illustrates an important event in the History of the Church of England. The Cartoons are bold and effectively coloured. Size, 45 in. by 35 in. No. 1. Gregory and the English Slaves, A D. 589. 2. St. Augustine and King Ethelbert, AD. 597. 3. Manumission of Slaves by an English Bishop. 4. The Martyrdom of St. Alban. 5. St. Columba at Oronsay, A.D. 563. 6. St. Aidan preaching to the Northumbrians. 7. The Venerable Bede translating St. John's Gospel, A.D. 735. 8. Stonehenge. 9. Iona at the Present Day. Founded A.D. 565. 10. Murder of Monks by the Danes, Crowland Abbey, about 870 A.D. 11. The Martyrdom of St. Edmund, A.D. 870. 12. St. Dunstan reproving King Edwy, A.D. 955. 13. Norman Thanksgiving after the Battle of Hastings, A.D. 1066. 14. The Murder of Thomas A'Beckett, A.D. 1170. 15. The Crusaders starting for the East. 16. Archbishop Langton producing before the Barons the Charter of Henry I., A.D. 1213. 17. Preaching at St. Paul's Cross, A.D. 1547. 18. The Seven Bishops sent to the Tower, A.D. 1688 19. The Consecration of Matthew Parker as Arch- bishop of Canterbury, Dec. 17th, 1559. Is. 4d. each on thick paper. | 3s. mounted and varnished. 2s. mounted on canvas. j 4s. ditto ditto, on rgllrr Publications of the Society for WORKS ON CHURCH HISTORY, dc. A Handy Book of the Church of England. By the Rev. E. L. Cutts. New edition. Crown 8vo. Cloth boards. 5s. [A work which aims at meeting inquiries upon the main points of the Church's History and present position. It covers a large area, and ought to be in the hands of all Church Workers as well as in those of General Readers.] Ancient British Church, A Popular Account of the. With special reference to the Church in Wales. By the Rev. E. J. NEWEU, M.A. With Map. Fcap. 8vo. Cloth boards. 2s. 6d. [A lucid book on a department of history hitherto much neglected.] A Story of the Church of England. By Mrs. C. D. Francis. Tost 8vo. Illustrated. Cloth boards. Is. 61L [A very simple narrative history of the English Church.] Augustine and his Companions. By the Right Rev. G. F. Browne, D.D. Post 8vo. Cloth boards. 2s. [This book is meant to follow " The Christian Church in these Islands before the coming of Augustine," and to show how much the Church of England owes to St. Augustine and Tope Gregory.] By-Paths of English Church History. Home Missions in the Early Mediaeval Period. By the Rev. Charles Hole, B.A. Post 8vo. Cloth boards, is. 6d. [Gives a clear view of some of the roots of English Christianity.] Celtic Church in Scotland, The. Being an Introduction to the History of the Christian Church in Scotland down to the death of St. Margaret. By the Right Rev. John DowdeN, D.D., Bishop of Edinburgh. Fcap. 8vo. Buckram boards. 3s. 6d. [The writer brings a wide knowledge to bear upon his subject, and deals with it in a bright and interesting manner : for General Readers.] Church in England and its Endowments, A Brief Sketch of the History of the. With a List of the Archbishops, tracing their succession from the present time up to the Apostles, and through them to Christ. By the Rev. George Miller. Post Svo. Paper cover. 4d. [A clear and simple statement of the history of Church endowments. For General Readers.] Church History in England. By the Rev. A. Martineau. From the Earliest Times to the Period of the Reformation. 121110. Cloth boards. 3s. [For reference and general use.] Church History (A Chapter of English) : being the Minutes of the S.P.C.K. (or the years 1 698- 1 703, togetherwith Abstracts of Corre- spondents' Letters during part of the same period. Edited by the Rev. Edmund McClure, M.A. Demy Svo. Cloth boards. 