{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_34210/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_34210","id":"gutenberg_34210","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/34210","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Architecture","Category: Art","Category: History - British","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Cathedrals -- England","England -- Description and travel"],"text":"Produced by Chuck Greif and the Online Distributed\nProofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was\nproduced from images available at The Internet Archive)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nCATHEDRAL CITIES\n\nOF\n\nENGLAND\n\n[Illustration: CANTERBURY\n\nTHE BAPTISTERY AND CHAPTER HOUSE]\n\n\n\n\nCATHEDRAL CITIES\n\nOF\n\nENGLAND\n\nBY\n\nGEORGE GILBERT\n\nILLUSTRATED BY W. W. COLLINS, R.I.\n\n[Illustration]\n\nNEW YORK\n\nDODD, MEAD AND COMPANY\n\n1908\n\n_Copyright, 1905_\nBY DODD, MEAD AND COMPANY\n\nPublished October, 1905\n\nTHE UNIVERSITY PRESS, CAMBRIDGE, U. S. A.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\nINTRODUCTORY                _Page_    3\n\nCANTERBURY                     \"     17\n\nDURHAM                         \"     37\n\nLICHFIELD                      \"     58\n\nOXFORD                         \"     65\n\nPETERBOROUGH                   \"     80\n\nST. ALBANS                     \"     91\n\nWELLS                          \"    102\n\nWORCESTER                      \"    118\n\nCHICHESTER                     \"    129\n\nCHESTER                        \"    139\n\nROCHESTER                      \"    162\n\nRIPON                          \"    174\n\nELY                            \"    183\n\nGLOUCESTER                     \"    202\n\nHEREFORD                       \"    224\n\nLINCOLN                        \"    235\n\nBATH                           \"    259\n\nSALISBURY                      \"    270\n\nEXETER                         \"    292\n\nNORWICH                        \"    315\n\nLONDON                         \"    337\n\nYORK                           \"    371\n\nWINCHESTER                     \"    397\n\nWESTMINSTER                    \"    414\n\n\n\n\nILLUSTRATIONS\n\n\n    Canterbury, The Baptistery and Chapter House           _Frontispiece_\n        \"       from the Meadows                            _Page_  19\n        \"       Christchurch Gateway                           \"    23\n        \"       Cathedral, Interior of the Nave                \"    27\n        \"       The Norman Stairway                            \"    33\n\n    Durham, Framwellgate Bridge                                \"    39\n      \"     from the Railway                                   \"    43\n      \"     Interior of Cathedral, looking across the Nave\n              into South Transept                              \"    47\n      \"     Elvet Bridge                                       \"    51\n      \"     Cathedral, the Western Towers                      \"    55\n\n    Lichfield Cathedral. The West Front                        \"    61\n\n    Oxford. Christ Church, Interior of Nave                    \"    69\n      \"            \"        Gateway                            \"    75\n\n    Peterborough Cathedral. The West Front                     \"    83\n          \"      The Market Place                              \"    87\n\n    St. Albans. The Cathedral from the Walls of Old Verulam    \"    95\n\n    Wells Cathedral and the Pools                              \"   103\n      \"   The Cathedral from the Fields                        \"   107\n      \"   The Ruins of the Banqueting Hall                     \"   113\n\n    Worcester. The Cathedral                                   \"   123\n\n    Chichester Cathedral from the North-East                   \"   133\n\n    Chester. East Gate Street                                  \"   141\n       \"     The Rows                                          \"   145\n       \"     St. Werburgh Street                               \"   151\n       \"     Bishop Lloyd's Palace and Watergate Street        \"   157\n\n    Rochester. The Cathedral and Castle                        \"   167\n\n    Ripon. The Cathedral                                       \"   177\n\n    Ely Cathedral. The West Front                              \"   185\n     \"  The Market Place                                       \"   189\n     \"  Cathedral, Interior of Nave                            \"   193\n     \"  from the Fens                                          \"   197\n\n    Gloucester Cathedral. Interior of the Nave                 \"   205\n        \"      The Old Parliament House and Cathedral          \"   211\n        \"      Cathedral from the Paddock                      \"   217\n\n    Hereford Cathedral. The North Transept                     \"   229\n\n    Lincoln Cathedral by Moonlight                             \"   239\n       \"    The Steep Hill                                     \"   245\n       \"    Cathedral. The West Towers                         \"   251\n\n    Bath. Pulteney Bridge                                      \"   263\n\n    Salisbury. High Street Gateway into the Close              \"   273\n        \"      The Market Cross                                \"   277\n        \"      The Cloisters                                   \"   281\n        \"      The Cathedral                                   \"   287\n\n    Exeter Cathedral from the Palace Gardens                   \"   295\n      \"    Mol's Coffee Tavern                                 \"   301\n      \"    Cathedral. Interior of the Nave                     \"   309\n\n    Norwich. The Market Place                                  \"   319\n       \"     The AEthelbert Gate                                \"   325\n       \"     The Cathedral from the North-East                 \"   331\n\n    St. Paul's and Ludgate Hill                                \"   353\n\n    York. Stonegate                                            \"   373\n      \"   The Shambles                                         \"   377\n      \"   Bootham Bar                                          \"   383\n      \"   Monk Bar                                             \"   387\n      \"   Micklegate Bar                                       \"   391\n\n    Winchester Cathedral. The North Aisle                      \"   399\n        \"      from St. Catherine's Hill                       \"   403\n        \"      The Cathedral from the Deanery Garden           \"   407\n        \"      St. Cross                                       \"   411\n\n    Westminster Abbey. The North Transept                      \"   419\n\n\n\n\nCATHEDRAL CITIES OF ENGLAND\n\n\n\n\nIntroductory\n\n\nIn the following accounts of the Cathedral Cities of England, technical\narchitectural terms will necessarily appear, and to the end that they\nshould be comprehensive, I give here a slight sketch of the origin of\nthe various forms, and the reasons for their naming, together with\ndates; and to the end that I may supply a glossary of easy reference, I\nplace as side headings in this introduction the various expressions\nwhich will be met with throughout the book.\n\nThis, I hope, may relieve the reader of the tedium of having to turn to\nbooks of reference at each moment, and being subjected to a constant\nreiteration of the terms, which must necessarily be frequently employed.\n\nThe Cathedrals of England may be said to comprise illustrations of\nAnglo-Saxon, Gothic, and Norman, with their variations and combinations.\n\n_Constantine_, A.D. 306-337.--_Romanesque._--With the establishment of\nChristianity, more especially when recognised in Rome during the time\nof Constantine, arose the marvellous development of architecture,\nfounded upon the basis of classical remains. This \"Romanesque,\" as this\nperiod of architecture came to be called, permeated later the whole of\nWestern Europe.\n\n_Basilica._--Relieved from immediate fear of persecution, the Christian\narchitects straightway commenced to convert the \"basilica\" remains to\nsuit the requirements of the \"New Faith.\" The Basilica, as its\nderivation from the Greek Basilike (\"the royal house\") implies, \"was the\nKing's Bench\" of the Romans. It was a long rectangular building, with\nsometimes rows of columns introduced to divide the space into a nave and\naisles. One end terminated in an \"apse,\" of semi-circular formation,\nwhere the judge and his assessors were accustomed to sit. This apse the\nChristians utilised as a chancel. The approach to the building was the\n\"atrium,\" or forecourt, somewhat similar to the English Cathedral\ncloister, but differently situated.\n\nA chief characteristic of the Roman buildings was the \"round arch,\"\nmainly composed of brick or stone work. This the Romans for many years\nhad used more in a decorative way than for utility, but which became of\nmore structural significance in the hands of the Christians.\n\n_Romanesque._--_Sixth to Twelfth Century._--In this wise, from the\nremains of the Basilica, with the further development of the \"round\narch\" to the \"semi-circular arch,\" the Christian Romans gradually\nevolved the style of architecture called \"Romanesque,\" _i.e._, in the\nRoman Style. This style became prevalent throughout Western Europe from\nthe beginning of the sixth to the close of the twelfth century. In\nprocess of time transepts were added and the choir prolonged, giving the\noutline, as it were, of a cross, the Holy Symbol of Christianity.\n\n_Anglo-Saxon._--500-1066.--Thus Romanesque may be said to be the\nfountain-head of Anglo-Saxon, Norman Proper, Anglo-Norman, and Gothic\nArchitecture.\n\nDuring the Roman occupation of England, missionaries came to her from\nRome, the metropolis, and made converts, as they did in other countries,\nand as missionaries do nowadays in China and elsewhere. They and\ntravelling merchants insensibly introduced the style of architecture\nthen prevalent in Italy, namely, the Romanesque. Owing to the untutored\nnature of the Anglo-Saxons, their first attempts at imitating what would\nappear to them entirely new, together with the difficulty of procuring\nskilled labour, were necessarily crude.\n\nThese first attempts may justly come under the heading of \"Anglo-Saxon.\"\n\nWhen the Campanile or tall bell-towers came into existence in Italy,\nEngland imitated.\n\n_Anglo-Norman._--1066.--The Normans, at the Conquest, introduced their\nrendering of architecture, which they had borrowed from the Romanesque,\nwith a suspicion of Lombardic, and even Byzantine styles intermingled.\nAs they could not entirely at first uproot the local peculiarities of\nthe Anglo-Saxon treatment of style which they found in the country, they\nin a way grafted the Norman architecture on to the existing style. Thus\nit came to be called \"Anglo-Norman.\" At first the work was heavier in\ncharacter than the Norman proper, but it became lighter towards the\nclose of the twelfth century.\n\n_Norman Peculiarities._--The Norman peculiarities were the building of\nthe church on a cruciform plan, with a square tower placed over the\ntransepts where they cross the nave; the massive cylindrical nave piers.\nTo relieve the heaviness of these massive nave piers and doorways, the\nchevron, or zigzag pattern, spiral and other groovings were cut. The\nmouldings were of the same character as in France, but towards the close\nof the twelfth century they were by degrees disused.\n\nIn the transition period, 1154-1189, the dog-tooth ornament appears, and\noccurs in combination with the \"billet,\" a circular roll with spaces cut\naway at intervals, as at Canterbury.\n\nThe Normans also greatly employed arcades, both blank and open. The\ninterlacing of arcades was frequently used by them. They were formed by\nsemi-circular arches, intersecting each other regularly. This\ninterlacing is supposed by many authorities to have been the origin of\nthe \"pointed lancet arch.\" The Norman arcades form a prominent feature\nin the internal and external decoration of their buildings. The internal\narrangement of the larger churches consisted of three stages or tiers.\nThe ground stage carried semi-circular arches, above that came the\ntriforium, or second stage of two smaller arches supported by a column,\nand within a larger arch. Above this again, came the third stage or\nclerestory, with two or more semi-circular arches, one of which was\npierced to admit the light.\n\nThe nave was usually covered by a flat ceiling, and not vaulted. The\ncrypts and aisles were vaulted.\n\nThe doorways appear to have been a special feature with the Normans, for\nthey were generally very richly ornamented, and were greatly recessed.\nThe windows were narrow and small in proportion to the rest of the\nbuilding. At a late period of the style the small circular windows\nbecame greatly enlarged, and it became necessary to divide up the space\nby the introduction of slender columns radiating from the centre.\n\nIn England the semi-circular apse, towards the close of the style,\ngradually gave place to the square apse, which was more generally\nadopted.\n\n_Gothic._--_Fourth to Twelfth Century._--Another great and early factor\nin ecclesiastical architecture is the Gothic. In the early stages of\nChristianity, the Goths, a Teutonic race, dwelt between the Elbe and the\nVistula. They subverted the Rome Empire. They, like other countries,\nreceived the Christian religion from Rome. Each country after its own\nfashion endeavoured to imitate the architecture of Rome. As these\ncountries were semi-barbarous and unpolished, their work was necessarily\nrude. This, in conjunction with the invasions of Italy by the Goths, led\nto the term \"Gothic.\" This period commenced in the fourth century, and\nwas entirely changed in the twelfth, by the introduction of the pointed\narch.\n\n_Gothic._--1145-1550.--This marked a new era, and established a new\nstyle of architecture, the transition from the Norman, or Romanesque,\nto the Mediaeval Gothic. Several attempts were made to introduce new\nnames in lieu of Gothic, for to name anything Gothic was looked upon\nwith askance.\n\n            Romanesque\n\n    Early Gothic        IVth century to XIIth century.\n    Anglo-Saxon         500-1066 A.D.\n\n           ANGLO-NORMAN\n    William I           1066.\n    William II          1087.\n    Henry I.            1100.\n    Stephen             1135.\n    Henry II.           1154-1189. Transition.\n\n          Mediaeval Gothic\n    EARLY ENGLISH\n    (FIRST POINTED, OR LANCET)\n    Richard I.          1189.\n    John.               1199.\n\n    COMPLETE, OR GEOMETRICAL POINTED\n    Edward I.           1272-1307. Transition.\n\n           DECORATED\n    MIDDLE POINTED, OR CURVILINEAR\n    Edward II.          1307.\n    Edward III.         1327-1377.\n\n         PERPENDICULAR\n    THIRD POINTED, OR RECTILINEAR\n    Richard II                1377.    Transition.\n    Henry IV.                 1399.\n    Henry V.                  1413.\n    Henry VI.                 1422.\n    Edward IV.                1461.\n    Edward V.                 1483.\n    Richard III.              1483.\n    Henry VII.                1485      } Tudor Period.\n    Henry VIII.               1509-1547 }\n\nWith the close of the Tudor Period, Mediaeval Gothic practically died\nout. There crept in then the English Renaissance, followed after by what\nis called \"The Revival of Gothic Architecture.\"\n\n         ENGLISH RENAISSANCE\n\n                                            about\n    The Elizabethan, or First Period        1547-1620.\n    The Anglo-Classic, or Second Period     1620-1702.\n    The Anglo-Classic, or Third Period      1702-1800.\n    The Revival of Gothic Architecture in\n            England.                        1800.\n\n\n\n\nCharacteristics\n\n\nANGLO-SAXON.--Anglo-Saxon may be briefly summed up as an inferior style\nof Romanesque, more especially the latter part, when it was considered\nnecessary to build in imitation of the Roman way. In the early years of\nthis period the advantages of stone, due to inconvenience of its\ncarriage or lack of skill, were not widely known in England. For the\nmost part the buildings were composed of wood with a thatched roof.\nThough it is true several buildings were also constructed of stone, and\nglass was used, yet it was only with advanced knowledge, introduced by\nContinental workmen, who came over in the seventh century, that\narchitecture approached anything like a definite style.\n\nIt reached this stage just a few years before the Norman Conquest. The\narches were usually plain, and always semi-circular. The columns were\ncylindrical, hexagonal, or octagonal, and thick in proportion to their\nheight. The towers, as a rule, were square, and not very lofty. They\nwere strongly but crudely worked, strip pilasters, _i. e._, slender\ncolumns, being introduced. Circular-headed openings served as upper\nwindows of these towers. They were divided into two lights by rounded\nbalusters, sometimes with caps heavily projected.\n\n_Norman_.--The Norman churches were mostly cruciform in plan, with a\ncentral tower. The east end was frequently terminated by an apse. Vast\ncolumns, either circular, octagonal, or simply clustered, separated the\naisles from the naves. The arches were chiefly semi-circular, the round\narch being used everywhere for ornament. The Norman towers are also\ngenerally square, with a somewhat stunted appearance. Many have no\nbuttresses whatever, whilst others are served with broad, flat, shallow\nprojections, which assert themselves more for show than for utility. The\nreason for this is that the Normans built their buildings with walls\nimmensely thick with an eye to stability. The heavy appearance of their\ntowers is cleverly relieved by the introduction of arcades around them,\nas at St. Albans, and occasionally richly ornamented, as shown at\nNorwich and Winchester.\n\nAt one of the angles there is frequently a stone staircase. The upper\nwindows of these towers differ little from the Anglo-Saxon, except in\nthat the two lights are separated by a shaft or short column in place\nof the rounded baluster.\n\nThe Norman doorways are a great feature. They are generally adorned with\na series of columns with enriched arch mouldings spanning from capital\nto capital.\n\nTheir vaults were heavily constructed at no great height from the\nground, and generally applied to the aisles of churches. They exerted a\ngreater thrust on the walls than the later Gothic vaults.\n\n_Norman_.--These churches are generally to be found perched on\ncommanding sites, chosen as natural places of defence. Often a river\nwound round the base, and where it led short, a moat was constructed on\nthe landward side, and borrowed its water from the river.\n\nThe activity of the Norman builders is astounding, and forms a great\ncontrast to the few years before their advent. For a short time\narchitecture suffered a paralysis. Not till the much-dreaded Millennium\n(1000 A.D.), when it was thought the world would certainly come to an\nend, had passed did people take heart again, and architects make up for\nlost time.\n\n_Early English_.--In this period the massive Norman walls gave way to\nwalls reduced in thickness. The buttresses became of more structural\nsignificance. Also, flying-buttresses gradually came into use to\nstrengthen the weakness of the upper works, caused by the reduction of\nthe walls in thickness. The pillars were elongated, and of slight\nconstruction. The doorways, windows and arcades were built with polished\nmarble obtained from the Isle of Purbeck.\n\nThe science of vaulting became more advanced.\n\nThe towers were taller and more elegant, with plain parapets. They were\ngenerally furnished with windows. The lower ones resembled much the\narrow-slit formation of the Norman style. The upper windows were grouped\nin twos and threes.\n\nThe broach-spire now came into notice. It was added on to the square\ntower, and at the early part of this style was low in height, but\ngradually became taller.\n\nThe circular-headed windows of the Normans gave place to the\nnarrow-pointed lancets of the Early English. These admitted little\nlight, and necessitated a greater number of windows, which were grouped\ninto couplets or triplets.\n\n_Geometrical_.--The window, by the gradual process of piercing the\nvacant spaces in the window-head, carrying mouldings around the tracery\n(or ornamental filling-in), and adding cusps (the point where\nfoliations of tracery intersect), gave rise to Geometrical work.\n\nThe earliest work of this kind is found in Westminster Abbey.\n\n_Decorated_.--The towers are made to appear lighter by the parapets\nbeing either embattled or pierced with elegant designs, and pinnacles\nplaced on them.\n\nThe broach-spires gave place to spires springing at once from the\noctagon. The buttresses are set angularly. In this period the architects\nfailed to maintain the vigour of the Geometrical period. The Decorated\nwindows are formed of portions of circles, with their centres falling on\nthe intersection of certain geometrical figures.\n\nThere is a glorious example afforded by the west window at York.\n\n_Perpendicular_.--The towers are generally richly panelled throughout;\nthe buttresses project boldly--sometimes square, or sometimes set at an\nangle, but not close to each other.\n\nThe pinnacles are often richly canopied. The battlements panelled, and\nfrequently pierced. In the middle of the parapet now and then is placed\na pinnacle or a canopied niche.\n\n\n\n\nCanterbury\n\nCantuaria.\n\n(\"Doomsday Book.\")\n\n\nOf all Cathedral cities, Canterbury, or, as it is also called, Christ\nChurch, may possibly be considered the most interesting. Though not the\nfirst to spread Christianity in Britain, it nevertheless firmly\nestablished it in the end. The earliest authentic evidence of Christians\nin England is mentioned by Tertullian, in 208. And again, in 304, St.\nAlban had been martyred during Diocletian's persecution at Verulam, now\nknown as St. Alban's. Then, in 314, Christianity had attained such a\nposition in Britain that it had been considered necessary for the\nBishops of York and London to attend at the Council of Arles, in France.\nSo that by the end of the third century to the beginning of the fourth,\nit is known that there existed bishops, though not till the close of the\nfourth century was there a \"settled Church\" in Britain, with churches,\naltars, Scriptures, and discipline.\n\nThese expounded the Catholic Faith, and were in touch with Rome and\nPalestine. But the arrival of Augustine, in 600, decidedly gave an\nimpetus to the lasting establishment of Christianity in England, and the\nwhole island quickly became converted.\n\nThough Christianity had long flourished in Rome, it could hardly, in its\nearly stages, be expected to make itself greatly felt in Britain, owing\nto the continual troublous times caused by the invasions first by the\nRoman soldiery, then by the Scots and Picts from Caledonia (now called\nScotland), and the Saxons, who came from the river Elbe, and the Angles,\nwho dwelt to the north of the Saxons, in the districts now called\nSchleswig and Holstein. Then the Danes and Northmen landed in England in\n787, and practically overran the whole kingdom. All these tribes, each\nin its turn, devastated the country, pillaging and destroying\neverything, so that there is little to marvel at the slow growth of\nChristianity in the island, seeing that the clergy were the first to\nsuffer. Augustine may be said to have certainly revived Christianity and\nrescued the Church from utter oblivion, but it was left till the Norman\nConquest to erect the wonderful architectural structures, many of which\nexist till this day.\n\n[Illustration: CANTERBURY\n\nFROM THE MEADOWS]\n\nThe early history of Canterbury is shrouded in mystery. The discovery of\nDruidical remains clearly points to the practice of religious rites of\nthe Britons prior to the Christian era. It appears also that the Romans\nfound it as a British town of some importance. This theory, laying aside\nminor considerations, is strengthened by the fact that the Romans called\nit Durovernum, the derivation of which they borrowed from the British\nwords \"dwr\" a stream, and \"whern\" swift, the latter of which was most\nappropriate to the Stour, on whose banks the city was founded. The\nSaxons on their arrival called the place \"Cantwarabyrig.\" From this, no\ndoubt, Canterbury owes the origin of its present name. Contrary to the\nordinary laws of foundation, there appears to have been no one (locally)\ncovetous of the honour of martyrdom, or possibly worthy, if martyred, of\nrecognition by the Church.\n\nDuring the Roman occupation of the city, Christianity struggled,\nprobably kept alive by such of the soldiers who had been previously\nconverted in Rome.\n\nTwo churches were built in the second century. One of these, in 600, was\nconsecrated by the Bishop of Soissons, and dedicated to St. Martin, for\nBertha, a daughter of Charibert, a Christian king of Paris. On her\nmarriage with Ethelbert of Kent, the foremost king of the English, it\nwas stipulated that her religious inclinations should be protected.\nThrough her influence the king became converted. To encourage\nChristianity, and to set a good example to his subjects, Ethelbert\nwelcomed Augustine and his forty monks, in 597, gave him his palace,\nwhich was speedily converted into a priory, and helped him to found an\nabbey without the city walls, and intended as a sepulture for the\nArchbishops.\n\nThis abbey was dedicated to St. Peter and St. Paul. As Canterbury was\nalready recognised as the metropolis, or head of the State of Kent, in\nthat their kings had their royal residence there, it was no difficulty\nfor Augustine, as spiritual head, to make it also a Metropolitan See,\nthe more so as, by the investiture of the Pope, he became the first\nArchbishop.\n\n[Illustration: CANTERBURY\n\nCHRISTCHURCH GATEWAY]\n\nPope Gregory's (the Great) scheme in sending Augustine was to divide\nEngland into two Provinces, with Metropolitans of equal dignity at\nLondon and York, and twelve Suffragans to each. But all that his\nemissary could effect was to consecrate two bishops, one at Rochester\n(Kent) and one at Essex. As Christianity took a firmer hold in England,\nit was generally to Canterbury that the different portions of England\napplied for missionaries. In this foundation Augustine has been followed\nby a succession of prelates, who distinguished themselves equally in\nspiritual and temporal affairs of the State--men, each of whom made a\ngreat stir during his life, and whose names even now are enshrined, as\nit were, in a halo of romance. They represent the intellect of their\ntimes; their lives show us the difficulties they encountered in\novercoming the crass ignorance of the people on whose behalf they\nworked, and the risks and dangers and petty tyranny they suffered at the\nhands of kings, whose chief amusements were disturbing the peace and\nlicentious living. Those who have played the most prominent part in\necclesiastical as well as in lay history are:\n\nDunstan, who governed with a tight hand the kingdom during the reigns of\nEdred and Edwy; Stigand, who, for his opposition to William the\nConqueror, was deposed from the See to make room for Lanfranc; Lanfranc,\nwhose memory is perpetuated not only through his abilities as scholar,\nstatesman and administrator, but more especially as one who rebuilt the\nCathedral and as founder of several religious establishments; the\ncelebrated Thomas a Becket, who, until he became Archbishop, was the\ngreat friend of Henry II., and was Chancellor of England. On the\nacceptance of the Archbishopric, Becket constituted himself as a\nchampion of the rights and claims of the Church, and would brook no\ninterference from Henry in ecclesiastical matters. This naturally\ncreated a coolness between the two, which ended in Becket's retiring to\nFrance for six years. On Henry's promise to annul the Constitution of\nClarendon, in 1170, Becket returned, only a few days after to be\nmurdered in the Cathedral.\n\nStephen Langton, who was raised to the See by Pope Innocent III., in\ndefiance of King John, during a quarrel he had with the Church; Cranmer,\nwho, for promoting the Reformation, was burnt at the stake in Mary's\nreign; and Laud, who was beheaded during the Commonwealth of Cromwell\nfor supporting the measures of his sovereign, Charles I.\n\nAugustine did not live to see the completion of his Cathedral. It was\ndedicated to Our Saviour, and it is even now usually called Christ\nChurch.\n\nDuring the ravages of the Danes the city suffered greatly, and the\nArchbishopric became vacant in 1011, through the violent death dealt out\nto Archbishop Alphage by the Danes.\n\n[Illustration: CANTERBURY\n\nINTERIOR OF THE NAVE]\n\nCanute, after his usurpation of the throne, rebuilt a great part of the\ncity and restored the Cathedral; and the monks were not forgotten, in\nthat the revenue of the port of Sandwich was made over to them for their\nsupport. These benefits greatly helped the city to attain great\nimportance, and in Doomsday Book it is entered under the title of\n\"Civitas Cantuariae.\"\n\nIn 1080 the Cathedral was burnt down, only to be restored with greater\nsplendour, and dedicated to the Holy Trinity, by Archbishop Lanfranc,\nwho rebuilt the monastic edifice, erected the Archbishop's palace,\nfounded and endowed a priory dedicated to St. Gregory, and built the\nhospitals of St. John and St. Nicholas.\n\nIn 1161 the city became almost extinct through fire, and at several\nsubsequent periods it suffered severely from the same cause.\n\nIn 1170 the great event which stirred the kingdom, and which\nconveniently marks the starting-point of the disastrous half of Henry\nII.'s reign, was the great means of replenishing the treasury of the\nCathedral. In that year Becket was murdered as he was ascending the\nsteps leading from the nave into the choir. His name was subsequently\ncanonised. His shrine was visited from far and near by every rank of\npilgrim, who seldom left without depositing first some substantial token\nof their reverence for the saint. Four years after the murder popular\nfeeling was as great as ever, so that it was probably to propitiate the\npeople, as much as to ask for Divine intercession in his troublous\naffairs, that Henry II. performed a pilgrimage to the shrine and\nsubmitted himself to be scourged by the monks.\n\nAnother source of great importance to the Cathedral was the institution\nof the Jubilee by the Pope. It commemorated every fifty years the death\nof Becket, and till the last one, celebrated in 1520, attracted an\nimmense number of pilgrims, who gave a great impetus to trade in the\ncity. The number and richness of their offerings were incredible.\n\nThe dissolution of the priory of Christ Church was gradually effected;\nthe festivals in honour of the martyr were one by one abolished; his\nshrine was stripped of its gorgeous ornaments, and the bones of the\nsaint were burnt to ashes and scattered to the winds.\n\nA part of the monastery of St. Augustine was converted into a royal\npalace by Henry VIII. In this palace Queen Elizabeth held her court for\na short time. During her reign there was an influx of Walloons, who,\npersecuted for their religious tenets, had fled from the Netherlands and\nsettled in Canterbury.\n\nThey introduced the weaving of silk and stuffs. To them Queen Elizabeth\nallotted the crypt under the Cathedral as their place of worship, where\nthe service is still performed in French to their descendants.\n\nIn this Cathedral was solemnised the marriage of Charles I. with\nHenrietta Maria of France, in 1625. During the war between Charles I.\nand Cromwell the Cathedral was wantonly mutilated and defaced by the\nfollowers of Cromwell, who converted the sacred edifice into stables for\nhis horses. At the Restoration, Charles II., on his return from France,\nheld his court in the royal palace at Canterbury for three days. This\nmonarch, in 1676, granted a charter of incorporation to the refugee\nsilk-weavers settled in the city. These refugees, a few years after,\nwere considerably increased by French artisans, who came over consequent\non the revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685.\n\nTo those admirers of form and beauty the wonderful architecture of the\npresent Cathedral must satisfy their every craving. To students the\nstudy of this colossal building must be a work of love, encouragement,\nand continued interest. Rebuilt soon after the Conquest by Archbishop\nLanfranc, and worthily enlarged and enriched by his several successors,\nthe Cathedral is a crowning work of grandeur and magnificence,\nexhibiting, in its highest perfection, every specimen of architecture,\nfrom the earliest Norman to the latest English. In form it is that of a\ndouble cross. Where the nave and the western transepts intersect, there\nsprings up a lofty and elegant tower in the Later English style, with a\nspired parapet and pinnacles, with octagonal turrets at the angles,\nterminating in minarets. In the west end are two massive towers, of\nwhich the north-west is Norman, and the south-west is similar in\ncharacter, though embattled, and little inferior to the central tower.\n\nPerhaps the most noteworthy portions of this Cathedral, though it is\nhardly possible to make a distinction, are the Chapel of Henry IV., with\nits beautiful fan tracery depending from the roof; the small but\nbeautiful Lady Chapel, which is separated from the eastern side of the\ntransept by the interposition of a finely carved stone screen; and in\nthat part of the Cathedral, called Becket's Crown, is the Chapel of the\nHoly Trinity, famous as the site of the gorgeous Shrine of St. Thomas a\nBecket. In \"Becket's Crown\" a softened light steals through the painted\nwindow. The interest in this window lies in the fact that most of the\nglass shown is ancient, and it is the fifth of the twelve windows in\nthe Trinity Chapel which suffered severely at the hands of the Puritans\nin 1642.\n\n[Illustration: CANTERBURY\n\nTHE NORMAN STAIRWAY]\n\nWhat remained of the ancient glass was replaced, as far as possible in\nthe original position, by the late Mr. George Austen, subsequently to\n1853.\n\nThese windows represent the miracles of St. Thomas a Becket between the\nyears 1220 and 1240.\n\nBetween the western towers there is a narrow entrance spanned over by a\nsharply pointed arch, enriched with deeply recessed mouldings. Above\nthis are canopied niches, over which is a lofty window of six lights\nwith richly stained glass.\n\nThe south-west porch constitutes the principal entrance, and is highly\nenriched with niches of elegant design. It belongs to a late period of\nEnglish architecture. The roof is most elaborately groined, and shields\nare attached at the intersections of the ribs. In the same period of\nLate English must be included the fine nave and the western transepts. A\ngorgeous effect is given by the richly groined roof supported by eight\nlofty piers, which divide it off on each side from the aisles. From the\neastern part numerous avenues lead to the many chapels in different\nparts of the interior, and give a truly magnificent effect. All these\nchapels deserve the closest study, like the rest of the building, to\nthoroughly appreciate the subtlety of design, and the marvellous skill\nof the architect.\n\n\n\n\nDurham\n\n              Dunholme.\n          (\"Doomsday Book.\")\nHac sunt in fossa Bedae Venerabilis ossa.\n\n\nThough Durham dates from the tenth century, yet it is necessary, to\nunderstand the growth of its power, to go back to the seventh century.\n\nThe exact date of the birth of St. Cuthbert is unknown. As a youth he\nwas admitted into Melrose Abbey, where in the course of fourteen years\nhe became monk and prior. From there he passed another fourteen years in\nthe Convent of Lindisfarne, after which he retired to Farne for nine\nyears. At the end of this period he was persuaded, most unwillingly, by\nEgrid, King of Northumbria, to become Bishop of Lindisfarne, a See in\nBernicia, as Durham County was then called.\n\nBut after two years' office he retired to Farne. There died St. Cuthbert\non March 20, A.D. 687, in the thirty-ninth year of his monastic life,\nstill undecided as to where he should be buried. However, the remains\nwere reverently preserved in the Church of Lindisfarne, till the monks\nwere compelled to flee, owing to the invasion of the Danes, towards the\nend of the ninth century. Though in dire dread and confusion, the monks\nforgot not their sacred trust, but carried the holy remains of St.\nCuthbert with them.\n\nThey wandered many a weary day throughout the North of England in search\nof \"Dunholme,\" which Eadner, a monk of their order, declared to them had\nbeen divinely revealed to him as the lasting place of rest for the holy\nand incorruptible body of St. Cuthbert. They seemed to have had great\ndifficulty in locating the whereabouts of Dunholme, for according to\ntradition they were miraculously delivered from their nomadic life. As\nthey proceeded they heard a woman inquire of another if she had seen her\ncow, which had gone astray. Much to their joy and relief they heard the\nreply, \"In Dunholme.\"\n\nThereupon they climbed to the summit of the \"Hill Island,\" at the base\nof which they had arrived, as they wished to deposit their corruptible\nburden on a spot so close to Heaven that it should remain incorruptible,\nand by its incorruptibility be a fitting foundation on which to build a\nshrine worthy of their Saint and the God who honoured him.\n\n[Illustration: DURHAM\n\nFRAMWELL GATE BRIDGE]\n\nAbout 995 their idea was realised by Bishop Ealdhune. He founded a\nchurch, built in the style usual then in Italy, of brick or stone with\nround arches. This style, based directly on Italian models, became\nprevalent throughout all Western Europe till the eleventh century, and\nin England was known as Anglo-Saxon. This church was erected over the\nSaint's resting-place, upon the rock eminence called Dunholme (Hill\nIsland). Later on the Normans changed this into \"Duresne,\" whence\nDurham. And a representation of a dun cow and two female attendants was\nplaced upon the building. At the same period the See was transferred\nfrom Lindisfarne, and, together with the growing fame of the presence of\nthe \"incorruptible body\" of the Saint, attracted pilgrims, who settled\nthere with their industries. Thus were laid the foundations of the great\ncity. In this wise St. Cuthbert became the patron Saint of Durham, as\nwell as of the North of England and of Southern Scotland.\n\nIn 1072 William the Conqueror found it necessary to erect, across the\nneck of the rock-eminence, the castle, to guard the church and its\nmonastery.\n\nIn 1093 Bishop Carileph built a church of Norman structure in place of\nEaldhune's Anglo-Saxon church, and changed the Anglo-Saxon establishment\nof married priests into a Benedictine abbey.\n\nAfter the Norman Conquest the county became Palatinate, and acquired the\nindependence peculiar to Counties Palatine.\n\nThe bishops of Durham were invested with temporal and spiritual powers,\nexercising the royal prerogatives, such as paramount property in lands,\nand supreme jurisdiction, both civil and military, waging war, right of\nforfeiture, and levying taxes. These privileges were granted, owing to\nthe remoteness of Durham from the metropolis and its proximity to the\nwarlike kingdom of Scotland, and allowed of justice being administered\nat home, thereby doing away with the obligation of the inhabitants\nquitting their county, and leaving it exposed to hostile invasions.\n\nThey were also excused from military service across the Tees or Tayne,\non the plea that they were specially charged to keep and defend the\nsacred body of St. Cuthbert. Those engaged on this service were called\n\"Haliwer folc\" (Holy War folk). But in the twenty-seventh year of the\nreign of Henry VIII. the power of the See was much curtailed; and\neventually, on the death of Bishop Van Milvert in 1836, it was\ndeprived of all temporal jurisdictions and privileges.\n\n[Illustration: DURHAM\n\nFROM THE RAILWAY]\n\nAround Carileph's fine Norman church numerous additions were made from\ntime to time, namely:\n\nThe Galilee or Western Chapel, of the Transitional Period.\n\nThe gradual change from the Norman to the Pointed style, which took\nplace between 1154 and 1189, during Henry II.'s reign.\n\nThe Eastern Transept, or \"Nine Altars.\"\n\nThe Western Towers, built in \"The Early English Style,\" which was a\nfurther development of \"The Transitional.\"\n\nIt was carried out in the reigns of Richard I. to Henry III., 1189 to\n1272. It is also known as \"First Pointed\" or \"Lancet.\"\n\nThe Central Tower (Perpendicular).\n\nThe Windows (Decorated and Perpendicular).\n\nFrom 1154, the commencement of Henry II.'s reign, architecture acquired\nnew characteristics in each reign, or rather the architects of each\nreign attempted to improve on the style of their predecessors. It began\nwith the \"Transition from Norman to Pointed.\" From that it passed to\n\"First Pointed or Early English.\" Then to \"Complete or Geometrical\nPointed.\" This was succeeded, in Edward III.'s time, by a more flowing\nstyle called \"Middle Pointed,\" \"Curvilinear,\" or \"Decorated.\" The\ngraceful flowing lines of this period culminated in what is known as\n\"The Third Pointed,\" \"Rectilinear,\" or \"Perpendicular Style.\" This\nperiod existed from 1399 to 1546, that is to say, from the beginning of\nthe reign of Henry IV. to the end of the reign of Henry VIII.\n\nThe Galilee or Western Chapel was built and dedicated as an offering to\n\"The Blessed Virgin,\" by Bishop Pudsey, between 1153 and 1195; and\nserved as the allotted place of worship for women, who were strictly\nforbidden to approach the sacred shrine of St. Cuthbert.\n\nIn the south-west corner of this chapel there is an altar-tomb of blue\nmarble. This is revered as the abiding-place of the earthly remains of\nthe great monk and historian, the Venerable Bede. Concerning him,\ntradition relates how Elfred, \"The Sacrist\" of Durham, in 1022, stole\nthese remains from Jarrow and preserved them in St. Cuthbert's coffin\ntill 1104. They were afterwards placed in a gold and silver shrine by\nBishop Pudsey, which was left in the refectory till 1370, when Richard\nof Barnard Castle, a monk afterwards buried under the blue stone on the\nwest of the present tomb, influenced its removal to the Galilee Chapel.\n\n[Illustration: DURHAM\n\nINTERIOR OF CATHEDRAL LOOKING ACROSS THE NAVE INTO SOUTH TRANSEPT]\n\nThere upon the altar-tomb, mentioned before, the casket was placed, and\nwas covered by a gilt cover of wainscot, which was drawn up by a pulley\nwhen the shrine was visited by pilgrims.\n\nUpon this altar-tomb there is an inscription in Latin, in current use of\nthe period, which runs thus:\n\n      \"Hac sunt in fossa Bedae Venerabilis ossa.\"\n    (\"In this tomb are the bones of the Venerable Bede.\")\n\nIn connection with this inscription there is a legend that the sixth\nword, \"Venerabilis,\" was miraculously supplied by divine intervention to\nthe tired and till then uninspired monk who was penning it. Hence Bede\nis known generally as \"The Venerable Bede.\"\n\nClose by there was an altar to the Venerable Bede.\n\nThe Reformation swept away the original tomb, leaving only a few traces\nbehind, and the bones were buried under its site; and an altar-tomb,\nwhich still exists, was erected over them.\n\nEvery Sunday and holiday at noon a monk was accustomed to ascend the\niron pulpit beneath the great west window, and from it to preach.\n\nThough this pulpit is gone, there still exists in close proximity a\nsmall chamber of the time of Bishop Langley, which was obviously the\nrobing-room of the preacher.\n\nFrom 1775 to 1795 this magnificent pile was given over to the tender\nmercies of one James Wyatt, architect, who, but for timely intervention\non the part of John Carter, would have left little of it to our present\nview; but, alas! by his chiselling and interference with the superficial\ndetails of the exterior, he has taught us a lesson in vandalism. The\nCathedral still survives with surpassing beauty, and the name of the\nwould-be destroyer is dead.\n\nThe Galilee Chapel was happily rescued in time from utter destruction at\nthe hands of James Wyatt. This gentleman had already commenced to pull\ndown a portion of it to make room for a coach-road, which he had planned\nto facilitate the connection between the castle and the college.\n\nUnhappily the spirit of utility of a most material age allowed the\nChapter House to be demolished, but, oddly enough, this demolition,\ntogether with the peeling of the exterior, the removal, so to speak, of\ndetails and minor embellishments of the grand edifice, have robbed us of\nnothing of its impressiveness, but indeed remind us, as the mutilated\nParthenon marbles do, of the irony of man's vain predilection to\nmutilate the beautiful, which must last for ever. Thus again there is\nevidence in the interior of man's destructive power in the mutilation\nof the Neville tombs.\n\n[Illustration: DURHAM\n\nELVET BRIDGE]\n\nIt seems strange that the House of God the Peacemaker and the shrine of\nSt. Cuthbert the \"incorruptible\" should have been used as a prison-house\nof corruptible beings and peace-breakers,--legitimised murderers,--for\nhere were interned the Scotch prisoners to the number of forty-five\nhundred, after the battle of Dunbar, and ample scope of amusement was\ngiven for their empty brains, as their ruthless exercise of the\nprivilege records.\n\nThe Chapel of the Nine Altars still contains the remains of St.\nCuthbert. When the tomb was opened in 1827 a number of curious and\ninteresting books and MSS., the portable altar, vestments, and other\nrelics were found. These are now placed in the Cathedral Library. The\nCathedral Library was formerly the dormitory and refectories of the\nabbey, as it was originally styled.\n\nIn this connection one is led to speculate upon the possible early\nevolution of religious thought of early Christianity, and to half\nsuspect that the \"Nine Altars\" in the Galilee Chapel and the \"Woman's\nBar\" were the remnants of symbols of pre-Christian era, retained for the\nobvious purpose of satisfying converts to the faith still young.\n\nThere is a strong flavour of the worship of the Nine Muses of pagan\ntimes, and of the Judaical laws with regard to women either within or\nwithout the places of worship.