5s. Promoting Christian Knowledge, 3 WORKS ON CHURCH HISTORY, tic. —Continued. Church History, Illustrated Notes on English. By the Rev. C. A. Lane. Vol. I. — From the Earliest Times to the Dawn of the Reformation. Vol. II. — lis Reformation and Modern Work. Crown 8vo. Cloth, is. each. [Deals with the chief events during the peiiod. The illustrations, amounting to over 100 in each Volume, add to its popular character.] Church History in Queen Victoria's Reign. By the Rev. Montague Fowler, M. A. Post Svo. Cloth boards. 3s. [ This work treats in a sober and impartial manner the important ecclesiastical move- ments of the last fifty years and more, and ought to be especially interesting to the young.] Church History, Sketches of. From the First Century to the Refor- mation. By the late Rev. Canon Rohertson, M.A. Post 8vo. Cloth boards. 2s. [A simple and attractive account of the leading events in Church History, from A.D. 33 to the Reformation: for general readeis ; suitable also for use in Sunday and day schools.] Church History in Scotland, Sketches of. By the late Rev. Julius Lloyd. Post 8vo. Cloth boards, is. 6d. [An account of Church affairs in Sc&tland from St. Columba's Mission to Iona until the present time.] Church History, Turning Points of English. By the Rev. E. L. Cutis, D.D. A new and revised edition. Crown 8vo. Cloth boards. 3s. 6d. [The leading events in the Church of England from the earliest period of British history to the present day, showing the Church questions that have arisen, and yet remain as our inheritance : for Churchmen in general.] Church History, Turning Points of General. By the Rev. E. L. CUTTS, D.D. Crown Svo. Cloth boards. 4s. [The leading events in General Church History from the time of the Apostles to the present day ; useful for a text-book in schools, &c, and for general readers.] Churchman's Life of Wesley (The). By R. Denny Urlin, Esq. Crown 8vo. Cloth boards. 3s. 6d. Conversion of the Heptarchy (The). By the Right Rev. G. F. Browne, D.D. Post 8vo. Cloth boards. 3s. [this is a continuation of the Bishop of Stepney's Monographs on the Conversion of England. It is full of interesting particulars obtained from research at first hand.] Dictionary (A), of the Church of England. By the Rev. E. L. Cutts, D.D. With numerous Woodcuts. Crown Svo. Cloth boards. 5s. [A manual for the use of clergymen and schools.] 4 Publications of the Society for WORKS ON CHURCH HISTORY, dc- Continued. Grosseteste, Robert, Bishop of Lincoln, The Life and Times of. By the late Ven. Archdeacon Perry. Post 8vo. Cloth boards. 2S. 6d. ["Grosseteste chiefly as a reformer in a corrupt period of the Church, and his quarrel with the Pope " : for general reading.] History of the English Church, in Short Biographical Sketches. By the late Rev. Julius Lloyd. Post 8vo. Cloth boards, is. 6d. [Leads the reader, by a series of selected lives, to a general idea of the Church History of England.] John "Wicliff, His Life, Times, and Teaching. By the Rev. A. R. Pennington, M.A. Fcap. 8vo. Cloth boards. 