\n\nTradition has it that St. Cuthbert was a misogynist, and so strong was\nit that the precincts of St. Cuthbert were strictly guarded against the\nencroachment of women. To enforce this \"The Boundary Cross\" or \"Woman's\nBar\" was constructed to limit their approach, in the south of the nave.\n\nBy this attitude towards women St. Cuthbert, as a priest, only\nforeshadowed the present regime of the Church of Rome as regards\nmatrimonial obligations on the part of its servants. For so saintly a\nman must not be taken as a hater of women, or his beatification as the\nson of a woman would have no sense, and would call his incorruptibility\ninto question, and his saintliness of character in grave doubt.\n\nThe chief entrance to the Cathedral was originally in the west end, but\nwhen Bishop Pudsey built the Galilee Chapel, a doorway was constructed\nin the north end, framed in a rich and deeply recessed Norman arch,\ndoing away with the necessity of the great entrance. Fixed to the door\nis the famous Norman knocker, suspended from the mouth of a grotesque\nmonster, by which offenders seeking sanctuary made their presence known.\n\n[Illustration: DURHAM\n\nTHE WESTERN TOWERS]\n\nOne of the most marvellous features, perhaps, of the whole Cathedral is\nthe impressive grandeur of its appearance to the traveller, approaching\nfrom any quarter, who sees this Island Hill capped by the mighty\nstructure, soaring up, as it were, into the heavens, yet dominating by\nits protecting shadows the city round its base--the symbol most\nbeautifully conceived of the affinity between earth and heaven, and\ntruly the noblest form of monument of reverential design that the human\nbrain could have possibly conceived.\n\n\n\n\nLichfield\n\nLicefelle.\n\n(\"Doomsday Book.\")\n\n\nLichfield, the ancient cathedral city of Staffordshire, has the best\nexisting type of the fourteenth-century English church. It is memorable\nalso as the birthplace of Dr. Johnson. Through the generosity of\nAlderman Gilbert the Corporation has purchased the house in which Dr.\nJohnson was born, with his statue opposite it, and has opened it to the\npublic, much in the same way as that of Shakespeare's at\nStratford-on-Avon. Lichfield is about sixteen miles to the north of\nBirmingham, and lies in a fertile valley, on a small tributary of the\nTrent.\n\nThe Venerable Bede, in his accounts of this city, calls it Licidfeld,\nbeing supposed to mean \"Field of the Dead.\" It appears that a large\nnumber of Christians, in the reign of Diocletian, was massacred just in\nthe neighbourhood, and thus originated the name Lichfeld, now altered to\nLichfield. The termination \"feld\" was clearly introduced from over the\nwater, for it still exists in the Low Countries, and bears the same\nmeaning. As to what connection exists between \"licid\" and \"dead,\" we\ncannot clearly understand.\n\nIn 669 Lichfield became an episcopal see, over which St. Chad was the\nfirst bishop. He left behind him a work, in the form of his Gospels. For\na short time, namely, in the reign of Offa, it was raised to the dignity\nof an archbishopric, but the Primacy was restored to Canterbury in 803.\nThe See of Lichfield was, in 1075, transferred to Chester, and from\nthere, a few years later, to Coventry. Eventually, in 1148, Lichfield\nrecovered its see. In 1305 the town received a charter of incorporation,\nand has since returned members to Parliament. It was raised to the\ndignity of a city by Edward VI., 1549.\n\nThe original Norman Cathedral no longer exists. In its stead there is a\nbeautiful structure of Early English style, dating either from the end\nof the twelfth or the beginning of the thirteenth century.\n\nMr. Collins gives us an excellent idea of the wonderful and elaborate\narchitecture of the west front. It seems that the architect generally\nlavished his best powers on the west front, as if to arrest the\nattention of the worshipper prior to entry. The west front was, and is\nnow, invariably the chief entrance to the church. There is no doubt that\nthe entrance was here specially situated with a view of continuing the\nfirst great impression. There is nothing grander and more impressive in\ncathedral architecture than to view the gradual unfolding of the\ninterior as the sight becomes more accustomed to the sudden transition\nof the outside glare of day to the subdued light inside.\n\nNothing can be more symbolical of religion in church structure than to\nobserve the trend of architectural lines in perspective. If the eye\nfollow the upward course of the central and side aisles, and the\ndownward sweep of the caps of columns, arches and walls diminishing in\ntrue perspective lines, it will be seen that they converge to the\nholiest place of the sacred edifice--the altar, the point of sight for\nall.\n\nThis Cathedral received, like other mighty buildings, similar\nill-treatment during the Civil Wars. It was converted into stables by\nthe parliamentary troops, who created havoc amongst its rich sculptures.\nIn 1651 it was set on fire, and, by order of Parliament, was stripped of\nits lead, and left to neglect and decay.\n\n[Illustration: LICHFIELD\n\nTHE WEST FRONT]\n\nThe damage was repaired by Bishop Hackett in 1671. The Restoration\nhas not long been completed, various improvements having been made.\nUnder the superintendence of Mr. Wyatt, the choir was enlarged by the\nremoval of the screen in front of the Lady Chapel. The transepts are\nrichly ornamented, and contain certain portions of Norman architecture.\nThe windows are worked in beautiful tracery. The choir is in the\nDecorated style of English architecture.\n\nSt. Mary's Chapel is an elegant design by Bishop Langton. For the\ncentral window was painted \"The Resurrection,\" by Eggington, from a\ndesign by Sir Joshua Reynolds, the first president of the Royal Academy.\nIn this same chapel there was the rich shrine to St. Chad, which was\ndemolished at the Dissolution.\n\nThere is a great central tower of two hundred and eighty-five feet in\nheight, besides two western spires one hundred and eighty-three feet.\nThe total length of the building from east to west is about four hundred\nfeet. By the north aisle is the Chapter-house. It is a ten-sided\nbuilding of great beauty, with a vaulted roof supported on a central\nclustered column.\n\nThe memory of Bishops Hackett, Langton, and Pattishul is kept alive by\ntheir monuments, which escaped the ravages of Cromwell's troops. A\nmonument to Dr. Samuel Johnson, a bust of Garrick, and a mutilated\nstatue of Captain Stanley, serve to remind us of their departure from\nthis world. Chantrey is responsible for a monument to the memory of the\ninfant children of Mrs. Robinson.\n\n\n\n\nOxford\n\nOxenford.\n\n(\"Doomsday Book.\")\n\n\nThe greatness of the city of Oxford, a contraction of Oxenford, as\nquaintly depicted on the armorial shield by an ill-drawn ox making\ntentative efforts to cross a ford represented by horizontal zigzag\nwaves, consists in its magnificent colleges, not huddled together, but\ndotted in all directions. Some authorities derive the name from\nOuseford, from the river Ouse, now the Isis, and that the wealthy abbey,\nerected on an island in this river, was named Ouseney, or Osney, from\nthe same source.\n\nDidanus, an early Saxon prince, is credited with a monastic\nestablishment, about the year 730, dedicated to St. Mary and All Saints,\nand founded for twelve sisters of noble birth. His daughter Frideswide\nwas first abbess, and was after death canonised and buried in the abbey\ndedicated to St. Frideswide.\n\nThe origin of the city is attributed by some historians to the\nestablishment of schools by Alfred the Great, whilst, on the other\nhand, it is demonstrated to have existed many years prior to this\nmonarch's reign, as far back as 802, by an act of confirmation by Pope\nMartin II., which sets it forth as an ancient academy of learning. It\nhas its market-place and other essentials, like every town; but take\naway the colleges, and with them sweep away all the traditions that have\nsprung up and constituted that university which brooks no rival\nexcepting Cambridge, the city would no longer be a city, but, at the\nmost, an overgrown village.\n\nThere is no doubt that the colleges were the gradual development of\nmonastic institutions. The hall of nowadays and the kitchens and\nbuttery-hatch are simply the survivals of the refectory of the mediaeval\ndays. The compulsory morning attendance of students, on most days during\nterm-time, to prayers in chapel, is again a survival of the matutinal\ndevotions of the monks. In the early days of monasticism the inmates of\nthe ecclesiastical buildings were the only recipients of learning and\nexponents of illuminated manuscripts, in addition to the knowledge of\nsome trade or other. A few, perhaps, of the laity, who were favourites\nand might possibly be admitted as novices, were permitted to partake of\nthis knowledge, but being brought up in the convent their sympathy and\ngratitude would be entirely with their benefactors. Nevertheless, as\ntime went on and a thirst for knowledge of letters increased, this\nintroduction of novices became the thin end of the wedge to the downfall\nof the monastic power, which was consummated by Henry VIII. in the year\n1525.\n\nOn the site of the monastery of St. Frideswide Cardinal Wolsey founded a\ncollege, then named Cardinal College, but now known as Christ Church. On\nthe disgrace of this famous prelate, Henry VIII. completed the\nestablishment, under the name of Henry the Eighth's College. It is\nnecessary to make this slight mention of the college, for no doubt its\ngreat accommodation influenced the removal of the episcopal see from\nOsney, and constituted the elevation of the Church of St. Frideswide\ninto a cathedral. This removal necessitated the change of name to Christ\nChurch, under which is comprised the sacred edifice and college. This\nhas given rise to a unique position. The Cathedral is not only a\ncathedral of the city, but is a noble and immense chapel of the college,\nand the Dean occupies the singular position not only as the Dean of the\nchurch but also as the Dean of the college.\n\nSpread out before the chief and only entrance of the church is Tom\nQuadrangle, with a paved walk extending all round, and raised a few\nsteps above the circular carriage drive which encloses a lawn, with the\npond famous for the ducking of students unpopular with their\ncontemporaries.\n\nThere are evidences, at one time, of the existence of pillars supporting\na roof, covering the whole extent of the broad-flagged pavement of this\nquadrangle. The principal entrance to this quadrangle is through Tom\nTower, from which daily, about nine in the evening, the huge bell booms\nforth one hundred and one strokes, the signal for all colleges to close\ntheir portals, and the dealing out of pecuniary fines to all\nlate-comers. The lower part of this tower, up to the two smaller towers,\nis Wolsey's, whilst the upper and incongruous half is the conception of\nWren. In spite of this, it is a noble-looking structure, as can be seen\nby looking at the water-colour of Mr. Collins.\n\nThe Cathedral cannot strictly be termed imposing, as so little of it is\nvisible externally. It is hemmed in on all sides by the college\nprecincts, and jammed, as it were, into a corner, presents a rather\nundignified appearance, and not at all in accordance with the usual\nproud position of a cathedral. It shows to best advantage when viewed\nfrom the side of the river Thames, exhibiting, as it does, its beautiful\nspire. This spire, of Early English architecture, is one of the earliest\nin the kingdom, though forming no part of the original design. It is\nplanted on the top of the central tower of the Cathedral, which is a\ncruciform Norman structure.\n\n[Illustration: OXFORD\n\nCHRISTCHURCH. INTERIOR OF THE NAVE]\n\nThe interior presents many interesting portions of singular beauty and\ndesign; the arches of the nave, which have been partly demolished, are\nin a double series, the tower springing from corbels on the piers. The\nremains of the nave, transepts and choir arches date from the twelfth\ncentury; and the Church of St. Frideswide, or, as it is now known,\nChrist Church. The beautifully groined roof of the choir is decorated\nwith pendants, presenting a rich appearance.\n\nThe Latin Chapel has several windows in the Decorated style, whilst the\nDean's Chapel possesses a monument in the same style, with beautiful\ncanopied niches, and the shrine of St. Frideswide, most elaborately\ndesigned in the Late style of English architecture. During the\nParliamentary war many windows were destroyed.\n\nIt is interesting to note the various vicissitudes of the city in\nhistory. It suffered terrible visitations from the Danes, who burnt it\non three separate occasions. For refusing to submit to the Conqueror,\nin 1067, Oxford was taken by storm and given to Robert D'Oily. William\nRufus held a council in the town under Lanfranc, Archbishop of\nCanterbury, with other bishops assisting, to defeat a conspiracy formed\nagainst him by Odo, Bishop of Bayeux, in favour of Robert, Duke of\nNormandy.\n\nStephen assembled a council of the nobility here, to whom he promised to\nabolish the tax called \"Dane Gelt,\" and to restore the laws of Edward\nthe Confessor. By way of digression it is interesting to note that the\nFlemings still use the word \"geld\" (money), which is a corruption of\n\"gelt.\"\n\nWhen Henry II. and Thomas a Becket fell out the monarch held a\nparliament at Oxford to undermine the Pope's authority, who had laid an\ninterdict on the kingdom.\n\nIn 1167 he again summoned here another parliament, to partition Ireland\namong faithful subjects who had achieved the conquest of it. The\ncitizens of Oxford contributed handsomely to the ransom of Richard I.\nwhen detained prisoner in Austria. King John managed here in 1204,\nthrough the aid of a parliament, to raise liberal supplies. Stephen\nLangton, Archbishop of Canterbury, held here a synod for reforming\necclesiastical abuses. Parliament was again assembled in this ancient\ncity by Henry III., in which he assumed the government, and revoked the\ngrant of Magna Charta and the Charter of Forests, on the plea that he\nsigned them when a minor. In 1319 Pondras, son of a tanner at Exeter,\ncaused some commotion at Oxford, declaring that he was the rightful heir\nof Edward I., and had been stolen and exchanged for the reigning prince,\nEdward II. For the imposture he was executed at Northampton.\n\nLater on a conspiracy was formed to assassinate Henry IV., at a\ntournament to be held here, and to restore the deposed monarch, Richard\nII., to the throne. It signally failed, and the Earls of Kent and\nSalisbury, Sir Thomas Blount, and others were executed near Oxford.\n\nThe next event of importance was the influence of Henry VIII., who\nraised Oxford to the dignity of a see, separating it from the Diocese of\nLincoln. Wolsey also left his mark, as he invariably did wherever he\nwent. During Henry VIII.'s reign Erasmus, a native of Holland, came to\nOxford to aid the progress of learning.\n\nHe taught Greek, but the violence of the popish party drove him from\nthence, as the study of the ancient language was deemed a dangerous\ninnovation. In 1555 Oxford witnessed the terrible death of Latimer and\nRidley, condemned to be burned at the stake. Their Protestant tendencies\nhad incurred Queen Mary's resentment, and a brass cross let into the\ncentre of the road, near Balliol College, marks the site, and is a\npathetic reminder of their martyrdom. Soon after Cranmer followed,\nrecanting all belief in the Pope's supremacy, and in transubstantiation.\n\nIn the time of Henry VIII. Cranmer was instrumental in getting the\nLord's Prayer, the Creed, the Commandments, and the Litany translated\ninto English, for hitherto it had been customary to conduct the Church\nservices in Latin.\n\nIn 1625 and 1665 king and Parliament hurriedly retreated from the plague\nin London to adjourn to Oxford. In the Parliamentary war Oxford played a\nprominent part, and in 1681 Charles II. dissolved Parliament at\nWestminster, only to assemble a new one in the university city.\n\n[Illustration: OXFORD\n\nCHRISTCHURCH GATEWAY]\n\nBut the great events that go to the making of England's history have\nbeen contributed by men whose names are inscribed upon the books of the\nvarious colleges of Oxford. The Cathedral College, Christ Church, claims\nthe three great English revivalists: Wycliffe; the chief of the\nLollards; John Wesley, founder of Methodism; and Pusey.\n\nSamuel Wesley, the father of Samuel, John, and Charles, entered Exeter\nCollege as a \"pauper scholaris,\" and was an eminent divine. His son\nSamuel, the intimate associate of Pope, Swift, and Prior, wrote squibs\nagainst Sir Robert Walpole, the Whigs, and the Low Church divines, and\nwas a member of Christ Church, as well as Charles. These three brothers\ncompiled the \"Book of Psalms and Hymns,\" Charles alone composed and\npublished some four thousand hymns, besides leaving about two thousand\nin manuscript.\n\nPusey, born near Oxford in 1800, entered as a commoner and died as a\ncanon of Christ Church, at the age of eighty-two.\n\nThe great scholar of Corpus Christi, John Keble, became member of that\ncollege at the age of fifteen, and when nineteen was elected Fellow of\nOriel,--a very proud distinction, for Oriel was then the great centre of\nthe most famous intellects in Oxford.\n\nTo this society belonged Copleston, Davison, Whately, and soon after\nKeble's election Arnold, Pusey, and Newman became members. Newman, whose\ntendencies were in turn Evangelical and Calvinistic, to become finally\ncardinal, matriculated at Trinity College. Amongst other famous members\nof Wolsey's foundation must be included the statesmen William Gladstone\nand the late Marquis of Salisbury.\n\nOther distinguished inmates of this college are Anthony Ashley Cooper,\nthe seventh earl of Shaftesbury, who interested himself in the practical\nwelfare of the working classes; and John Ruskin, author of \"The Stones\nof Venice,\" whose father had at first conceived the ambition of seeing\nhim become bishop; Cecil Rhodes, the Imperialist, whose health was so\nuncertain that at one time his doctor gave him only six months to live,\nacquired wealth in South Africa, and came home to be admitted to Oriel,\nOxford.\n\nThe author of \"Alice in Wonderland,\" under the _nom de plume_ of \"Lewis\nCarroll,\" was also a student of Christ Church. As Charles Lutridge\nDodgson he wrote many important works on mathematics.\n\nThese, with a host of other celebrated men of all the various colleges,\nhave all shed lustre upon their _alma mater_; and, as long as old\ntraditions be revered and followed, Oxford need never fear a decline.\nThe beautiful buildings, collegiate and ecclesiastical, the wonderful\nuniversity libraries, \"The Bodleian\" and \"The Ashmolean,\" the sumptuous\nplate and silver of the colleges, are some of the great features of this\ncathedral city.\n\nSuch, in brief, is the history of this prominent seat of learning.\n\n\n\n\nPeterborough\n\nSt. Petrius de Burgh.\n\n(\"Doomsday Book.\")\n\n\nThis ancient cathedral city of Peterborough is most curiously situated.\nOn first looking at the map it is extremely difficult to determine\noff-hand to which of the three counties, Northamptonshire,\nHuntingdonshire, or Cambridgeshire, it belongs. It is true part of the\ncity lies in Huntingdonshire. Happily for Northamptonshire, the near\nproximity of the river Nene probably decided the worthy monks to select\nthat site for the monastery. It was dedicated to St. Peter, whose\nsaintly name was evidently borrowed to designate the name of the\nborough, and to displace the original appellation, which was\nMedeswelhamsted, or Medeshampsted, taken out of compliment to a\nwhirlpool in the river Aufona, now the Nene. Though we are told that\nthis monastery was founded, about 655, by a royal Christian convert,\nPaeda, the fifth king of Mercia, and finished by his brother, Wulfhere,\nin atonement for his crime in connection with the premature death of\nhis sons for their Christian proclivities--though we are told this,\nnevertheless we are inclined to think that the worthy brethren were\nchiefly responsible for the selection of the site.\n\nIf we come to consider closely the locality of each monastic\ninstitution, we generally stumble across a river, however small and\nhumble it may appear. And why is this? Simply for the fish, which was\ncarefully preserved and encouraged to multiply. Even to this day all\nmonks, nuns, and strict followers of the Roman Catholic persuasion\nrigidly adhere to the observance of eating fish, instead of flesh, on\nevery Friday and fast day, though nowadays it is not customary for them\nto catch fish in its natural element. In the good old days the holy\nfriars had to depend principally upon the yield of the river for\nFriday's requirements, if perchance the monastery was situated far\ninland. Travelling in mediaeval times was somewhat precarious and slow.\n\nThis monastery would be in all probability a wooden erection of\nAnglo-Saxon style. Philologists demonstrate that \"getimbrian\"--to\nconstruct of wood--was the Anglo-Saxon word for \"build.\" If this\nargument holds good, it accounts not only for the scarcity of Old\nEnglish lapidary remains, but also for their peculiar character. Till\nthe arrival of masons in 672 from the continent, the buildings had been\ncomposed mostly of wood covered with thatch. Only towards the close of\nthe tenth century, with a better knowledge of stone-work, did architects\ndevelop a definite style in England.\n\nWith the arrival of the Danes, about the middle of the ninth century,\nthe town was sacked, the monks were massacred, and the monastic\nbuildings were burnt. For more than a century it remained in oblivion,\ntill the combined efforts of Ethelwold, Bishop of Winchester, King\nEdgar, and his wealthy chancellor Adulph, produced a monastery, over\nwhich, in recognition of his pecuniary assistance, Adulph was made\nabbot. As usual, the Norman Conquest left its mark in the shape of a\ncastle to protect the town, and to instil wholesome awe in the English.\nIt was early in the reign of Henry I. that a fire caused great injury to\nthe town and monastery. Though deplorable, as it at first appeared, it\nnevertheless gave birth to the present Norman cathedral church, which\nAbbot Salisbury commenced to build in 1118, two years after the\naccident. At the same time the site of the town was transferred from the\neastern side of the monastery to the present situation north of the\nNene.\n\n[Illustration: PETERBOROUGH\n\nTHE WEST FRONT]\n\nSix years before the death of Henry VIII., to wit, in 1541,\nPeterborough was separated from the Diocese of Lincoln and was created\ninto an episcopal see. The last abbot of Peterborough was appointed\nfirst bishop, with the abbot's house as the episcopal palace, and the\nmonastery church as the cathedral. To this building, the Norman effort\nof Abbot Salisbury, was grafted the architecture of the Early English\nstyle. No pen can so adequately describe the magnificence of the west\nfront of this cathedral as the brush of Mr. Collins. This artist has\ndone full justice to his subject, which has evidently been a work of\nlove to him. In his rendering he has both successfully caught the true\nspirit of the church's grandeur, and has managed to incorporate his\ndistinct individuality. Mr. Collins has shown the same qualities with\nregard to the \"market-place.