3s. [This work embraces the result of recent researches : for general reading.] Lectures on the Historical and Dogmatical Position of the Church of England. By the Rev. W. Baker, D.D. Post 8vo. Cloth boards, is. 6d. [Supplies in short compass a clear account of the historical position of the Church of England : for General Readers.] Lassons from Early English Church History. By the Right Rev. G. F. Browne, D.D. Post 8vo. Cloth boards, is. 6d. [These lectures are true lessons, and have much to teach the ordinary Churchman.] The Christian Church in these Islands before the Coming of Augustine. By the Right Rev. G. F. Browne, D.D. Post 8vo. Cloth boards, is. 6d. [A lucid and scholarly account of this obscure period of English Church History : for General Readers.] The Church of England: its Planting, its Settlement, its Reformation, and its Renewed Life. Four addresses by the late Rev. E. Ven- ABLES, M.A. Post 8vo. Cloth boards, is. [A useful summary.] The Story in Outline of the Church of England. By the Rev. Canon Garnier, M.A. Sm. post 8vo. Paper covers. 3d. [Gives a short and simple historical account of the Church of England.] The Title Deeds of the Church of England : an Historic Vindication of her Position and Claims. By the Rev. Canon Garnier. Post 8vo. Cloth boards. 3s. 6d. [The sub-title explains the aim 01 this book, which is written in a lucid and interesting manner.] Promoting Christian Knoivledge. 5 STORIES FOUNDED ON CHURCH HISTORY. Attila and hig Conquerors. A Story of the Days of St. Patrick and St. Leo the Great. By the late Mrs. Rundle Charles. Crown 8vo. Cloth boards. 3s. 6d. Champions of the Right. By the Rev. E. Gilliat, M.A. Crown 8vo. Cloth boards. 2s. [A series of selected Biographies, illustrating English History.] Conquering and to Conquer. A Story of Rome in the Days of St. Jerome. By the late Mrs. Rundle Cicari.es, author of "The Schonberg-Cotta Family." Crown 8vo. Cloth boards. 2s. 6d. [Presents a fair Picture of Society in Jerome's tinu : for General Readers.] Gaudentius. A Story of the Colosseum. By the Rev. G. S. Davies. Crown 8vo. Cloth boards. 2s. 6d. [A Picture of Roman Morals yielding to the Pressure of Christianity : for Educated Readers.] Jack Dane's Inheritance. A Tale of Church Defence. By Frances Beaumont Milne. With one page Woodcut. Post 8vo. Limp cloth. 6d. [A story upon the rights and liberties of the Church of England.] Lapsed, not Lost. A Story of Roman Carthage. By the late Mrs. Rundle Charles. Crown 8vo. Cloth boards. 2s. 6d. [A Story of the time of St. Cyprian : for General Readers.] Mitslav : or, The Conversion of Pomerania. By the late Right Rev. R. Milman, D.D. Crown 8vo. With Map. Cloth boards. 3s. 6d. Narcissus. A Tale of Early Christian times. By the Right Rev. W. Boyd Carpenter. Crown 8vo. Cloth boards. 3s. 6d. Stories for the Saints' Days. By S. W., author of " Stories for every Sunday in the Christian Year." Fcap. 8vo. Cloth boards, is. 6d. An Epitome of the Lives of certain Saints and Fathers : for Ordinary Readers.] The Church in the Valley. By Elizabeth Harcourt Mitchell. With four page Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. Cloth. 2s. 6d. [A story which introduces much Church History, and is well calculated to spread useful information upon the Disestablishment question.] The Villa of Claudius. A Tale of the Roman-British Church. By the Rev. E. L. Cutts, D.D. New edition. With four page Illustrations. Crown 8vo, Cloth boards, is, 6d, 6 Publications of the Society for DIOCESAN HISTORIES. Bath and Wells. By the Rev. W. Hunt. With Map. Fcap. 8vo. Cloth boards. 2S. 6d. Canterbury. By the Rev. R. C. Jenkins. With Map. Fcap. 8vo. Cloth boards. 3s. 6d. Carlisle. By Richard S. Ferguson, Esq. With Map. Fcap. Svo. Cloth boards. 2s. 6d. Chester. By the Rev. Rupert H. Morris, D.D. With Map. Fcap. 8vo. Cloth boards. 3s. Chichester. By the Rev. W. R. W. Stephens. With Map and Plan of the Cathedral. Fcap. 8vo. Cloth boards. 2s. 6d. Durham. By the Rev. J. L. Low. With Map and Plan. Fcap. 8vo. Cloth boards. 2s. 6d. Hereford. By the Rev. Canon Phillott. With Map. Fcap. 8vo. Cloth boards. 3s. Lichfield. By the Rev. W. Beresford. With Map. Fcap. 8vo. Cloth boards. 2s. 6d. Lincoln. By the late Rev. Canon E. Venatiues, and the late Ven. Archdeacon Perry. With Map. Fcap. 8vo. Cloth boards. 4s. Norwich. By the Rev. A. Jessopp, D.D. With Map. Fcap. 8vo. Cloth boards. 2s. 6d. - Oxford. By the Rev. E. Marshall, M.A. With Map. Fcap. 8vo. Cloth boards. 2s. 6d. Peterborough. By the Rev. G. A. Poole, M.A. With Map. Fcap. Svo. Cloth boards. 2s. 6d. Rochester. By the Rev. A. J. Pearman. With Map. Fcap. Svo. Cloth boards. 4s. Salisbury. By the Rev. W. H. Jones. With Map and Plan. Fcap. 8vo. Cloth boards. 2s. 6d. SodorandMan. By A. W. Moore, M.A. With Map. Fcap. Svo. Cloth boards. 3s. St. Asaph. By the Venerable Archde.icon Thomas. With Map. Fcap. 8vo. Cloth boards. 2S. St. David's. By the Rev. Canon Bevan. With Map. Fcap. Svo. Clotli boards. 2S. 6d. Winchester. By the Rev. W. BENHAM, B.D. With Map. Fcap. 8vo. Cloth boards. 3s. Worcester. By the Rev. I. Gregory Smith and the Rev. Piiipps Onslow. With Map. Fcap. Svo. Cloth boards. 3s. 6d. —York. By the Rev. Canon Ornsby, M.A. With Map. Fcap. Svo. Cloth boards, 3s. 6d, Promoting Christian Knowledge. 1 NON-CHRISTIAN RELIGIOUS SYSTEMS. Fcap. Svo. Cloth boards. 2s. 6d. each. Buddhism. Being a Sketch of the Life and Teachings of Gautama, the Buddha. By T. W. Rhys Davids. With Map. Buddhism in China. By the Rev. S. Beal. With Map. Christianity and Buddhism : a Comparison and a Contrast. By the Rev. T. Sterling Berry, D.D. Confucianism and Taouism. By Professor R. K. Douglas. Hinduism. By Sir M. Monier Williams. With Map. Islam as a Missionary Beligion. By Charles R. Haines. 2s. Islam and its Founder. By J. W. H. Stobart. With Map. The Coran: its Composition and Teaching and the Testimony it bears to the Holy Scriptures. By Sir W. Muir, K.C.S.I. The Eeligion of the Crescent or Islam; its Strength, its Weakness, its Origin, its Influence. By the Rev. W. St. Clair- Tisdall, M.A. 4s. THE FATHERS FOR ENGLISH READERS. Fcap. Svo. Cloth boards. 2s. each. Boniface. By the Rev. I. Gregory Smith, M.A. is. 6d. Leo the Great. By the Rev. Canon Gore, M.A. Gregory the Great. By tlie Rev. J. Barmby, B.D. Saint Amhrose : his Life, Times, and Teaching. By the Ven. Arch- deacon Thornton, D.D. Saint Athanasius: his Life and Times. By the Rev. R. Wheler Bush. 2s. 6d. Saint Augustine. By the Rev. Edward L. Cutts, D.D. Saint Basil the Great. By the Rev. R. T. Smith, B.D. Saint Bernard, Abbot of Clairvaux, A.D. 1091—1153. By the Rev. S. J. Eales, M.A., D.C.L. 2s. 6d. Saint Hilary of Poitiers and Saint Martin of Tours. By the Rev. J. Gibson Cazenove, D.D. Saint Jerome. By the Rev. Edward L. Cutts, D.D. Saint John of Damascus. By the Rev. J. H. Lupton, M.A. Saint Patrick ; his Life and Teaching. By the Rev. E. T. Newell, M.A. 2s. 6d. Synesius of Cyrene, Philosopher and Bishop. By Alice Gardner. The Apostolic Fathers. Dy the Rev. Canon Scott Holland. The Defenders of the Faith; or, the Christian Apologists of the Second and Third Centuries. By the Rev. F. Watson. The Venerable Bade. By the Right Rev. G. F. Browne, D.D. 3 Publications of the Society for THE HOME LIBRARY. Crown Svo. Cloth boards, 6d. each. Black and White. Mission Stories. By the late H. A. Forde. Charlemagne. By the Rev. E. L. Cutts, D.D. With Map. Constantino the Great. The Union