\"\n\nThe three lofty and beautiful arches of this west front are Early\nEnglish. Perhaps a jarring note to its fine composition is the small\nporch, over which there is a chapel to St. Thomas a Becket.\n\nA square tower at the north-west angle and another similar one at the\nsouth-west angle of the nave enrich the general effect. The nave itself\nis Norman, and is separated from the aisles by finely clustered piers\nand arches of the same style, but lighter than usual in character.\n\nThe east end is circular, and there are several chapels of the English\nstyle subsequent to the Early English. They are elegantly designed with\nfan tracery, and the windows, since their original foundation, appear to\nhave been enriched with tracery.\n\nOn the south side there is the shrine to St. Tibba, and close to it Mary\nQueen of Scots was buried. Her remains were afterwards exhumed and\nremoved to Westminster.\n\nThe north side was graced with a tomb to Queen Catherine of Arragon.\nUneasy was her rest, for Cromwell's troops laid sacrilegious hands on\nthe tomb. Her royal memory is now perpetuated by a commonplace marble\nslab.\n\nNot content with this the Roundheads, as the parliamentary forces were\ncalled, defaced the Cathedral, looted its plate and ornaments, and\npulled down part of the cloisters, the chapter house, and the episcopal\npalace. What remains of the cloisters exhibit specimens of Early Norman,\ndown to the later periods of English architecture, and give some idea of\ntheir former grandeur.\n\nBesides its beauties, this cathedral affords an excellent study of\narches, illustrating the subtleties of every transitional period in\narchitecture, from Norman to perpendicular.\n\n[Illustration: PETERBOROUGH\n\nTHE MARKET PLACE]\n\nThe choir, by John de Sez, is Early Norman. Martin of Bec took fifteen\nyears, in the twelfth century, to realise the completion of the aisles\nof both transepts. The remaining portions of the transepts and the\ncentral tower were designed by William de Waterville, from 1155 to 1175.\n\nUnfortunately, the insecurity of this tower caused it to be pulled down\nin 1883, and attempts were immediately made to substitute another.\n\nThe nave belongs to the latter part of the Norman period. To be correct,\nits date, 1177 to 1193, clearly indicates it should be included rather\nin the Transition period, which was then trending towards the Lancet of\nEarly English.\n\nThis same Transition must also claim the western transepts by Abbot\nAndrew, 1193 to 1200.\n\nThe painted roof of wood, added by Abbot Benedict, 1177 to 1193, is a\nfair example of the fashion prevalent in Europe at that period. Another\nobject of interest is the \"decorated windows,\" which were placed\nthroughout this church in the fourteenth century.\n\nA distinctive feature is the existence of the \"Close,\" exhibiting\ninteresting remains of English architecture. To more thoroughly ensure\nthe privacy of the cathedral, its precincts were enclosed, very much\nlike a college at a university, either within a solid wall enclosure or\ngenerally surrounded by dwellings for the ecclesiastics. Though the\ncathedral might be in the densest quarter of the town, yet, on closing\nits gates, it secured complete severance from the city. The cathedral\nclose at Salisbury is quite the best specimen extant in England.\n\n_En passant_ we would mention among the many eminent men that\nPeterborough is justly proud of, Benedict, who was abbot in 1180, and\nfounded an hospital, which he dedicated to St. Thomas a Becket, whose\nbiographer and ardent admirer he was; and an eminent English historian\nin the fourteenth century, John, abbot of the monastery of Peterborough;\nArchdeacon Paley, a celebrated divine and moralist, who died in 1805;\nand Sir John Hill, a popular writer in the eighteenth century.\n\nIn conclusion, we cannot help drawing attention to the great general,\nstatesman, and contemporary of the Duke of Marlborough, who was called\nafter this city, and known in the reigns of Anne and George I. The title\nof Earl of Peterborough was conferred by Charles I. on the family of\nMordaunt, and worthily borne by the celebrated soldier-statesman.\n\n\n\n\nSt. Albans\n\nSt. Albanus.\n\n(\"Doomsday Book.\")\n\n\nUnder the title of \"Oppidum,\" the stronghold of Cassivelaunus, St.\nAlbans is frequently mentioned by Caesar and Tacitus.\n\nAt the time of Caesar's first visit to England, which was in 46 B.C., the\nBritons led a wandering life, and it was only in war time that they\ngathered together and took refuge in towns. Tacitus and Caesar describe\nthe Britons as people who had no cities, towns, or buildings of any\ndurable materials. The sites of their towns were chosen with a view to\nturning to good account all the assistance that Nature could lend, such\nas woods, ditches, and bogs.\n\nThough Caesar names no particular town, yet he describes his attack and\noccupation of the \"Oppidum\" over which Cassivelaunus was the chief. And\nfrom what is known of the progress and distance of Caesar from the\nThames, there seems no doubt that \"Verulamium,\" as it was then and\nafterwards called, is identical with that of the stronghold of the\nBritons. It was situated on the low ground on the banks of the river\nVer. Caesar's occupation was brief. Until the conquest of Britain by\nClaudius in 43 A.D. it remained an important city in the hands of the\nBritons. Finally, in 420 A.D., the Romans quitted Britain. During their\nstay they had greatly opened up the country, constructing the famous\nhigh roads, one of which is the great North Road, called Watling Street,\nwhich stretches from London to York.\n\nIn the fifth century Verulamium, as we shall still continue to call St.\nAlbans for a while, was occupied by the Saxons. They changed the site of\nthe Roman city from the low ground, on which now stands the Church of\nSt. Michael, to the higher ground. At the same time they renamed it\nWatling-ceaster, after Watling Street, which passed through it.\n\nFrom the ruins of the ancient city of Verulamium arose in the tenth\ncentury the celebrated monastery in honour of St. Alban. To account for\nthe erection of this building it is necessary to give a brief sketch of\nits patron saint.\n\nDuring the Diocletian persecution of the Christians, in the year 304 A.\nD., a distinguished citizen, Alban of Verulamium, of Roman origin, but\nconverted to Christianity, suffered martyrdom for giving shelter to\nAmphibalus, a Christian. For this crime he was executed on the site of\nthe present abbey, and in 772 was canonised.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nNearly five hundred years after, in 793, Offa, the King of Mercia, was\nvery much exercised in mind as to the best means of expiating his murder\nof AEthelbert.\n\nGreatly to his relief, he was bidden in a vision to seek the remains of\nSt. Alban, and over them, when found, to erect a monastery. In\naccordance with these instructions he, with Higbert, Archbishop of\nLichfield, the Bishops of Leicester and Lindsey, and a huge assembly of\nclergy and laity, visited the hill, where the \"Proto-martyr of England,\"\nas St. Alban came to be known, had suffered. There the holy remains were\ndiscovered. Over them Offa founded the abbey, with a monastery for one\nhundred monks of the Order of St. Benedict.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe present abbey really dates from the eleventh century. At the close\nof the tenth century the ruins of the old Roman city of Verulamium were\nbroken up to serve as materials for the new church buildings. But owing\nto the unsettled character of the times the erection was delayed, till\nWilliam the Conqueror was firmly possessed of the throne, when Paul of\nCaen, a relative of Archbishop Lanfranc, was appointed abbot in 1077. He\nbuilt the magnificent Norman structure, based upon the plans of St.\nStephen's, Caen--the same church which served as a model for Lanfranc,\nwhen he built Canterbury.\n\nThough finished for some years past, it was only consecrated in 1115.\n\nAs was invariably the custom, the church was built in the form of a\ncross. In this connection it is interesting to note the evolution of the\ncross.\n\nPrior to the Christian era the cross was looked upon with disfavour.\n\nTo be crucified was to undergo a most ignominious form of punishment,\nand it was only served out to malefactors of the worst description.\nNothing short of this would have been a sufficient check in those times\nto the growth of vice. But in the early days of Christianity the cross\ncame to be regarded as the holiest symbol of \"The Sacrifice\" made for\nthe good of mankind.\n\nWhen converts met they formed on the ground the sign of the cross, in\norder to distinguish friends from foes. The mere fact of a severe\npunishment meted out consequent on discovery of this secret passport\nserved only to increase the reverence held for the symbol.\n\n[Illustration: ST. ALBANS\n\nFROM THE WALLS OF OLD VERULAM]\n\nAs soon as time and opportunity allowed places of worship were erected,\nand the natural form adopted would be that of the cross, for which they\nhad suffered so much persecution, and which typified the foundation of\ntheir faith and hopes of salvation.\n\nAs they assembled in church they would be sensible of the prevailing\ninfluence of the emblem. In every direction, look where they would, they\nwould always see the holy sign. The roof would reveal to the gaze the\nsame form as that on the ground.\n\nEven the walls, as they soared upwards, out-lined, tier upon tier, the\nChristian sign, capped at the last by a mighty cross, which cast its\nprotecting shadows around and over the worshippers.\n\nThe altar came to be placed at the head of the cross. The transept,\ncrossing it at right angles, formed the arms, and the nave the upright.\n\nThe altar was always situated at the east end, again illustrating a link\nwith the pagan times, when worshippers turned towards the sun.\n\nAs time progressed chapels were erected along the sides, causing the\nwalls to be pierced and arched. These chapels were in honour, firstly,\nof \"The Blessed Virgin,\" and then of the leaders of \"The Faith,\" who had\nbeen canonised as saints on account of martyrdom. But the main building\nwas always dedicated to the \"God Head.\"\n\nBy a special grant in 1154, given by Pope Adrian IV., who was born near\nSt. Albans, and who was the only Englishman ever appointed to the Papal\nSee, the abbots of St. Albans were allowed the privilege of wearing a\nmitre. Added to this dignity he was given precedence over all in\nEngland, whether they were king, archbishop, bishop, or legate. He also\nexercised supreme episcopal jurisdiction over all clergy and laity in\nall lands pertaining to the monastery.\n\nThe first abbot was Willgod, nominated by King Offa.\n\nThe last one was Richard Boreman, otherwise Stevenache.\n\nIn all there were forty-one from the foundation to the suppression,\nwhich took place in 1534. In that year the monastery was seized by Henry\nVIII., who allowed pensions to the monks, and an annuity to the abbot.\n\nAbout 1480 the abbey was amongst the first in England to set up a\nprinting press. On this the first English translation of the Bible was\nprinted.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nIn spite of every loving care exercised, the relics of St. Alban enjoyed\nlittle rest. In Wulruth's reign as fourth abbot, the abbey suffered at\nthe hands of the Danes. They carried away with them the bones of \"the\nProto-martyr\" to Denmark, and there placed them in a convent at Owenses.\nThey were found and brought back to the abbey.\n\nAgain, seventy years later, the Danes ravaged the country. But this time\nAElfric II., eleventh abbot, resorted to artifice. He hid the bones in\nthe walls of the church, and sent bogus relics to the monastery at Ely,\ngiving the monks special charges to guard them well. On the retirement\nof the Danes from the country, AElfric sent post haste to reclaim these\nbones. Ely at first demurred, but, giving way in the end, sent back some\nsubstituted bones. This disquieted the saint.\n\nHe appeared to Gilbert, a Benedictine monk, and to him disclosed the\nfraud, enjoining him to bring to light the true bones from their\nhiding-place. This was solemnly done. But Ely unexpectedly disclosed the\nartifice they had practised, and claimed that they were in possession of\nthe true relics.\n\nAs neither party would yield, \"the relics of St. Alban\" for a hundred\nyears received reverential and impartial homage both at St. Albans and\nat Ely. Eventually Ely disclaimed their right, on the appeal of Robert\nde Gorham, the eighteenth abbot, to the Pope.\n\nIn the history of the \"Wars of the Roses,\" the city of St. Albans played\na prominent part.\n\nIn 1455 Henry VI. set up his royal standard on the north side of the\ntown, whilst the Yorkists, under the Duke of York and the Earl of\nWarwick, the \"Kingmaker,\" encamped in the fields east of the town.\n\nOn May 3 of the same year in Holywell Street and its adjacent roads\nfought the two armies to decide the succession to the English throne.\nThe Yorkists gained the victory. The king was taken a wounded prisoner.\n\nOn February 17, 1461, St. Albans was for the second time the scene of a\nterrible battle. The Lancastrians, with Queen Margaret at their head,\ndefeated the Yorkists under the Earl of Warwick, and restored Henry VI.\nto the throne.\n\nThe principal portions now in existence of the original Norman church by\nPaul of Caen are the tower, the eastern bays of the nave, and the\ntransepts. Though it exhibits specimens of architecture of different\nperiods, and has undergone much restoration, the main architectural\noutlines, as conceived by Paul, have been adhered to all the time.\n\nWithin recent years Sir Gilbert Scott, succeeded by Sir Edmund Beckett,\nmade extensive renovations. The only reminder of the once vast monastic\nbuildings is the great gateway, within a few yards of the west entrance\nto the abbey.\n\n\n\n\nWells\n\nWelle.\n\n(\"Doomsday Book.\")\n\n\n\"Wells, a city, having separate jurisdiction, locally in the hundred of\nWells-Forum, County of Somerset.\" Thus runs a description of this place,\nand is a fair sample of most cities. We think a little explanation anent\n\"the hundred\" may possibly make that term more clear of understanding,\nand may not be amiss. The description, short as it is, has quite a\ncondensed history of its own, but only conveys a hazy idea of the status\nof the city.\n\n[Illustration: WELLS\n\nCATHEDRAL AND THE POOLS]\n\nIn the days of heathenism, it must be remembered that England was\npartitioned into several kingdoms, the size of which was regulated by\nthe might of their respective kings. Each tribe, or kingdom, was ruled\nby a tribal chief, or folk-king. He was chosen by the tribe, and the\nking-ship became in time practically hereditary. To maintain his power\nhe had to respect and keep the customs of his people. Without their\nconsent he could pass no law; he could touch no freeman's life or\nheritage without consent of law, which gave the freeman the right of\ndefending his cause before his fellow-freemen; he presided, at regular\nannual intervals, at the folk-moot, or tribal assembly, and at the great\nfeasts and sacrifices. Counsellors and wise men assisted the king with\nadvice. His marriages were the result of favourable and pacific\nnegotiations with other tribes. He was called upon to travel throughout\nhis kingdom and see that justice was properly administered and evil and\noppression suppressed. He was almost regarded as a demi-god, and his\ncrimes were supposed to be punished by the gods, who denied good seasons\nand brought about other calamities. The king was allowed a little army,\nor comitatus as it was called, of paid retainers, to maintain adequate\ndiscipline, and to form his bodyguard. These kings, chosen by the people\nat the tribal-moot, in heathen times were throned on the holy stone and\ncarried about on a shield, and in Christian times were consecrated. In\naccordance with the extension of the West Saxon kingdom, which became\nthe kingdom of the English, the court increased. At the time of the\nConquest, a treasurer, a chancellor, and other officials looking after\nthe king's plate, clothes, and horses were added to the royal\nhousehold. When in addition to these were added the bishops, abbots, and\nthe aldermen, who had succeeded the tribal kings in the several \"folks,\"\nor \"shires,\" on their absorption into the West Saxon kingdom, the king\nwas recognised as the head of the Witema-gemot, or Concilium Sapientium,\nas the \"meeting of wisemen\" was called. In the tenth century the king no\nlonger went about to get the consent of each folk-moot to a certain law,\nbut convened the heads of each shire-moot at some convenient central\nspot. This convening of moots, or Mycel-gemot, became the Magnum\nConcilium of the Normans, and in the thirteenth century developed into\nthe High Courts and Parliament. Beneath the shire-moots came the\n\"hundred-moots,\" and later on the \"hall-moots.\" The origin of the\n\"hundred\" appears, by some authorities, to be based on the military\norganisation. It is supposed, in the first instance, to be a grouping of\na sufficient number of free homesteads to furnish at least one hundred\nand twenty fully-armed freemen for war service, and to supply\nfull-qualified jurors for the cases of the district. This hundred-moot\nwas presided over by a lord or an hundred-elder, and discharged the\nduties for the district much in the same way as the shire-moot did for\nthe county. It was a criminal and civil court with its grand jury,\nand enforced the attendance of persons from each manor within the\nhundred. When the king was absent from the shire-moot, the \"ealdorman\"\n(alderman) of the shire presided, and to watch the royal interests was\nnominated the \"shire-reeve,\" or sheriff (scirgerefa), chosen from the\nbetter class of the freeholders. We are told that the laws of England\nwere far in advance of those in France. In fact, the English had written\nlaws at the time of the Conquest, and the Normans had none. It hardly\nseems credible that the conquered were, in some respects, more civilised\nthan their conquerors.\n\n[Illustration: WELLS\n\nFROM THE FIELDS]\n\nIt was only after the Conquest that the \"Doomsday Book\" came into\nexistence. After the Conquest the sheriff became simply a royal officer.\nHe was the financial representative of the Crown within his district.\nNow his financial duties no longer exist, and his judicial are almost\n_nil_. Our general knowledge of him is that he is supposed to be in at\nthe death of a murderer, and that he is somehow or other associated with\nthe bailiff--sheriff's officer, as he is styled.\n\nMr. Collins presents us with three interesting graphic descriptions.\nThis city owes its name to the numerous springs, and more particularly\nto that of St. Andrew's Well, whose water, rising in the vicinity of\nthe episcopal palace, flows through the south-western part of the city.\nIna, King of the West Saxons, named it thus. He, in 704, founded a\ncollegiate church and dedicated it to St. Andrew the Apostle.\n\nThis foundation was handsomely endowed by Cynewulf in 766, and\nflourished till 905. Wells was then erected into a see. This change was\nconsequent on an edict of Edward the Elder for the revival of religion,\nwhich had been brought down to a low ebb by the frequent and terrible\nincursions of the Danes. To combat this state of things, Pligrund,\nArchbishop of Canterbury, consecrated several new bishops, of whom\nAldhelm, formerly Abbot of Glastonbury, became first bishop of Wells.\n\nEdward the Confessor made his chaplain, Giso, the thirteenth bishop to\nthe See, and at the same time enriched it by the confiscated property of\nGodwin, Earl of Kent, and Harold, Earl of Wessex, his son, whom he had\ndriven into exile. Harold, in spite of his exile, made an incursion into\nSomersetshire, levied mail on his former tenantry, and eased the church\nof its treasures.\n\nIn the meantime Giso was being consecrated at Rome. On his return he was\nfortunate enough to gain some compensation from the queen, who was\nsister to Harold. But, unfortunately for Giso, Harold was again received\ninto favour. He promptly procured the banishment of Giso, and on his\nsuccession later to the throne straightway resumed all his estates,\nwhich Edward the Confessor had granted to the Church, and thus\nimpoverished the See.\n\nBishop Giso's opportunity came with the Conquest, when he was\nreinstated. William, in his second year of reign, restored to the\nBishopric, with some small deduction, all Harold's estates. Giso\naugmented the number of canons, and built a cloister, hall, and\ndormitory, and enlarged and beautified the choir of the Cathedral. John\nde Villula, his successor, swept away these buildings, and on their site\nbuilt a palace.\n\nVillula's name in ecclesiastical history is closely associated with a\nmemorable event which caused considerable commotion and rivalry between\nthe inhabitants of Wells and Bath. He removed the See of the diocese to\nBath, and assumed the title of Bishop of Bath. Feeling ran high, and the\nArchbishop of Canterbury was appealed to. His ingenuity proposed that\nthe prelates should be styled \"Bishop of Bath and Wells,\" that an equal\nnumber of delegates from both cities should elect him, and that their\ninstallation should take place in both churches. Yet, later, the\ndetermination of the diocese's headquarters became again a vexed\nquestion, under Bishop Savaricus, who was closely allied to the Emperor\nof Austria.\n\nRichard I.'s liberty was granted him by the Emperor of Austria on one\ncondition besides the ransom, that the then vacant Abbey of Glastonbury\nshould be annexed to the See of Bath and Wells. Savaricus afterwards\nchanged the seat of his diocese to Glastonbury, and styled himself\nBishop of Glastonbury. The seat was finally settled in 1205, after his\ndeath, by the monks under his successor, Joscelyne de Wells. Glastonbury\npetitioned Rome, favourably, to be reinstated as an abbey, on condition\nof relinquishing a handsome portion of its revenue to the See.\n\nJoscelyne assumed the bishopric title of Bath and Wells, which has\nremained to this day. The death of this prelate was the signal for\nfurther dispute in another direction. The monks of Bath endeavoured to\nexercise, in opposition to the Canon of Wells, the right of electing the\nsuccessor to the See. All dispute was settled by the Pope, who managed\nto draw closer the union of the churches. At the Reformation the\nmonastery of Bath was suppressed, and though the name of the See was\nretained, all ecclesiastical authority and the right of electing the\nBishop were vested in the Dean and Chapter of Wells, which then became\nthe sole chapter of the Diocese.\n\n[Illustration: WELLS\n\nTHE RUINS OF THE BANQUETING HALL]\n\nThe Chapter House is a beautiful octagonal building, each side measuring\nfifty feet. Its finely groined roof is held up by a central clustered\ncolumn of Purbeck marble. Beneath it there is a crypt displaying a very\ngood example of plain groining.\n\nThe foundation of the present Cathedral was laid by Wiffeline, the\nsecond bishop of the diocese, and completed by Bishop Joscelyne in 1239.