of the Church and State. By the Rev. E. L. Cutts, D.D. John Hus. The Commencement of the Resistance to Papa] Authority on the Part of the Inferior Clergy. By the Rev. A. H. Wratislaw. Judaea and her Rulers, from Nebuchadnezzar to Vespasian. By M. Bramston. With Map. Mazarin. By the late Gustave Masson. Military Religious Orders of the Middle Ages : the Hospitallers, the Templars, the Teutonic Knights, and others. By the Rev. F. C. Woodhouse, M.A. Mitslav; or, the Conversion of Pomerania. By the late Right Rev. R. Milman, D.D. With Map. Narcissus : a Tale of Early Christian Times. By the Right Rev. W. Boyd Carpenter, Bishop of Ripon. Richelieu. By the late Gustave Masson. Sketches of the Women of Christendom. Dedicated to the Women of India. By the late Mrs. Rundle Charles, author of "The Chronicles of the Schonberg-Cotta Family." The Church in Roman Gaul. By the Rev. R. Travers Smith. With Map. The Churchman's Life of Wesley. By R. Denny Urlin, Esq., F.S.S. The House of God the Home of Man. By the Rev. Canon J elf. The Inner Life, as Revealed in the Correspondence of Celebrated Christians. Edited by the late Rev. T. Erskine. The Life of the Soul in the World : its Nature, Needs. Dangers, Sorrows, Aids, and Joys. By the Rev. F. C. Wood- house, M.A. The North-African Church. By the late Rev. JULIUS LLOYD, M.A. With Map. Thoughts and Characters; being Selections from the Writings of the late Mrs, Rundle Charles, Promoting Christian Knowledge. 9 CHURCH HYMNS. Nos. I to 7, in Various Sizes and Bindings, ranging in price from id. to 4s. 8d. Church Hymns, with Tunes. Edited by Sir Arthur Sullivan. Crown 8vo., Fcap. 4to., and Folio (Organ copy), in various Bindings, from 2s. to £1. is. Common Prayer Book and Church Hymns. Bound in One Volume, and in Two Volumes in Cases. Can be had in various Sizes and Bindings, from 6d. to 48. Common Prayer Book and Church Hymns, with Tunes. Brevier, 8vo., Limp paste grain roan, red edges, 6s. COMMENTARY ON THE BIBLE. Old Testament. Vol. I., containing the Pentateuch. By Various Authors. With Ma.ps and Plans. Crown 8vo. Cloth boards, red edges, 4s. ; half calf, 10s. ; whole calf, 12s.; half morocco, 12s. Old Testament. Vol. II., containing the Historical Books. Joshua to Esther. By Various Authors. With Maps and Plans. Crown 8vo. Cloth boards, red edges, 4s.; half calf, ios.; whole calf, 12s. ; half morocco, 12s. Old Testament. Vol. III., containing the Poetical Books, Job to Song of Solomon. By Various Authors. Crown 8vo. Cloth boards, red edges, 4s.; half calf, 10s. ; whole calf, 12s. ; half morocco, 12s. Old Testament. Vol. IV., containing the Prophetical Books, Isaiah to Malachi. By Various Authors. With two Maps. Cloth boards, red edges, 4s.; half calf, 10s. ; whole calf, 12s.; half morocco, 12s. Old Testament. Vol. V., containing the Apocryphal Books. By Various Authors. Cloth boards, red edges, 4s. ; half calf, IOs. ; whole calf, 12s.; half morocco, I2s. New Testament. Vol. I., containing the Four Gospels. By the Right Rev. W. Walsham How, Bishop of Wakefield. With Maps and Plans. Crown 8vo. Cloth boards, red edges, 4s.; half calf, ios.; whole calf, 12s.; half morocco, 12s. New Testament. Vol. II., containing the Acts, Epistles, and Revelation. By Various Authors. With Map. Crown 8vo. Cloth boards, red edges, 4s.; half calf, ios.; whole calf, 12s.; half morocco, 12s. 10 Publications of the Society for THE HEATHEN WORLD AND ST. PAUL This Series is intended to throw light upon the writings and labours ol the Apostle of the Gentiles. Fcap Sw. Cloth boards. 2s. each. Saint Paul in Greece. By the Rev. G. S. Davies, M.A., Charterhouse, Godalming. With Map. Saint Paul in Damascus and Arabia. By the Rev. Georgb Rawlinson, M.A., Canon of Canterbury. With Map. Saint Paul In Asia Minor and at the Syrian Antioch. By the late Rev. E. H. Plumptre, D.D. With Map. Saint Paul at Rome. By the late Very Rev. Charles Merivale, D.D., D.C.L. With Map. ANCIENT HISTORY FROM THE MONUMENTS. This Series of Books is chiefly intended to illustrate the Sacred Scriptures by the results of recent Monumental Researches in the East. Fcap. Svo. Cloth boards. Zf. each. Sinai, from the Fourth Egyptian Dynasty to the Present Day. By the late Henry S. Palmer. With Map. A New Edition revised throughout by the Rev. Professor SAYCE. Babylonia (the History of). By the late George Smith. Edited and brought up to date by the Rev. Professor Sayce. Assyria, from the Earliest Times to the Fall of Nineveh. By the late George Smith. Persia, from the Earliest Period to the Arab Conquest. By the late W. S. W. Vaux, M.A., F.R.S. A New and Revised Edition, by the Rev. Professor Sayce. Promoting Christian Knowledge. NATURAL HISTORY RAMBLES, Intended to cover the Natural History of the British Isles in a manner suited to the requirements of visitors to the regions named. Fcap. 8vo. with numerous Woodcuts. Cloth Boards. 2s. 6d. each. In Search of Minerals. By the late D. T. Ansted, M.A, Lakes and Rivers. By C. O. Groom Napier, F.G.S. Lane and Field. By the late Rev. J. G. Wood, M.A. Mountain anrJW.oor. By J. E. Taylor, Esq., F.L.S. Ponds and Ditches. By M. C. Cooke, M.A., LL.D. Sea-Shore (The). By Professor P. Martin Duncan. Undergrounds By J. E. Taylor, Esq., F.L.S. Woodlands (The). By M. C. Cooke, M.A., LL.D. MANUALS OF ELEMENTARY SCIENCE. A Set of Elementary Manuals on the principal Branches of Science. Fcap. Svo. Limp cloth, is. each. Electricity. By the late Fleeming Jenkin, F.R.S. Physiology. By A. Macalister, LL.D., M.D., F.R.S. Geology. By the Rev. T. G. Bonney, M.A., F.G.S. Crystallography. By Henry Palin Gurney, M.A. Astronomy. By W. H. M. Christie, M.A., F.R.S. Botany. By the late Professor Bentley. Zoology. By Alfred Newton, M.A., F.R.S. A New Edition. Matter and Motion. By the late J. Clerk Maxwell, M.A. Spectroscope and its Work (The). By the late Richard A. Proctor. Publications of the S. J'. C. K. THE PEOPLE'S LIBRARY. Crown $vo. Cloth boards. It. each. A Chapter of Science ; or, What is a Law of Nature ? Six Lectures to Working Men. By Professor J. Stuart, M.P. With Diagrams. A Six Months' Friend. By Helen Shipton, author of "Chris- topher." With several Illustrations. British Citizen (The) : his Rights and Privileges. A short History l>y the late J. Thorold Rogers, M.P. Factors in Life. Three Lectures on Health — Food — Education. By the late Professor SEELEY, F.R.S. Guild of Good Life (The). A Narrative of Domestic Health and Economy. By the late Sir B. W. Richardson, M.D., F.R.S. Household Health. A Sequel to "The Guild of Good Life." By the late Sir B. W. Richardson, M.D., F.R.S. Hops and Hop-Pickers. By the Rev. J. Y. Stratton. With several Illustrations. Life and "Work among the Navvies. By the Rev. D. W. Barrett, M.A. With several Illustrations. The Cottage Next Door. By Helen Shipton. With several Illustrations. Thrift and Independence. A Word foi Working Men. By the Rev. W. Lewery Blackley, M.A. SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE. London: Northumberland avenue, w.c; 43, queen victoria street, e.g. Date Due