\nThis cruciform structure was dedicated to St. Andrew. On the south the\ncloisters form three sides of a quadrangle. The prevailing style of the\narchitecture of this church is the Early English, with the introduction\nof the Decorated and subsequent periods.\n\nThe west front is divided into compartments by buttresses, and is richly\nembellished with canopied niches, containing statues of kings, popes,\ncardinals, bishops, and abbots. Even the mullions of the west window and\nthe lower stages of the western towers are similarly treated. These\ntowers, like the central tower, are crowned with parapets elegantly\npierced. The nave and transepts display the grand simplicity and\nelegance of the Early English style. The former is separated from the\naisles by a series of clustered columns and finely pointed arches, above\nwhich are placed a triforium of lancet-shaped arches, and a range of\nclerestory windows with elegant tracery in the Later English style\ninserted.\n\nThe choir belongs to the Decorated style.\n\nThe Cathedral contains several chapels. In one there is the ancient\nclock from Glastonbury. It has an astronomical dial, and figures of\nknights in armour are set in motion by machinery. An ancient font in the\nsouth transept is of the same date as this portion of the Cathedral.\n\nOf monuments there is the elaborate effigy of Bishop Beckington; and in\nthe choir the grave-stone of Bishop Joscelyne is the sole relic of what\nwas once an imposing marble monument bearing a brass effigy. In the\ncentre of the nave King Ina was buried.\n\nThe hall, by Villula, was demolished in the reign of Edward VI. for the\nsake of its materials. Its remains even now clearly indicate its\noriginal splendour. In length it was one hundred and twenty feet.\n\nOn the dissolution of the monasteries Henry VIII. remodelled the then\nexisting establishment and refounded it. This monarch's name reminds us\nthat Cardinal Wolsey and Archbishop Laud were prelates of this see. The\neminent historian, Polydore Vergil, was archdeacon in the sixteenth\ncentury, and in the year 1634 was born in this city pious Dr. George\nBull, Bishop of St. David's.\n\nThe history of the See is the history of the city.\n\n\n\n\nWorcester\n\nWirecestra.\n\n(\"Doomsday Book.\")\n\n\nApart from its beautiful Cathedral, this ancient city has gained\nnotoriety from its famous manufacture of porcelain. Who is there who has\nnot heard of \"Old Worcester\" china? From the experiments of china clay,\nchina stone from Cornwall, feldspar from Sweden, fire-clay from\nStourbridge and Broseley, marl, flint, and calcined bones, Dr. Wall\nevolved those exquisite creations of Worcester china which now claim\nuniversal admiration and obtain fabulous prices.\n\nIt has been said that for political reasons the joint efforts of Dr.\nWall, a physician; William Davies, an apothecary; and Edward Cave, the\nfounder of _The Gentleman's Magazine_, gave birth to the foundation of\nthe Worcester Porcelain Company. This desirable event took place in\n1751, six years after the invasion of the Pretender's armed forces,\nwhich penetrated as far as Derby. Whether the establishment of this\nindustry helped George II.'s party to gain votes in the county against\nthe numerous supporters of the Pretender, who made their presence felt\nin Worcester, or not, is now of little consequence. The existence of\nthis branch of art clearly demonstrates the insecure footing of\npolitics, and asserts the triumph of its founders.\n\nMr. Collins gives us another proof that \"art is long\" by his skilful\nrendering of the beautiful portion of Worcester Cathedral here shown.\n\nAt the period of the Roman invasion of England, two British tribes, the\nCornavii and Dobuni, were in part ownership of Worcestershire. This\nBritish settlement was promptly annexed by the Romans as a military\nstation, and was included in the division called Flavia Caesariensis.\nThey named it Vigorna, but being low and woody it offered little\nattraction to them, and received little attention at their hands. With\nthe establishment of the Saxon Octarchy this territory became included\nin the kingdom of Mercia. Like many of the English towns that served as\nRoman military posts, the Saxons grafted the Roman appellation \"cester\"\nfor a camp, to Wigorna.\n\nWigorna-cester gradually changed to Worcester. The city's advancement\nwas temporarily checked by the ravages of the Danes, who burnt it more\nthan once. In spite of the opposition of the Bishop of Lichfield, the\nSee of the city was founded by Archbishop Theodore, in 673, though not\nfinally established till 780. It then severed its connection with the\nSee of Lichfield.\n\nSave for predatory incursions of the Danes, especially on two occasions,\nwhen the Dane chief Canute was, in 1016, defeated by Edmund Ironsides\nnear Blockley; and at another time, when the Danes deemed it necessary,\nin 1041, to punish the Saxons for refusing to pay them tribute called\n\"danegelt,\"--save for these little misfortunes, little else interfered\nwith the gradual growth of the city's prosperity.\n\nNaturally, with increased prosperity, the city freed itself from bondage\nto Danes. At the date of the Conquest it had even attained sufficient\nimportance to have a mint. The existence of various English mints at\nthat period, as shown here, and in Oxford and other towns, according to\ntheir importance and the exigencies of the neighbourhood, must have been\nsolely due to the geographical partition of England.\n\nPrior to the Conquest we notice the frequent distribution and\nredistribution of England into kingdoms, in ratio to the superior power\nor stratagem of one king over another.\n\nBy this is made evident the lack of unity and support against the common\nfoe, the foreign invader. Each kingdom of necessity issued its own\ncurrency, besides framing its own laws to suit the character of the\nsubjects and the nature of the surroundings.\n\nThough each king attempted to restore this chaos to order by the simple\nprocess of grabbing his neighbours' land during the intermission of\nhostilities against foreign invaders, it was only Alfred the Great who\nreally attempted some scheme of unity--and then failed to accomplish\nwhat seemed an impossibility. But this impossibility was entirely\novercome by William the Conqueror, who straightway grasped the\nsituation. He erected castles everywhere, with the twofold purpose of\ncurbing the Saxons and keeping out their former foes. Under his rule\ninternal dissensions were quelled, effete customs were abolished, new\nand necessary laws were introduced, architecture was encouraged, trade\nwas fostered, and a recognised currency was adopted. All this can be\nreadily gathered at a glance into that marvellous book he caused to be\ndrawn up, called \"Doomsday Book.\" In it a correct valuation of all\nproperty, from the noble lord's down to the agricultural implements of\nthe peasant, is entered, with the position of every church and castle\nextant conspicuously marked on the chart in Latin. He wished to\nthoroughly gauge the resources of his recent conquest. With this\ninformation he gained an index to the complete establishment of his\nsovereignty over England. This may be considered a digression, but we\nsubmit that a brief sketch of the wonderful change that took place under\nthis monarch is essential to the right understanding of the history\nalike of cathedral and city. No other reigning prince of England, before\nor since William's reign, has left such lasting evidences of his\npersonality except it be Henry VIII., who is inseparable with the\ndissolution of the monasteries.\n\nThe drawing of Mr. Collins gives an excellent idea of the character of\nWorcester Cathedral. Its site is on the eastern bank of the river\nSevern, and is the most important building of the city. Yet it cannot be\ncompared to the massive grandeur of Ripon. Though its beauty could not\nentirely be marred by restoration, yet, having been allowed to get out\nof repair, the task was entrusted in 1857 to Mr. Perkins, the cathedral\narchitect. He has managed to sweep away a great part of the old work,\nand in some instances has replaced the original by conjectural work of\nEarly English style.\n\n[Illustration: WORCESTER\n\nTHE CATHEDRAL]\n\nBut to revert to the early stages of the Cathedral, Bishop Oswald\nappears to have absorbed the secular monks of St. Peter's, the Bishop's\nchurch, into a monastery of St. Mary, thereby changing the secular state\nof the canons to that of the monastic. This bishop, in 983, finished the\nbuilding of a new monastic cathedral.\n\nBy the time that the Normans cast their influence over Worcester, Bishop\nWulfstan had gained so much fame for saintliness that it is recorded he\nwas the only English prelate left in charge of his see. But subsequent\nhistory somewhat discounts his holy character and demonstrates his\nreadiness to conform with new customs.\n\nHe met the Normans half-way by undertaking to build a great church of\nstone, after the Norman style of architecture.\n\nIn 1088 he suffered interruption through Welsh raids, but finally\nsignalised the end of his labours by holding a synod in the crypt in\n1094.\n\nAnother notable foundation of his is the Commandery, in 1095, believed\nto be one of the rarest specimens of early house architecture now\nextant. We cannot be too grateful for his contribution to church\narchitecture, though only the outer walls of the nave, the aisles, a\npart of the transept walls, some shafts, and the crypt remain as\nevidences of his Norman adaptability.\n\nHere it is well to accentuate the fact that the crypt (1084) is apsidal,\nand that only three other examples of this style exist, namely at\nWinchester, Gloucester, and Canterbury, all dating within the last\ntwenty years of the eleventh century.\n\nThe nave (1175) was much injured by the collapse of the central tower.\nIn the meanwhile, though dead some two hundred years, the saintly\ncharacter of Wulfstan suffered no diminution, and was turned to\nprofitable use by the monks soon after 1203, the year of his\ncanonisation. The magnificent offerings to his shrine became so numerous\nand rich that the monks were enabled to finish the Cathedral in\n1216--surely the most fitting memorial to the great founder. They\ncontinued their labours by adding a Lady chapel, soon after, in the east\nend, and rebuilding the choir in the Early English style. In the\nfourteenth century the nave was reconstructed, the Decorated style being\nintroduced in the north side and the Perpendicular in the south.\n\nThe Chapter House is a round building with a stone roof resting on a\ncentral pillar, and dates from the Late Norman period.\n\nThe Refectory belongs to the Decorated, and the Perpendicular style\nclaims the cloisters. The central tower is just over one hundred and\nsixty feet in height. As can be seen by the drawing, the plan of the\nbuilding is a pure cross. There are two transept aisles, and only\nsecondary transepts to the choir exist. A noteworthy circumstance is\nthat St. Helen's, Worcester, is the earliest recipient of a chantry\n(1288).\n\nThe most interesting memorial in this cathedral is King John's, in the\nchoir, said to be the earliest sepulchral effigy of an English king in\nthe country. In the Chantry Chapel there is an altar-tomb to Arthur,\nPrince of Wales and son to Henry VII., who died in 1502. John Bauden,\nbishop, and author of \"Icon Basilike,\" has a monument. Bishop Hough's\nmemory is perpetuated by the work of Roubillac, and that of Mrs. Digby\nby the sculpture of Chantrey.\n\nTo give a detailed account of the history of the city would be long and\nunnecessary. Suffice it to say that the city continually changed hands\nduring the civil wars. In 1265, in Worcestershire, close upon the\nfrontier of Gloucestershire, was fought the battle of Evesham, in which\nHenry III.'s son surprised and defeated Earl Simon de Montford, one time\na royal favourite. This result put an end to the confederacy of the\nbarons. Cantilupe, the Bishop of Worcester, was implicated in that he\nfavoured the Earl's cause, who had withdrawn previous to the battle, to\nthe friendly territory of Worcester's See, and had rested at Evesham\nAbbey. Queen Elizabeth and James II. respectively paid the city a short\nvisit.\n\nIt suffered extensively by the dissolution of the monasteries. The\nparliamentary troops foully defiled the Cathedral, and did considerable\ndamage to the city, which was Royalist.\n\nHere it was that Charles II., with his Scottish army, was defeated by\nCromwell, who had taken up a position on Red Hill without the city\ngates. Fortune and disguise helped Charles to escape, and from here he\nbegan his adventurous journey to Boscobel. The cathedral city has since\nincreased steadily in prosperity. Besides the Worcester China Company,\nfounded in 1751, and still flourishing, a Company of Glovers was\nincorporated in 1661, and is an important industry. These, in addition\nto hop-growing, help to keep up the trade prosperity of Worcester. The\nSee has enriched the Church of Rome by four saints, and has yielded to\nthe English State several Lord Chancellors and Lord Treasurers.\n\n\n\n\nChichester\n\n(\"Doomsday Book.\")\n\n\nIn a geographical account of this city it is given as being locally in\n\"the hundred of Box and Stockbridge, _rape_ of Chichester, county of\nSussex.\" The origin of this term \"rape,\" comes from the Icelandic\n\"hreppr,\" meaning a village or district. From the Icelandic verb,\n\"hreppa,\" to catch, obtain, arose the Anglo-Saxon rendering--\"hrepian,\nhreppan,\" to touch. Rape came thus to be one of six divisions of the\ncounty of Sussex, possibly by reason of their nearness to each other. It\nformed the intermediate between the shire and the hundred. A sketch of\nthe shire and the hundred is treated in the description of Wells. After\nthis slight digression, we will immediately enter upon the history of\nChichester.\n\nIts foundation dates, with certainty, from the time when England formed\na portion of the Roman Empire. About the year 47 A.D., Flavius\nVespasian conquered this part of England. He established a camp on the\nsite of the present city, close to the road now known as Stane Street,\nthrowing up an entrenchment three miles long. This is attributed to be\nthe \"Regnum\" of the Belgae, mentioned in the \"Itinerary\" of Antonine.\n\nThere is no reason to doubt this, if it be borne in mind that, situated\nalmost on the south seaboard of England as Chichester is, it might quite\nconceivably be expected to be classed accidentally as forming a part of\nthe territory of the Belgae, though geographically wrong. The advantage\nof a site at the foot of a small spur of the South Downs, within easy\ndistance of the sea, though inland, would offer great attractions to the\nRoman invader.\n\nThe early history of England shows us that invasions took effect\ngenerally on the south and east coasts of the island. The conquered\ntribes travelled westwards, retreating before the fierce invader.\n\nLittle seems to have been known about the Roman occupation of Chichester\ntill the accidental turning up of a Sussex marble slab on the site of\nthe present council chamber. This discovery took place about the year\n1713. From this a little information is gleaned about the Roman\nbuildings. The slab bears a defaced inscription in Latin, the missing\nletters of which having been supplied, give a conjectural reading. It\nappears that Chichester was the seat of a British king, Cogidubnus; and\nthat under the auspices of a certain Pudens, a temple of Neptune and\nMinerva was erected out of compliment to Claudius. The evidence of this\nstone seems also to have been borne out by Tacitus, who mentions in his\nwritings the existence of Cogidubnus as a native king possessed of\nindependent authority. This king, also, is said to be the father of\nClaudia, who figures in the Second Epistle to Timothy. The conjectural\nreading again leads us to suppose that the city was occupied by a large\nnumber of craftsmen, who, in fact, were responsible for the erection of\nthe temple mentioned above, besides the walls and other buildings.\n\nDuring the early Saxon period in the fifth century the city was\ndestroyed by OElla. He was succeeded by his son Cissa, who rebuilt it\nand called it Cissa's Ceaster--Cissa after his own name, and Ceaster in\nrecognition of the Romans having occupied it. The city afterwards became\nthe seat of the South Saxon kings, and remained thus till about the\nmiddle of the seventh century. Wulfhere, the Mercian, then invaded it\nand made Athelwald, its king, prisoner. Upon his conversion to\nChristianity the king was reinstated. He was afterwards killed in battle\nby Ceadwalla of Wessex, who conquered the kingdom of the South Saxons.\nIn 803 Egbert managed to make a union of the several Saxon kingdoms.\nThis event caused considerable prosperity to Chichester. From ancient\npenny-pieces discovered, we learn that King Edgar, in the year 967, had\nestablished a mint here, thus clearly indicating the importance of the\ncity.\n\nIt suffered a terrible decline through the devastations of the Danes; so\nmuch so, that scarcely two hundred houses and only one church existed at\nthe time of the Norman Conquest. However, from 1070 the fortunes of the\ncity began to mend rapidly. This wholesome change was caused primarily\nby the removal of the See from Selsea, where it had remained for over\nthree hundred years, to Chichester. As first bishop of Chichester,\nStigand, the chaplain to William the Conqueror, was appointed. In the\nreign of Henry I. a cathedral was built and consecrated by Bishop Ralph.\nIt was soon destroyed by fire. On its site the same prelate erected a\nsecond structure of far greater magnificence, a considerable portion of\nwhich is still extant.\n\n[Illustration: CHICHESTER\n\nFROM THE NORTHEAST]\n\nIn 1189 the city again suffered from a terrible fire, which also caused\ngreat damage to the Cathedral. This building, however, was repaired and\ngreatly enlarged by Bishop Siffed. His efforts, with those of Ralph,\nform the basis of the present cathedral. It was dedicated to St. Peter.\nThe architecture embraces the Norman and the Early English and Decorated\nstyles.\n\nA beautiful tower arose from the centre, surmounted by an octagonal\nspire three hundred feet high, with two towers on the west, of which the\nupper courses of one were destroyed during the parliamentary war. On the\nnorth is seen a fine bell-tower and lantern, connected by flying\nbuttresses with octagonal turrets springing from the angles.\n\nIn the reign of Charles I., after a stubborn defence by the Royalist\ncitizens, the city was compelled to surrender to Cromwell's troops. In\nthe course of this reign the north-west tower was battered down, and in\n1648 Cromwell ordered the destruction of the cathedral cloisters, the\nBishop's Palace, the Deanery, and the Canons' houses. The Bishop's\nPalace was repaired in 1725, and contains a chapel built in the\nthirteenth century. A general and great restoration of the Cathedral was\ncommenced in 1830, but in spite of every precaution the tower and spire\nfell down in 1861. Under the guidance of Sir Gilbert Scott the necessary\nrepairs were undertaken. The cloisters were restored about the year\n1890.\n\nBesides his grand contribution to the church's architecture, Storey's\nmemory is perpetuated by the very fine octagonal cross in the Decorated\nEnglish style. It stands fifty feet high, in the centre of the town,\nfrom which the four principal streets run out at right angles towards\nthe country. These streets, in olden days, led to four gates in the\nembattled walls which surrounded the city. The last of these gates was\ntaken down in 1773. Besides the cross, Storey founded in 1497 the\nGrammar School, where Archbishop Juxon, the learned Seldon, the poet\nCollins, and Dr. Hurdis, Professor of Poetry at the University of\nOxford, received their elementary education.\n\nAmongst other schools founded was one by Oliver Whitby, in 1702, to\nafford free nautical education to twelve boys; namely, four from\nChichester, and four from each of the villages of West Wettering and\nHarting. Though Chichester is connected by a short canal with the sea,\nand a certain amount of shipping is done, it can hardly be considered as\nan important port. It lies fourteen miles north-east of England's\ngreatest naval port, Portsmouth. Curiously enough, Chichester is only\nfive miles south of Goodwood, the famous city for horse-races.\n\nThe municipal and parliamentary borough of Chichester, incorporated as\ncity in the year 1213, is almost surrounded by a small stream called the\nLavant, and is pleasantly situated at the end of a small spur of the\nSouth Down Hills. It is considered as one of the principal cattle\nmarkets in the South of England. Accommodation for several thousands of\ncattle was arranged in 1871 by the Corporation.\n\nThere are also the Guildhall, which was formerly the chapel of a convent\nof Grey Friars; the corn-exchange, the market-house, museum, and\ninfirmary.\n\nBradwardine and Juxon, both archbishops of Canterbury; Lawrence\nSomercote, a great canonist and writer; the poets Collins and Hayley,\nwhose memory has been perpetuated by a tablet designed by Flaxman in the\nCathedral, were all born in this city. The Diocese of Chichester covers\nnearly the whole extent of Sussex.\n\nIn conclusion we would draw the attention to the quaint design on the\nBishop's armorial shield. It depicts the curious device of a mitred\nprelate holding a sword in his mouth. He is seated, presumably, on a\nthrone, which much resembles a square block of marble, looked at\nperspectively. Perhaps it is meant for the Holy Stone. Both the Bishop's\narms are outstretched. In his left hand an open book is held, whilst\nhis right is palm upwards. Why the Bishop holds the sword in his mouth,\nwhen his right hand is free, it is hard to say. Possibly the arms were\nfirst drawn up for a warlike bishop, or it may mean that the sword is\nthe sword of Justice. In all probability the correct meaning is conveyed\nby the twelfth verse in Hebrews iv., wherein it sets forth that the\nsword in the Bishop's mouth is symbolical of \"The Word of the Lord,\"\nwhich is \"sharper than any two-edged sword,\" and the Book of the Law is\nin his left hand, whilst the right hand is extended in blessing or in\nsupplicating prayer.\n\n\n\n\nChester\n\nCestre.\n\n(\"Doomsday Book.\")\n\n\nThis famous place occupies a singular position. It is a city and county\nof itself, a municipal county since 1888, and a parliamentary borough,\nbesides being an episcopal city, a seaport, and county town of Cheshire.\n\nChester is also the capital of the county of Cheshire. It is situated on\na rocky elevation, on the north bank of the River Dee, by which the city\nis partly encircled. Just seventeen miles north of it lies the great\nmanufacturing and seaport town of Liverpool. At one time Chester was a\npalatine city, enjoying all the privileges peculiar to that dignity.\nThis practically conferred independent authority on a city far situated\nfrom the Metropolis. The head of the city was a little king, and enjoyed\ndiscretionary power. In a brief sketch of this, in the account of\nDurham, is clearly shown the mutual advantages accruing, especially in\ncases of emergency, such as incursions of the enemy, to both the city\nthus honoured and the Metropolis London.\n\nThe geographical position of Chester in the extreme west of England, and\nits proximity to the restless Welsh, demanded some such power to cope,\nat a moment's notice, with any unexpected event from that quarter. This\nnearness to Wales contributed in a great measure to the importance of\nthis city, as will be presently shown.\n\nThe earliest authentic history of Chester ascribes its origin to the\nBritish tribe called the Cornavii. At the time of the Roman invasion\nthey inhabited that part of England which now is known as the counties\nof Chester, Salop, Stafford, Warwick, and Worcester.\n\n[Illustration: CHESTER\n\nEASTGATE STREET]\n\nThe city they called Coer Leon Vawr--City of Leon the Great. This name\nis supposed to have been given out of compliment to Leon, son of Brut\nDarien, the eighth king of Britain. By some historians this origin is\ncontested. They say that this Welsh name of Coer Leon Vawr indicated\nthe \"city or camp of the Great Legion.\" They also supply \"Coer Leon,\"\nor \"Dwfyr Dwy,\" and render their meaning into \"the city of the Legion on\nthe Dee,\" from its connection with that people. The city was also called\nDeunana and Deva, after the same river. However, it is conclusively\nproved that here the Twentieth Roman Legion established a station\nafter the defeat of Caractacus, who, after having made a mighty effort\nto withstand this second invasion of England by the Romans, was taken\nprisoner. He and his wife and family were taken to Rome, and, according\nto custom, were paraded through the streets for the benefit of the\npublic, but afterwards honourably treated. This second occupation of\nEngland lasted from 43 A.D. till the Romans finally departed in 446 A.\nD. The first was a short stay by Julius Caesar in B.C., some\nninety-seven years previous. In 46 A.D., within three years of the\nlanding of the Romans, Chester was established as a Roman camp, during\nthe reign of Claudius, the Roman Emperor.\n\nFrom the disposition of the four principal streets,--Northgate Street,\nEastgate Street, Bridge Street, and Westgate Street, together with the\nwalls surrounding the city, and the selection of a rocky site on the\nbank of a fair-sized river, Chester gives a good illustration of the\nprinciples upon which the Romans went to work. From a determined centre\nthese roads run out to their respective gates in the boundary walls, in\nthe direction of the four cardinal points. The walls of this city are\nthe only ones in England that are perfect in their entire circuit of two\nmiles, though the gateways have all been rebuilt within the last\nhundred years. On the departure of the Roman soldiery, England reverted\nto the Britons, who appeared to have been helpless, so long had they\nrelied upon their late conquerors for protection. From them Chester was\ntaken by Ethelfrith, King of Northumbria, who defeated them under the\nKing of Powysland in 607. The Britons, however, regained possession and\nmaintained it till 828, when Egbert, who was then the sole monarch of\nEngland, annexed it to his possessions. The Saxons, during their\noccupation of the city, named it Legancaester and Legecester.\n\nThe Danes, in the ninth century, caused severe damages. On their retreat\nEthelfreda, Countess of Mercia, repaired the walls. On her death the\nBritons once more became the city's masters, but were driven out again\nby Edward the Elder. Athelstan, it is said, revived its mint. About the\nyear 972 Edgar assembled a naval force on the river Dee. To demonstrate\nhis supremacy he caused himself to be rowed by eight tributary kings\nfrom his palace on the south bank of the river to the Convent Church of\nSt. John's. To increase the desired effect, we are told that he took the\nhelm,--the symbol of government.\n\n[Illustration: CHESTER\n\nTHE ROWS]\n\nOn the division of England, in 1016, between Canute and Edmund\nIronside, Canute gained possession of Mercia, in which were included\nChester and Northumbria. Chester remained as a city of Mercia, governed\nby its earl, till the Norman Conquest. William then bestowed it with the\nearldom on his nephew Hugh Lupus. He was, in view of the proximity of\nWales, invested with sovereign or palatine authority over the tract of\ncountry now represented by the county of Cheshire and the coast-line of\nFlintshire as far as Rhuddlan. Chester was made the seat of his\ngovernment.\n\nAt that time it is described in \"Doomsday Book\" as Cestre, and as\npossessing four hundred and thirty-one houses within its walls. For over\ntwo centuries after the Conquest this city formed an important military\nstation for the defence of the English border against the Welsh. The\nNorman Earl Ranulph I. granted the first charter, though its purport\nproves that Chester already enjoyed certain municipal rights. On account\nof its garrison it was frequently visited by reigning monarchs.\n\nChester was captured by the Earl of Derby, who held it for the Crown\nduring the war between Henry III. and the barons. The contest was ended\nwith the defeat of the barons at the battle of Evesham, close to\nWorcester. Here, in 1300, it was that the Welsh chieftains paid homage\nto the first English Prince of Wales, the infant son of Edward I.\n\nRichard II., by Act of Parliament, erected the earldom of Chester into a\nprincipality to be held only by the eldest son of the King. This was\nrescinded in the next reign. In fact, Richard II. was made captive by\nHenry of Lancaster, and was imprisoned in a tower over the gateway of\nthe Castle. The city suffered greatly during the Wars of the Roses. It\nwas visited by Queen Margaret of Anjou, the wife of Henry VI. This queen\nplayed a prominent part with regard to the claim to the English throne.\nShe was daughter to Rene, who was a relation of the King of France. He\nwas titular king of Sicily, but without territories. Though Margaret\nbrought to Henry a rich dower, he was persuaded to consent to the\ndeduction of a large portion of Maine and Anjou to her father Rene.\nDuring the Duke of Gloucester's life, who had strongly opposed the royal\nmarriage, Margaret and her coadjutor, the Duke of Suffolk, had not dared\nto carry into effect the agreement they had extracted from Henry. The\nDuke of York, who was regent in France, through his integrity, was also\na serious obstacle. She and Suffolk had him recalled, and the regency\ngiven to Beaufort, Duke of Somerset, nephew to Cardinal Beaufort. York\nfelt injured, and took revenge by asserting his claim to the Crown.\n\nBy his father he was descended from Edward III.'s fourth son. From his\nmother, the last of the Mortimers, he inherited that family's claim from\nLionel, the second son of the same king. On the other hand, John of\nGaunt, from whom Henry VI. was descended, was Edward's third son. Thus\nYork, through his mother, had a prior claim. These rival claims caused\nconfusion and tumult throughout England. In the meantime the English\npossessions in France were lost one after the other, till in 1451 only\nCalais remained. The misgovernment of the regency in France under\nSomerset contrasted most unfavourably with that of York.\n\nIn these troublous times England looked towards York as the only one to\nbe trusted, who then became Protector during the King's mental weakness.\nHe imprisoned the Duke of Somerset. The latter as soon as he was free\nassembled an army, and was killed at the battle of St. Albans, the first\nWar of the Roses. His followers, the Lancastrians, were defeated by the\nDuke of York, and the King made prisoner. Eventually York declared\nhimself. By Act of Parliament he and his heirs were constituted\nsuccessors to the throne of England after the death of Henry VI.\nMargaret, however, defeated the Yorkists in battle, in which York was\nslain. He left behind him three sons,--Edward, George, and Richard,--the\nfirst of whom later on deposed Henry VI. and became Edward IV. We have\nventured to give this brief sketch of the origin of these rival claims,\nin that most of the cathedral cities were affected by the fortunes or\nmisfortunes of their favoured party.\n\nChester, in the years 1507, 1517, and 1550, suffered from a terrible\nvisitation of the sweating sickness. From 1602 to 1605 the plague made\nit necessary to suspend all the city fairs, and to hold the assizes at\nNantwich. This epidemic occurred again with great loss of life to the\ninhabitants, between 1647-48. During the Civil War this city of Chester\nendured great sacrifices for its loyalty to Charles I.\n\nThe King came there in 1642, when the citizens gave him great pecuniary\nassistance. Not till after a memorable siege, lasting from 1643 to 1646,\ndid the citizens agree to surrender. The garrison were allowed to march\nout with all the honours of war, the safety of the persons and property\nof the citizens with liberty of trade were secured, and the sanctity of\nthe sacred buildings and their title-deeds preserved.\n\n[Illustration: CHESTER\n\nST. WERBURGH STREET]\n\nSir Charles Booth, in 1659, with the aid of the citizens, overcame the\ngarrison of Charles II., then an exile, but was afterwards defeated by\nLambert, Cromwell's general.\n\nThe presence of the Duke of Monmouth, in 1683, stirred the populace to a\ntumult. Amongst other excesses the mob spent its fury in forcing the\ncathedral doors, breaking the painted glass, destroying the font, and\nother regrettable damage to this building. In 1688 the city was taken by\nthe Roman Catholic lords, Molyneux and Ashton, for James II., who, after\nall, rendered further efforts useless by his abdication. Under William\nIII. Chester was included in the six cities for the residence of an\nassay master, and was permitted to issue silver coinage. The last\nimportant military event that took place in this city was in the\nRebellion of 1745, when it was fortified against the Pretender.\n\nIn architecture the great characteristic is the quaint way the houses\nhave been built. The streets have been cut out of the rock below the\ngeneral surface of the land. The houses appear to have been built into\nthe rock, or rather to have been piled up against it. The shops are\nlevel with the streets, and over them runs a balustraded gallery. Steps\nat certain intervals lead the way down into the streets. These\ngalleries are called by the inhabitants \"The Rows.\" These Rows are\nhouses with shops. Overhanging the shops, like the eaves of a house, are\nthe upper stories, to which additional flights of steps give access.\n\nTwo explanations are given for this unusual construction of houses: one,\nthat the Rows, or promenades, are the remnants of the ancient vestibules\nof the Roman houses; the other that they were probably originated to\nafford ready defence against the sudden raids of the Welsh. The latter\nappears the more likely. The Rows, from their position to the streets,\nwould afford the besieged greater facilities of shelter and attack.\n\nIn Bridge Street and Eastgate Street the Rows are made pleasant\npromenades. Though many of the houses have been rebuilt, they still\nretain the old character. In addition to these interesting buildings\nthere was the castle built by the Conqueror, of which there remains only\na large square tower, called \"Julius Agricola's Tower.\" The front has\nbeen entirely renewed. This tower served probably as a place of\nconfinement of the Earl of Derby. Here were imprisoned Richard II. and\nMargaret, Countess of Richmond. Just shortly before the Revolution James\nII. heard Mass in the second chamber.\n\nThough the Cathedral has been left to the last, its history is no less\ninteresting than the other features of Chester. The Cathedral was\noriginally the church attached to the convent of St. Werburgh, under\nwhich name its ecclesiastical site is mentioned in \"Doomsday Book.\" It\nwas first dedicated to St. Peter and St. Paul, but Ethelfrida afterwards\ntransferred their patronage to that of the Saxon saint, Walmgha, the\ndaughter of Wulphen, King of Mercia. Besides this princess the great\nbenefactors were Leofric, Earl of Mercia, and Hugh Lupus, who\nsubstituted Benedictine monks for secular canons.\n\nOn the dissolution of the abbey, in lieu of the abbot and monks, a dean,\nprebendaries, and minor canons were appointed, the last abbot being made\ndean. Here it is as well to remember that a church was called an abbey,\nwhatever its former denomination might have been, if an abbot became its\nhead. In much the same way the name \"minster\" is derived from a\nmonastery, and cathedral is due to the fact that the bishop had his\ncathedra, or throne, placed in the sacred building for his own use. At\nthe dissolution the Cathedral of Chester was dedicated to \"Christ and\nthe Blessed Virgin.\" Though there are some interesting remains of the\nabbey, the present building was built in the reigns of Henry VII. and\nHenry VIII. The diocese of Chester dates at the period of the kingdom of\nMercia. It was afterwards incorporated with that of Lichfield, but in\n1075, Peter, Bishop of Lichfield restored the See to Chester. His\nsuccessor, however, removed it for the second time to Lichfield. Henry\nVIII., in 1541, created six new sees, in which he included Chester. With\na portion of the possessions of the Abbey of St. Werburgh, which was\ndissolved, he endowed the new see. The first bishop after the\ndissolution was John Bird. In 1752 the palace of the bishop was rebuilt\nby Bishop Keene.\n\nThe cathedral site is on the eastern side of Northgate Street. Excepting\nthe western end, it presents the appearance of a heavy, irregular pile,\nwhen viewed externally. The interior is very impressive, and contains\nportions in the Norman, and in the Early and Decorated styles of English\narchitecture. It possesses a clerestory in the Later style. Some chapels\nin the Early English style, are to the east of the north transept. The\nsouth transept, separated from the Cathedral by a wooden screen, forms\nthe parish church of St. Oswald. The style of the Bishop's throne,\nsometimes known as St. Werburgh's Shrine, belongs to the Early period of\nthe fourteenth century. In the eastern walk of the cloister stands\nthe Chapter House, of Early English style, built by Earl Randulph the\nFirst. It served as the burial-place of the earls of the original Norman\nline, except Richard, who perished by shipwreck.\n\n[Illustration: CHESTER\n\nBISHOP LLOYD'S PALACE AND WATERGATE STREET]\n\nThe sacred edifice has from time to time undergone extensive\nreparations.\n\nAs a port Chester was at one time most important, but through the\nsilting up of the Channel in the fifteenth century, it lost a\nconsiderable amount of its shipping trade. In spite of the Channel being\ndeepened in 1824, its shipping prosperity cannot be said to have\nadvanced hand in hand with the progress of the city, though it possibly\nmay be greater than it was in the fifteenth century.\n\nThe great Chester Canal comes from Nantwich, passes through Chester, and\nmerges into the Ellesmere Canal, which winds up northwards to the river\nMersey. Thus the city is connected with Liverpool.\n\nAs the crow flies, the country traversed from London to Chester is most\ninteresting. The track passes through the counties of Middlesex,\nBuckinghamshire, Northamptonshire, Warwickshire, with its famous towns,\nStratford-on-Avon, the birthplace of Shakespeare, and Coventry, through\nStaffordshire, famous for its beautiful old china and its Cathedral at\nLichfield, and finally into Cheshire, the county containing Chester and\nNorthwich.\n\nAmong the many eminent men born at Chester was Randolph Caldecott, in\n1846. He is handed down to posterity as the famous illustrator of the\nworks of Washington Irving. But the achievement that gained him the\ngreatest _acclame_ was a series of coloured books for children. They\nbegan in 1878 with \"John Gilpin\" and \"The House that Jack Built,\" and\nended the year before his death, in 1886, with the \"Elegy on Madame\nBlaize\" and \"The Great Panjandrum Himself.\" In the crypt of St. Paul's,\nLondon, his memory is perpetuated through the great artistic expression\nof a brother artist, Alfred Gilbert, R. A.\n\nThus, in this brief sketch, an attempt has been made to give a\ncategorical history of one of England's most ancient cities from its\nearliest occupation by the British Cornavii, and its subsequent events\ndown to the royal visit in 1869 by the then Prince of Wales, now our\nKing Edward VII., on which occasion he opened the new townhall. It would\nrequire far greater space to record every feature of interest in\nconnection with Chester than can be allotted within the present\nlimitations. To the antiquarian Chester furnishes a most interesting and\nabsorbing study, and will in all likelihood continue to do so for many\nyears to come yet.\n\nTo those interested in horse-racing the fine race-course attracts\nannually a great concourse to Chester.\n\n\n\n\nRochester\n\nRoucestre.\n\n(\"Doomsday Book.\")\n\n\nIn the illustration is seen to great advantage the temporal and\nspiritual power of Rochester: the State, as represented by the Norman\nkeep; the Church, as symbolised by the cathedral. Ever since\nChristianity came to England, these two mighty levers of power have\nmarched, if not always hand in hand, more or less in accord. Though the\ntwo have frequently struggled for supremacy, yet their feuds have done\nmore towards the enlightenment of the people than any harmonious concert\ncould have effected. In marked contrast to mediaeval times the State and\nChurch of the present day formulate and carry out the will of the\npeople. They are the channels of purpose as determined by the nation.\nGreat as the power of the Church still is, it has nevertheless lost that\ntremendous authority it once wielded under the popes.\n\nHenry II. set up a strenuous opposition, whilst Henry VIII. dealt it a\ncrushing blow. The dissolution of the monasteries was a terrible check\nto Roman Catholicism in England, as well as Luther's reforms in Germany.\nYet in spite of all this the Church of Rome has more adherents in Europe\nthan any other religion. The menace to the Church of England lies in the\nlack of absolute obedience to the spiritual head, and the many different\nsects. The Church of Rome exacts absolute obedience and faith, and by\nthese means is steadily increasing its influence. The Roman Catholic\nCathedral recently erected in London is a convincing proof of the\nuntiring energy of the followers of that wonderful religion. It is also\ncurious to notice that the Latin races are the staunchest supporters of\nthe Papacy.\n\nAs its name implies, Rochester was a Roman camp. This place formed one\nof the stipendiary towns of this Latin race, and was called\n\"Durobrivae.\" Not much information has been preserved concerning their\noccupation of the town. That it was important, and served as a military\nbasis, is clearly demonstrated by the great Roman Watling Street, which\npasses through the city, and which bears evidence to their great\nengineering skill.\n\nThe great Roman streets were at that time the chief and only means of\nquick communication from one camp to another. To read the account of the\nwonderful system of roads organised by Darius the Persian is as\ninteresting to follow as any modern fiction. He realised that quick\ncommunication with the outlying quarters of his possessions meant\nincreased power and security. Along the roads, at proper distances, were\nblockhouses guarded by soldiers. The messenger on horseback drew rein at\neach of these wayside places to take refreshment and get a remount, or\nto hand over the dispatches to a fresh messenger.\n\nIn much the same way the Romans constructed their roads for their\npostmen, and, no doubt, to serve as their first line of defence if a\nretreat should be necessary. We can almost conjure up the sight of a\nmounted bearer of important dispatches racing along. Suddenly the horse,\nalmost thrown on to his haunches, is pulled up in front of one of these\nguardhouses dotted at regular intervals along the great road. A hasty\nmeal is snatched, a fresh horse mounted, and off again, with a clatter\nand a whirlpool of dust, hurries the messenger, as if a kingdom depended\nupon his quick dispatch. We cannot attach too much importance to this\nmethod of communication, if we remember that it is only within the last\ntwo centuries or so that the semaphore came into existence. When first\nintroduced, this medium of conveying rapidly a message by the waving of\na wooden arm up and down on a post, which was generally planted on a\ncommanding site, was considered a wonderful invention. Even at sea it\nwas left to Admiral Rodney to construct an efficient code of signals. Of\ncourse the most primitive method was the lighting of beacons in times of\ngreat danger.\n\nBesides Watling Street, the city of Rochester is known to have been\ndefended by walls built in the direction of the cardinal points,\naccording to the Roman custom. They extended for half a mile from east\nto west, and close upon a quarter of a mile from north to south. After\nthe Romans had departed, this place came into the possession of the\nSaxons. They renamed it \"Hrove Ceaster,\" which in process of time became\ncontracted to Rochester.\n\nDuring the early Saxon period Ethelbert, King of Kent, through the\ninfluence of his queen and the preaching of St. Augustine, who had just\narrived, became a convert to Christianity. By this king, as we have\nseen, Canterbury Cathedral was richly endowed. To help carry out the\npapal instructions given to Augustine, Ethelbert in 600 founded a\nchurch in Rochester. By erecting this into a see, he, at the same time,\nlaid the foundation of the future prosperity of the city. The building\nwas dedicated to St. Andrew. A monastery for secular priests was also\nestablished, over whom was appointed for their bishop, Justus, who had\naccompanied St. Augustine and his forty monks into Britain.\n\nThis cathedral suffered at many times, in common with the city, from\nseveral incursions of the Danes. The city, more especially in 676, was\nsacked and almost destroyed by Etheldred, the King of Mercia, whilst in\n839 the Danes landed at Romney, defeated the troops sent to oppose them,\nand massacred most of the inhabitants. Again, in 885, they sailed up the\nMedway under the leadership of Hasting, and laid siege to Rochester.\nFortunately for the city it was rescued by the timely assistance of\nAlfred. Three mints established by Athelstan in 930, two for himself and\none for the bishop, and the fact of the city being then recognised as\none of the chief ports of England, show with what rapidity it had\nregained prosperity. This peaceful state was rudely awakened, however,\nin 999. The Danes reappeared in the Medway, before whom the\nterror-stricken inhabitants fled and abandoned the city to their\nfury. At the Conquest, Rochester was given by William to his\nhalf-brother, Odo, Bishop of Bayeux, who was also created Earl of Kent.\nIn the reign of William Rufus he was implicated in a conspiracy to\ndethrone Rufus in favour of Robert Duke of Normandy. Thereby his\npossessions reverted to the Crown. In this Rochester suffered. In 1130\nHenry I. attended at the consecration of the church of St. Andrew by\nLanfranc. During the ceremony a fire broke out. The city was almost\nreduced to ashes.\n\n[Illustration: ROCHESTER\n\nCATHEDRAL AND CASTLE]\n\nIt was again visited, seven years later, by fire, from which it had\nhardly recovered when a third conflagration occurred and left traces of\ndevastation for ages. In 1141, Robert Earl of Gloucester was placed in\nthe Castle. He was the chief general and counsellor of Matilda, and had\nbeen captured prisoner at Winchester after having effected the Queen's\nescape. He was eventually exchanged for King Stephen. In 1215 the barons\nseized and held the Castle against King John, who gained it. Henry III.\nrepaired the Castle.\n\nThe Castle was again, in 1254, successfully defended for the King by\nEdward Earl Warren, against Simon de Montford and the barons. In the\nreign of Richard II. the insurrectionists under Wat Tyler released one\nof their comrades imprisoned in the Castle.\n\nRochester has been at different times visited by reigning princes. Henry\nVIII., with Emperor Charles V., came there in 1521, whilst in 1573 Queen\nElizabeth honoured it with her presence. Charles II., on his\nrestoration, passed through the city _en route_ from the Continent to\nLondon. In fact Rochester, being also a port, was a convenient place for\nJames II. to embark secretly on board of a trading-vessel lying in the\nMedway, by which he was conveyed to France.\n\nThis Norman castle, which has played such an important part in the\nhistory of the city, deserves some notice. Its extensive remains,\nsituated on a commanding site, overlook the right bank of the river. The\nCastle is supposed to have been built by Gundulph, when Bishop of\nRochester, in the latter part of the eleventh century. It preceded by a\nfew years the building of the Cathedral by the same prelate. The\narchitecture of this castle is a striking example of the simplicity of\nplans generally employed by the Normans. By preference the castle was a\nrectangular keep in form. The sides varied from twenty-five to a hundred\nfeet in length, and equally so in height. At the corners the walls\nadvanced so as to form square towers, the faces of which were usually\nrelieved by flat pilaster-like buttresses. The walls at the base measure\nsometimes as much as thirty feet in thickness, and diminish to as much\nas ten feet at the summit.\n\nThe internal arrangements consisted of a store-room, from which a narrow\nstaircase, made into the thickness of the walls, gave access to the\nrooms of the garrison and those of the owners above, wood being employed\nfor the floor and roof. A well was always dug. The entire building was\nsurrounded by a deep moat filled, if possible, with water. The entrance\nwas small, and was defended by a draw-bridge and portcullis. It was on\nthe thickness of their walls and the moat that the Normans chiefly\nrelied for their impregnability. They seldom departed from this simple\nform of architecture. Their defence was rarely constructed on a series\nof fortifications. Local advantages and a lofty site were invariably the\nNorman idea of a safe stronghold.\n\nGreat interest is attached to the Cathedral of Rochester. Its see is the\nsmallest in the kingdom and the most ancient after Canterbury. The two\nwere established, as we have seen, within a few years of each other,\nunder the auspices of St. Augustine and King Ethelbert of Kent.\n\nThe present cathedral dates from the commencement of the twelfth\ncentury, when it was built by Gundulph. If what we are told about this\nstructure be correct, its importance cannot be too greatly enhanced, for\nit is claimed that its architecture, though much altered and repaired\nsince, is in the main a copy of Canterbury Cathedral at that time. Thus,\nin describing the plan of the one in Rochester, a general idea can be\ngained about the other at Canterbury.\n\nGundulph's contribution is a spacious and venerable building in the form\nof a cross, with a central tower surmounted by a spire. The Norman style\nforms the basis of the architecture, to which the Later English style\nwas added chiefly in the many windows of the nave and other parts of the\nchurch. The west front was entirely restored between 1888 and 1889, the\nNorman style being strictly adhered to. The doorway is a most decorative\nbit of Norman workmanship. Let into the clustered columns on either side\nthere is, on the right, an effigy of Queen Maud, and on the left another\nof Henry I. The door is covered with a rich mass of geometrical design\nin metal.\n\nThe crypt, invariably a great feature in a cathedral, is partly the work\nof Gundulph; that is, the western portion is. The eastern part consists\nof cylindrical and octagonal shafts with a light vaulting springing\nfrom them, and belongs to the same period as the superstructure of the\nthirteenth century.\n\nThere are several chapels, a finely groined roof, and ancient tombs,\nwhich all lend interest to this fine cathedral.\n\nThe red-veined marble statue of Walter de Merton cannot fail to attract\nattention. He was the founder of the great scholastic college at Oxford\ncalled Merton College. Though small in size, the _entree_ to it demands\nhigh classical attainments.\n\nWith regard to commerce, Rochester has a favourable position on the\nriver Medway, in the creeks and branches of which are the oyster\nfisheries. The Corporation, assisted by a jury of free dredgers, hold a\nCourt of Admiralty, in which they make regulations for the opening,\nstocking, and closing of the oyster beds.\n\nIn conclusion, we cannot help saying that Kent should be a proud county,\npossessing, as it does, the two most ancient sees in the kingdom, the\ndioceses of which are separated only by the Medway.\n\n\n\n\nRipon\n\n(\"Doomsday Book.\")\n\n\nIn the West Riding of the county of York, twenty-two miles north-west of\nthe city of York and eleven miles north of Harrogate, the ancient city\nof Ripon is situated at the juncture of the Ure, Laver, and Skell. The\nnarrow and irregular streets and well-built houses, some of which still\nretain the quaint, picturesque gables so reminiscent of earlier times,\nenvelop the city with that delightful, indefinable air of mediaevalism--a\nsomething which, tempered with old associations and traditions, no\nmodern city with all its improvements can supply. To saunter through the\nancient, ill-lighted streets of an old town at night, when life is\ndormant and commercialism quiescent, is the time to view unexpected\nbeauties of architecture unfold themselves, and to become oneself imbued\nwith a spirit of romanticism and a feeling of rest. If a figure in\nmediaeval costume and rapier were to come round a corner suddenly, or\nemerge from some dark nook, it would scarcely startle the senses, so\nappropriate would it seem with the surroundings, enshrouded in\nmysterious shadows.\n\nA new city can be admired, but can never be revered till it has survived\nthe many storms of generations, and has emerged with a halo of\ntraditions respected and treasured.\n\nRipon, in common with other cathedral cities, possesses this charm, and\nafter many vicissitudes presents us with a magnificent cathedral. To\nrevert to the commencement of the city's history, it is supposed to have\nderived its name from the Latin \"Ripa,\" owing to its situation upon the\nbank of the river Ure. The earliest authentic record gives it under the\nname of Inhrypun, in connection with the establishment of a monastery in\n660 by Eata, who was then Abbot of Melrose. It was subsequently given by\nAlfred, King of Northumbria, to Wilfrid, who had been raised to the\narchbishopric of York. He was afterwards canonised as a saint. Under\nWilfrid's administration and influence the town very much increased its\nwealth and importance. Through the division of the bishopric in the year\n678 Ripon became a see.\n\nA great calamity overtook the city in the ninth century. The Danes burnt\nand plundered it, causing such devastation that it was almost wiped\nout. From its ruins, however, it recovered so quickly as to be\nincorporated as a royal borough by Alfred the Great. This happened by\nthe year 886. In the suppression of the insurrections of the\nNorthumbrian Danes it suffered severely through the terrible laying\nwaste of the land which Edred found necessary to subdue them.\n\nLittle time was left for the city to regain its former prosperity, when\nthe surrounding country was again laid waste, in 1069, by William the\nConqueror after defeating the Northumbrian rebels. This monarch's\nvengeance so completely demolished the town that it still remained in\nruins and the land uncultivated at the time of the Norman survey. The\nmonastery, destroyed by Edred, was rebuilt by Oswald and his successors,\nwho were archbishops of York. It was endowed and made collegiate by\nArchbishop Aldred somewhere about the time of the Conquest. The city was\nnow enjoying comparative peace, and was regaining lost prestige when it\nagain became a mere wreck. Under Robert Bruce, in the reign of Edward\nII., the Scots compelled the inhabitants to surrender everything of\nvalue they had, and burnt the town. This period of devastation lasted\nfrom 1319 till 1323.\n\n[Illustration: RIPON\n\nTHE CATHEDRAL]\n\nBy the exertions of the Archbishop of York, ably assisted with\ndonations from the local gentry, the city rapidly recovered by the time\na terrible plague compelled Henry IV. to leave London and take up his\nresidence here. The court of necessity followed him.\n\nThis royal sojourn did the city immense good, and again it derived\nbenefit some two centuries after by the presence of the Lord President\nof York in 1617. He had been obliged by a similar plague to remove his\ncourt hither.\n\nTen years later another royal visitor came, namely, James I., who rested\na night here on his route from Scotland to London. On this memorable\noccasion he was presented with a pair of Ripon spurs. From early times\ntill the sixteenth century Ripon was a recognised centre for the\nmanufacture of woollen caps. On the decline of this industry the city\nacquired such a fame for the manufacture of spurs that it became quite a\ncurrent phrase to say \"as true steel as Ripon rowels.\" Ben Jonson and\nDavenant make references in their verses to Ripon spurs. This industry,\ntogether with those of manufacturing buttons and various kinds of\nhardware, flourished till quite recently, when mechanical industries\nsupplanted them.\n\nIn 1633 Charles I. also paid the city a visit. During the Civil War the\nparliamentary troops, under Sir Thomas Mauleverer, took possession of\nRipon. After mutilating many of the monuments and ornaments of the\nchurch, they were eventually driven out of the town in 1643 by the\nRoyalists, under Sir John Mallory of Studley, a township comprised under\nRipon. In recounting the political fortunes of the city little has been\nsaid about its chief attraction, the Cathedral, not because it has\nplayed no important factor in the welfare of the city, but because it\nhas been considered better to give, apart, the chief characteristics of\nits architecture.\n\nWe have seen how a monastery was established in 660, by Eata, which\nlater came under the patronage of St. Wilfrid. From the ruins of St.\nWilfrid's Abbey the present cathedral was founded about 680 A.D., in\nthe reign of Egfrid. With the exception of St. Wilfrid's crypt, called\nSt. Wilfrid's Needle, which tradition says was used for the trial of\nfemale chastity, nothing of the original Saxon fabric remains. From the\nsimilarity of this crypt, and of another at Hexham, both erected by St.\nWilfrid, in formation and arrangement to the catacomb chapels at Rome,\nit is inferred that this churchman had made himself familiar with their\npeculiarities during his residence in that Latin city. This is\ninteresting to note.\n\nThe Cathedral, as it now stands, embraces various styles of\narchitecture, and is dedicated to St. Peter and St. Wilfrid. It is a\nlarge cruciform church, with a square central tower and two western\ntowers. They at one time carried spires, each not less than one hundred\nand twenty feet in height; but the central spire having been blown down\nin 1660, caused considerable damage to the roof, and it was thought\nadvisable to pull down the others. Their removal accounts for the\nstunted appearance of these square towers. The construction of the\npresent church was commenced by Archbishop Roger, dating from 1154 to\n1181. To this period belong the transepts and portions of the choir. The\nwestern front and towers were carried out in the Early English style,\nmost probably by Archbishop Gray, between 1215 and 1255, and near the\nclose of the century the eastern portion of the choir was rebuilt in the\nDecorated style. The nave and part of the central tower were also\nrebuilt in the Perpendicular style at the close of the fifteenth\ncentury. The fabric was entirely renovated under the guidance of Sir\nGilbert Scott, from 1862 to 1876. The episcopal palace is a modern\nbuilding in the Tudor style, and is about one mile from the town.\n\nThe present bishopric dates only from the year 1836. There are several\ncharitable institutions: namely, the Hospital of St. John the Baptist,\nfounded by an archbishop of York in 1109; the Hospital of St. Mary\nMagdalene, for women, by another prelate of York in 1341; and the\nHospital of St. Anne, by some unknown benefactor who lived in the reign\nof Edward IV. A clock-tower was presented to the town to commemorate\nQueen Victoria's Diamond Jubilee. There is now, in place of the ancient\nindustries, an extensive trade in varnish, in addition to the\nmanufactories for saddle-trees and leather, but the most interesting\nindustry is that of the Ripon lace. It is a torchon lace much\nresembling, in uniformity of pattern, the design used in peasant laces\nin Sweden, Germany, and Russia.\n\n\n\n\nEly.\n\nEly.\n\n(\"Doomsday Book.\")\n\n\nIn the early history of the majority, if not of all of these cathedrals,\nit is interesting to note the many points of resemblance. It will be\nobserved that most of them had their inception in the seventh century. A\nmost convenient way also of remembering, if actual dates be forgotten,\nis that the commencement of the same century heralded the arrival of St.\nAugustine and his forty monks at Canterbury, and the re-establishment of\nChristianity in England. Whatever previous efforts had been attempted to\nchristianise the natives (prior to this century) pale into\ninsignificance after the landing of this great missionary from Rome. The\nsubsequent important events are invariably five; namely, the\ndevastations of the Danes in the ninth century, the erections of castles\nto overawe the inhabitants with the ecclesiastical foundations, still\nextant, after the dreaded millennium had passed, from the Conquest; the\ndissolution of the monasteries by Henry VIII.; the desecration and\nmutilation of the churches under Cromwell's Protectorate; and the\ninevitable restoration, not always happy, of these grand buildings.\n\nThe Venerable Bede, in his \"Ecclesiastical History,\" ingeniously\nattributes the derivation of the name to an eel, called \"Elge,\" on the\nassumption of the great abundance of this fish in the neighbourhood. At\nthe same time another rendering, by some one else, supposes that the\nSaxon \"Helyg,\" a willow, which flourished extensively, owing to the\nmarshy nature of the soil round about the city, gave rise to the present\ncontraction. However it may be, Ely dates from the year 673. The\nsubsequent history of the Church and state of this famous place\noriginated in that year from the small foundation of a monastery for\nmonks and nuns by Ethelreda. This princess was the daughter of the King\nof the East Angles, and the wife of Egfred, the King of Northumberland.\nShe had devoted a great deal of her life to monasticism, and eventually\nconstituted herself as the first abbess of her religious effort. A\ncontradictory account gives it that this lady more likely became the\nfirst abbess of a religious house which she had filled with virgins.\nTheir number is not stated. Nothing more is heard or worth relating\nof the welfare of this royal benefice until the ninth century, when, in\nthe natural order of things, it was destroyed by the Danes. In 879, a\nmatter of nine years after this devastation, it was partially restored\nby those brethren who had fortunately escaped the massacre. Under the\ngovernment of provosts they were established and existed as secular\npriests for nearly a century. At the end of this period of inactivity it\nreceived much attention from Ethelwold, Bishop of Winchester. This\nprelate in 970 purchased the whole of the Isle of Ely from Edgar. He\nthen rebuilt the monastery and endowed it munificently. In it regular\nmonks were placed under the rule of an abbot, to whom Edgar granted the\nsecular jurisdiction of two hundreds within and five hundreds without\nthe Fens. Many other important privileges were bestowed by the same\nmonarch, recognised by Canute, and greatly increased by Edward the\nConfessor in recognition of part of his education here received. These\nmany marks of royal favour caused it to become the richest in England,\nand the city participated in its prosperity.\n\n[Illustration: ELY\n\nFROM THE WEST FRONT]\n\nSoon after the Conquest a determined resistance was made by many of the\nnobility against what they considered the tyranny of William. Led by\nsuch leaders as Edwin, Earl of Chester, Egelwyn, Bishop of Durham, and\nheaded by Hereward, an English nobleman, they contrived to do\nconsiderable damage in the surrounding country. They built a castle of\nwood in the Fens, and made a vigorous stand against the Normans, who\nbesieged the island, constructed roads through the marshes, threw\nbridges across the streams, and erected, as usual, a strong castle at\nWiseberum. With the exception of Hereward, the rebellious subjects were\nreduced to submission. According to one authority, it is supposed that\nWilliam's camp was simply an old Roman camp repaired for the occasion.\nWe learn that the field, which contained the ancient site, was known as\nBelasis in some records of the reign of Henry III. It appears that one\nof William's generals was called Belasis, and that he was quartered on\nthe monastery, which he had taken possession of after the conquest of\nthe isle. He treated the monks with every mark of courtesy, allowing\nthem to remain under an abbot of his own choosing. At first he laid them\nunder certain restrictions, but subsequently restored the privileges\nthey had previously been accustomed to.\n\n[Illustration: ELY\n\nTHE MARKET PLACE]\n\nIn 1107 the eleventh and last abbot, Richard, employed all his interest\nwith Henry I. and gained the royal sanction to the establishment of an\nepiscopal see at Ely. To this the monarch granted, for a diocese, the\ncounty of Cambridge, which had till then been under the jurisdiction of\nthe Bishop of Lincoln. The isle was also invested with sovereign powers.\nRichard, however, did not live to become the first bishop, an honour\nwhich was conferred in 1109 on his successor, Hervey.\n\nBy this arrangement the Abbot was superseded by the Bishop, and an\nentire distribution of the property belonging to the abbey was effected\nbetween them. As the abbey became the church of the See, the Abbot was\nobliged to alter his dignity to that of a prior. A fair, to continue for\nseven days, commencing from June 20, to commemorate the anniversary of\nthe death of Ethelreda, was instituted by the Bishop. The prelate Nigel,\nin the reign of Stephen, built a castle here, of which no remains exist,\nand whose site is now conjectural. The year 1216 witnessed dreadful\nscenes of spoliation of churches and large sums of money exacted from\nthe inhabitants under the guise of ransom.\n\nThe cause of all this devastation being visited upon Ely was John's idea\nof revenging himself upon the barons. At their hands he had, the year\npreviously, been compelled to undergo the mortification of signing the\nMagna Charta at Runnymede, a field between Windsor and Staines. Ever\nsince that time the irresolute and mean king had been devising schemes\nof vengeance against his opponents. Three months spent in the Isle of\nWight had enabled him, through agents and the promise of the estates of\nthe barons as plunder, to raise a considerable army of the Brabanters.\nAt their head he suddenly emerged from concealment, and surprised the\nbarons by appearing before Rochester Castle and defeating them.\n\nIn the meantime John was well supported at Ely by his general, William\nBunk, or rather an unexpected incident hurried on its doom. The elements\nunkindly betrayed the city into the hands of the Brabanters. At a\ncritical time, the treacherous swamps--the isle's hitherto great natural\nfortifications--became the city's undoing; for a sharp frost set in and\nrendered a ready glacial access to the city. The enemy lost no time in\nreducing the barons to submission and the wretched inhabitants to great\nmisery. The barons, thus reduced to dire extremities, invited Louis, the\neldest son of the King of France, to aid them, promising him through his\nwife the crown of England.\n\n[Illustration: ELY\n\nINTERIOR OF THE NAVE]\n\nThe French landed at Sandwich, retook Rochester Castle, and compelled\nJohn to flee. John, crossing over the Wash, in his march from Lynn in\nNorfolk into Lincolnshire, suffered great loss through the return of the\ntide swamping the rear of his army, all his money, and stores. He\nhimself escaped to Swineshead Abbey, in the Lincolnshire Fens, where a\nmonk is said to have administered poison to him. With great difficulty\nand exhaustion the monarch arrived at Newark, where he died in the\nOctober of the year 1216.\n\nFrom this time onward the city enjoyed comparative peace, and exercised\nthe privileges granted by Edgar, Edward the Confessor, and William the\nConqueror.\n\nTill the twenty-seventh year of the reign of Henry VIII. the royal\nfranchise of Ely, in several statutes, was recognised as the county\npalatine of Ely. Henry, by Act of Parliament, remodelled the privileges,\nand ordered the justices of oyer and terminer, and gaol delivery, and\njustices of the peace for the Isle of Ely, to be appointed by letters\npatent under the Great Seal. The dissolution of the monasteries also was\nthe means of converting the conventual church into a cathedral--much\nmore appropriate to the dignity of the Bishop, whose title had been\ngranted, as we have seen, by Henry I. in 1107. This ecclesiastical\nbuilding, first a conventual and then a cathedral church, was commenced\nin 1081, and entirely completed in 1534. The dedication to St. Peter\nand St. Ethelreda was changed to \"The Holy Trinity.\"\n\nIt is a magnificent cruciform structure, displaying the many changes\nthat took place in ecclesiastical architecture from the early years of\nthe Norman Conquest down to the latest period of English style.\n\nThe main feature is the extraordinary variety of arches built according\nto successive styles. Though this peculiar treatment suggests an\nunfinished appearance, it cannot rob the church of its wonderful beauty.\nThere is a departure from the general plan of other cathedrals. The nave\nis continued through an extended range of twelve arches. It belongs to\nthe Late Norman period, and its completion probably dates from about the\nmiddle of the twelfth century. From 1174 to 1189 the western tower and\nthe transepts were built by Bishop Ridall. Bishop Eustace, between 1198\nand 1215, erected the Galilee or western porch, a noble Early English\nstructure. Much at the same time a curious coincident is noticeable.\nBishop Pudsey was busy at Durham building the Galilee or Western Chapel,\nwhich is such a noble adjunct to that city's cathedral.\n\n[Illustration: ELY\n\nFROM THE FENS]\n\nEly's choir was originally Early Norman, and terminated in an apse.\nUnfortunately this Norman apse was destroyed. In restoration the\nchurch was extended eastward by six more arches under the guidance of\nBishop Northwold, about the middle of the thirteenth century. His\naddition is Early English. The carving is very rich and elaborate.\n\nWhile Bishop Hotham was engaged upon the building of the Lady Chapel,\nthe Norman tower erected by Abbot Simeon tumbled down in 1321. Hotham\nimmediately replaced it by an enlarged octagonal substitution. On it he\nplaced a lofty lantern of wood, a rich ornament and in good keeping with\nthe rest of the holy edifice. Though this prelate deserves every\nrecognition, yet we are much more indebted to Alan of Walsingham, who\ndesigned the Lady Chapel and the octagonal tower and lantern so ably\ncarried out by Hotham. Alan had also made his influence felt in the\nchoir-bays of this same cathedral, where he has so cleverly preserved\nand combined the old Early English elegance of proportion with richness\nof detail. Under the superintendence of Sir G. B. Scott the fabric has\nbeen extensively restored.\n\nAttached to the Cathedral is the church of Holy Trinity; it was formerly\nthe Lady Chapel of the Cathedral. It was commenced in the reign of\nEdward II., and is one of the most perfect buildings of that age.\nAnother handsome church is that dedicated to St. Mary, and is partly\nNorman and partly Early English in character.\n\nAt the Grammar School, founded by Henry VIII., Jeremiah Bentham, the\ncelebrated political writer, received the rudiments of his education.\nThe Sessions House, the new Corn Exchange, and Mechanics' Institute are\nother notable features of Ely.\n\nAn historic relic, now preserved at Trinity College, Cambridge, is the\n\"Ely Book.\" It cannot be passed over without a word. On a page are\nportrayed Ethelwold and King Edgar, but its chief importance is the\nrecord of instructions received by the commissioners to supply details\nand valuation of property for the \"Doomsday Book.\" The inquiries and\nanswers indicate that England had already been divided up into manors,\nand furnish besides a variety of most interesting information.\n\nAnother incident in the history of Ely, if not of great importance to\nthe city, is nevertheless an interesting insight of the respective\nposition of the Church and State soon after the dissolution.\n\nIn the good days of Queen Bess, the Bishop of Ely received a royal\nrebuke.\n\nIn the great struggle between the Protestants, or anti-papal world, and\nthe Catholic reaction, there was little leisure for the clergy to air\ntheir grievances. They were compelled to submit to the will of the\nQueen and her counsellor Cecil, from whom Archbishop Parker of\nCanterbury received his cue for the government of the Church. Though he\nenjoyed the personal confidence of Elizabeth beyond any other\necclesiastic of the time, his complaints were unavailing. The supremacy\nof the lay power over the ecclesiastical was too thoroughly accomplished\nto allow of the Church to exist apart in the early years of Elizabeth's\nreign. The Bishop of Ely, for expressing unwillingness to hand over the\ngardens of Ely house to Sir Christopher Hatton, received a\ncharacteristic warning, couched in elegant language, for his temerity.\n\"By God, I will unfrock you!\" was the Queen's gracious answer to the\ndaring prelate, if he did not mend his ways.\n\nThrough the cultivation of its fertile soil by market-gardeners, Ely\noffers its produce to the London market.\n\nA considerable factory for earthenware and tobacco-pipes, and numerous\nmills for the preparation of oil from flax, hemp, and cole-seed, help to\nfurnish the trade resources of this historical town, which is situated\non the river Ouse, in Cambridgeshire, and just sixteen miles from the\ncelebrated University of Cambridge.\n\n\n\n\nGloucester\n\nGlowecestre.\n\n\"Doomsday Book.\"\n\n\nTo the long list of \"cesters,\" the Anglicised form of the Latin \"Castra\"\n(camp), must be added Gloucester, famous in more respects than one; the\ncity where Henry I. died from a surfeit of lampreys, where Henry II.\nheld a great council in 1175, where the coronation of Henry III. in its\nabbey took place; the city which the same monarch \"loved better than\nLondon,\" the city extolled by Bede as one of the noblest in the land.\nPrior to the Roman invasion it is held to have been of considerable\nimportance, and to have originated from the settlement of a tribe of\nBritons, called the Dobuni. This tribe, with that of the Cornavii, also\ncontrolled about the same time the destinies of Worcester, now renowned\nfor its beautiful china. By the Dobuni the city was called Coer Glou,\neither out of compliment to its founder Glowi, a native, with the\nmeaning, \"the city of Glowi,\" or because the same British words,\naccording to another interpretation and its reputation, can be rendered\n\"the fair city.\" In the year 47 this stronghold passed into the Roman\npossession, under Aulus Plautius, and according to Richard of\nCirencester, a colony was established. This he styles Glebon, whilst the\n\"Itinerary\" of Antonine and other ancient records enter it as Glevum\nColonia.\n\nAn interesting account upon the Roman classification of towns in England\ndiscloses a very important particular. It adds considerable weight to\nthe description of the city by the authors just quoted. Their statements\nthat Gloucester was classified as a colony called Glevum seemed to be\nborne out by a tombstone found at Rome. It purports to be in memory of a\ncitizen of Glevum. This has given rise to the supposition that \"Glevum\"\nwas the honourable title bestowed upon an English town of importance\nmade a \"colony\" by Nerva. This period would be between 96 and 98 A.D.\nThis date in no way combats the original one of 47 A.D. It is only\nintended to show that Gloucester at the later period had become a colony\nwith a certain amount of self-government, forming a unit of the Great\nRoman Empire.\n\nThe district to the north-east of the present city, called King's\nHolme, is supposed to have been the actual site of the Roman camp. Close\nto it was also the palace belonging to the Anglo-Saxon kings of Mercia,\nwhich was called Regia Domus. Round about this spot quite a valuable\ncollection of Roman remains has been made, which, besides establishing\nthe fact of their occupation, have helped archaeologists to form a\ncorrect estimation of the habits and customs of the Latin invaders. When\nthe pressing needs of Rome required the return of all her legions,\nGloucester came to be governed by Eldol, who was a British chief. He\nsurvived the terrible massacre of the Britons by the Saxons at\nStonehenge, and in 489 revenged their memory by killing Hengist, the\nSaxon chief, at the battle of Maeshill in Yorkshire.\n\n[Illustration: GLOUCESTER\n\nINTERIOR OF THE NAVE]\n\nFrom the Britons the city in 577 was captured by the Saxons. They called\nit Gleauanceaster, which exists to this day under the contracted form of\nGloucester. At that time it was included in the kingdom of Wessex, and\nwas afterwards annexed to that of Mercia. In the meanwhile tradition\nsays that a bishop's see was founded at Gloucester in the second\ncentury. Lucius, the first Christian king of Britain, is held to be the\nfounder, and is also supposed to have been buried in the Church of St.\nMary de Lode of this city. With all respect to tradition, this can\nonly be accepted with reservation. If true, the present church of St.\nMary de Lode deserves far greater recognition than it receives. Though\nevidently an old foundation much restored, it can hardly lay claim to\nsuch antiquity. In all probability a temple to some Roman deity existed,\nwhich, by conflicting accounts of historians, gave rise to the\nsupposition of an early established see. Though there is proof that\nChristianity existed during the Roman occupation of England, it seems\nmore likely that, after their general exodus from the island in 418, a\ndiocese, if any, was soon after established at Gloucester, over which\nEldad presided in 490.\n\nThis first bishopric, on the subversion of the country by the\nAnglo-Saxons, must have become extinct; for the next we hear of it is\nwhen, as part of the kingdom of Mercia, the entire county of Gloucester\nis included in the diocese of Lichfield at the time of the introduction\nof Christianity. However, the first authentic evidence of monasticism\nappears in the year 679, when the holy brethren founded their\nestablishment. Under the auspices of Wulfhere, then King of Mercia, this\npriory was dedicated to St. Oswald, and in the same year was annexed to\nthe newly established see of Worcester. It afterwards became the abbey.\nThe city's importance in the same year was considerably increased by the\nroyal patron. The King's brother and successor, Ethelred, nevertheless,\ncompleted the ecclesiastical building, which some contend was a nunnery.\nThis the Danes destroyed. It was then refounded for the reception of\nsecular priests in 821, by Bernulf, King of Mercia.\n\nAs early as 964, in a charter to the monks of Worcester dated at\nGloucester, Edgar styles this a \"royal city.\" Several times it suffered\nfrom the incursions of the Danes in the eighth century, and more\nespecially so in the tenth, when it was taken and nearly destroyed by\nfire in the reign of Ethelred II. This monarch's reign seems to have\nbeen a disastrous one for the kingdom. In the first place, through the\nambitious schemes of his mother Elfrida, who caused his stepbrother\nEdward to be murdered, he wrongfully occupied the throne in 979. On\naccount of his tragic death Edward came to be styled \"the Martyr.\" A\nreign thus inauspiciously commenced proved to be a constant struggle\nagainst the Danes. The King acquired the name of Ethelred the Unready;\nfor when the Danes attacked the kingdom, instead of being prepared to\nrepel them, he endeavoured to counteract the evil with large sums of\nmoney. As this only served as a further incentive to fresh invasions,\nEthelred eventually compounded with them in 994. On condition that these\nplundering expeditions should cease, he offered them tribute. This is\nthe first mention we get of the \"danegelt,\" as it was called. With the\nexception of the reign of Edward the Confessor, it continued to be\nlevied almost without interruption till the time of Henry II. The only\nbenefit that Ethelred's reign conferred upon his subjects was the act of\natonement made by Elfrida.\n\nTo ease her conscience and remorse for the murder of Edward, she caused\nthe foundation of several monasteries, and performed penances. Edmund\nIronsides, who succeeded in 1016, was the exact opposite in character to\nhis father Ethelred.\n\nHe continued a serious obstacle to Canute and his Danes. After the last\nof five pitched battles Canute and he agreed to divide the kingdom\nbetween them: Canute to have Mercia and Northumberland, and Edmund the\nremainder. However, through the murder of Edmund a few days after, at\nOxford, Canute usurped the throne of England in 1017. During his reign\nof eighteen years, except for a dispute with Scotland over Cumberland,\nthe country enjoyed peace at home.\n\nThis peaceful term, in conjunction with the passing over of the dreaded\nmillennium, when the end of the world had been expected, caused the\ngreat building activity which, under the Norman Conquest, attained such\nwonderful results.\n\nIn the meanwhile the trade resources of Gloucester, even before the\nConquest, had greatly advanced, and had probably outdistanced in ratio\nthose of more important commercial centres of England. No doubt the\nnatives had learned many hitherto unknown industrial arts from the\nRomans.\n\n[Illustration: GLOUCESTER\n\nTHE CATHEDRAL AND OLD PARLIAMENT HOUSE]\n\nA native art and civilisation existed in the Island, we know, before the\nRoman Conquest. Great skill in enamelling, claimed by the ancients to be\nof Celtic origin, and the primitive abundance of gold and tin, worked,\nas history relates, by the Phoenicians, encouraged a certain degree of\nnative excellence in metal work. Besides this, the gold coinage and\nother signs of their ingenuity, by remains discovered in Yorkshire and\nelsewhere, illustrate that various branches of art existed a matter of a\ncentury and a half before the Roman Conquest. Yet it is only reasonable\nto suspect that the inhabitants of Gloucester and of the other camps\nprofited greatly from the far better knowledge and technique brought by\nthe invader from Rome, the acknowledged centre of civilisation at\nthat time. Certain it is that the Roman influence must have left some\nresult. The subsequent history of Gloucester has it that a mint existed\nat the time of Alfred. It evidently fell into disuse, for a mint was\nagain established in the reign of King John. He also granted the\nburgesses exemption from toll, and showered other marks of royal favour.\nAs far back as the twelfth century, Long Smith Street derived its name\nfrom the numerous artisans who dwelled there.\n\nThey were employed in forges for the smelting of ore. Iron-founding and\ncloth-making were also in full swing. Felt-making, sugar-refining, and\nglass-manufacture all flourished at one time or another. Pin-making was\nintroduced by a Mr. John Tilsby in 1625, and until quite recently formed\nthe staple trade of the place. Bell-founding, once a feature, no longer\nis practised. In its career of nearly two centuries close upon 5,000\nbells of different sizes had been cast. With the exception of foundries,\nmany modern industries have supplanted the old, and include match works,\nmarble and slate works, saw mills and flour mills, chemical works, rope\nworks, railway wagon and engine factories, agricultural implements, and\nship-building yards; for it must be remembered that Gloucester is\nreckoned as a port. It exports such valuable commodities as iron,\ncoals, malt, salt, bricks, and pottery. The town is also celebrated for\nits Severn salmon and lampreys.\n\nIn discussing the resources of Gloucester, no regard has been paid to\nthe proper distribution of dates. A leap from the eleventh to the\nnineteenth century has been unavoidably made, and to chronicle the chief\nevents it is necessary to go back to the year 1022, when a change was\nmade in Bernulf's foundation.\n\nThis year saw the ejection of the secular priests and the introduction\nof the Benedictine monks by Canute. In spite of opposition, the new\norder managed to keep possession of the monastery till the dissolution.\nThe abbey founded by Aldred, Bishop of Worcester, a few years before the\nNorman Conquest served as the basis of the present cathedral. This\ntransition took place from 1072 till 1104, under Abbot Serle. In 1381\nWalter Frocester, its historian, became its first mitred abbot. Here\nagain we have an instance of a Norman building forming the backbone to\nsubsequent periods of Gothic and English architecture. Though each style\nis distinct, the _tout ensemble_ is in such perfect harmony that it\ncalls for the greatest admiration for the wonderful skill of the several\narchitects. The plan of the Cathedral is the usual symbol of the cross.\nIn the centre there is the beautiful fifteenth-century tower. Its mass\nof detail and pierced work give it an air of elegance and lightness. The\noldest portions are the nave, the chantry chapels, which are apsidal and\nare on either side of the choir, and the crypt. These are supposed to\nhave belonged to Aldred's abbey, which may thus be taken to have become\nincorporated in the present building. They are of Norman origin, or\nrather date a few years before the Conquest. No doubt these parts came,\nmore or less, to be touched up and restored by the Normans. In 1248, the\nroof of the nave, an Early English addition to the massive Norman nave,\nwas finished by Abbot Henry Foliot. The Chapter House also is Norman.\nCompared with those at Wells and Lincoln, its simplicity is striking. It\ndiffers also in another respect. Belonging, as it did, to a Benedictine\nchurch, it follows the shape usually found in churches of that order;\nnamely, the square.\n\nThe south aisle was commenced by Abbot Thokey in 1310, and the south\ntransept in 1330. About the same time building operations were commenced\nfor the north transept and the choir. The latter was finished in 1457.\n\nTo the north of the nave lie the cloisters. These form a most wonderful\nEarly example of fan-tracery, constructed some time between 1351 and\n1390. Here in the south end of the cloisters were set apart a series of\nstalls, better known as the carrels, in which the monks studied and\nwrote. They may have undergone great hardships and austerities, but they\nevidently had a great sense of beauty. They have left us the finest\nworks of architecture possible, which have not been surpassed by any\nmodern erection.\n\nThe west front, and the south porch with fan-traceried roof, were added\nin 1421.\n\nThe triforium, carried round in a curve under the great east window,\nforms a narrow passageway from one side of the choir to the other. This\nformation, curiously enough, has constituted quite a feature at\nGloucester. It is called the \"whispering gallery.\" There is no evidence\nthat the architect intended it. St. Paul's, in London, affords another\nsimilar example.\n\n[Illustration: GLOUCESTER\n\nFROM THE PADDOCK]\n\nThe sculptor's art is represented by many tombs of certain merit. There\nis the tomb erected by Abbot Parker to the memory of Osric, King of\nNorthumberland, who was one of the founders of the monastery, and who\ndied about the eighth century. In the north aisle leading to the Lady\nChapel--which by the way, with its square ending appears like an\nafter-thought, extended eastwards, as it were, from the apsidal\ntermination of the choir--is a monument covering the remains of Robert\nDuke of Normandy, the eldest son of the Conqueror. He was a benefactor\nto the old abbey. His effigy in coloured bog oak is disposed in a\nrecumbent attitude on an altar-tomb. There are many others, amongst\nwhich that of Dr. Jenner, famous for the introduction of vaccination\ninto general practice, commands great attention. Robert Raikes is also\nrepresented. He and the Rev. Thomas Stock, a rector of St. John the\nBaptist in this city, share the honour of having established the first\nSunday school in England, which was held in Gloucester. Some\nauthorities, however, contend that the reverend gentleman was the\noriginator of the Sunday school, though they do not deny that Raikes,\nthrough his unwearied exertions, promoted the increase of these\ninstitutions throughout the kingdom.\n\nBut of all the monuments, that erected by the monks of Gloucester to the\nmemory of Edward of Carnarvon deserves the most attention, not only for\nits beauty, but because it served as the type for the Gothic sculptors\nto copy during two centuries. The recumbent effigy is hedged in by a\nseries of elaborately decorated shafts, forming a kind of open-work\ngrille, with pinnacles and niches. Overhead it is covered in with richly\nornamented Gothic work.\n\nThis shrine, constructed to receive the body of the murdered Edward II.,\nconveyed thither from Berkeley Castle by Abbot Thokey, throughout the\ngreater part of Edward III.'s reign continued to attract vast numbers of\npilgrims. Their offerings soon brought in a great revenue, which was\nspent not on rebuilding the church, but in restoring the surface, in\nputting new windows in the old walls, and, generally, in adapting the\ntwelfth-century building to the Perpendicular style of the fourteenth\ncentury. In this way the original Norman work forms the skeleton to the\nPerpendicular casing.\n\nIn 1541 the Cathedral was separated from the diocese of Worcester by\nHenry VIII. and made a distinct bishopric.\n\nBesides this magnificent pile, Gloucester possesses four other churches,\nwhich deserve some slight notice. There is the Church of St. Mary de\nLode, said to contain the remains of Lucius, the first British king. It\nhas an interesting old chancel, and a monument to Bishop Hooper.\n\nSt. Mary de Crypt is a cruciform building of the twelfth century, with a\nbeautiful lofty tower. The curfew bell is still rung from the tower of\nSt. Michael, which is said to have been connected with the ancient abbey\nof St. Peter. St. Nicholas, originally Norman, is now an ancient\nstructure of the Early style of English architecture.\n\nOf schools, one was refounded by Henry VIII. for the education of the\ncathedral choir. Another was established in the same reign by Dame Joan\nCooke, and was called the Crypt School, from the fact of its schoolroom\nadjoining the church of the same name. Sir Thomas Rich, a native of\nGloucester, in 1666 founded the Blue-Coat Hospital, much on the same\nlines as that of Christ's Hospital, recently removed from London to the\ncountry.\n\nDuring the many years that were taken in beautifying the Cathedral, we\nmust not forget that the city was struggling with varying fortune. It\nmight almost be called a royal city, so often was it visited by princes,\nwere it not that Winchester claims that distinction. In the war between\nStephen and the Empress Matilda, Gloucester always accorded a welcome to\nthe Empress. Thither she is said to have escaped after the siege of\nWinchester, carried in a coffin. If not true, the story is well founded.\nThe city was captured from Henry III. by the barons in 1263. In one of\nthe many Parliaments held at Gloucester, were passed, in 1279, the laws\nconnected with the Statute of Quo Warranto, better known as the Statutes\nof Gloucester.\n\nIn 1327 Edward II. was assassinated in Berkeley Castle by his keeper,\nSir Thomas Gournay, and John de Maltravers, Lord Berkeley. From this\ntime Gloucester seems to have enjoyed comparative peace, though its\ncounty was the theatre of several important historical events enacted in\nits cities of Chichester and Tewkesbury. The latter is especially\nmemorable for the great and decisive battle, in which the Lancastrians\nwere totally defeated, in 1471. On that occasion Margaret of Anjou, her\nson Prince Edward, and her general, the Duke of Somerset, were taken\nprisoners by Edward IV. After the battle Prince Edward was murdered and\nthe Duke of Somerset beheaded. In the great contest between Charles I.\nand the Parliament, the city of Gloucester, it is true, became an object\nof importance to the success of the royal cause. The city was, however,\nsuccessfully defended for the Parliament by Colonel Massie, till\nrelieved in 1643 by the Earl of Essex. In the meantime Chichester was\ntaken by Prince Rupert.\n\nThe subject-matter of this city has unconsciously led us to introduce\nTewkesbury and Chichester. Having gone so far we cannot close without\nfirst drawing attention to the existence of three other cities that\nprominently stand out in this same county of Gloucestershire. They are\nCheltenham, the home of the famous public school; Tewkesbury, where the\ndecisive battle of the Roses was fought; and Bristol, the great port\nsituated near the mouth of the Severn, the river on the banks of which\nlies this ancient cathedral city of Gloucester.\n\n\n\n\nHereford\n\nHereford.\n\n(\"Doomsday Book.\")\n\n\nOn the borders of Wales is Herefordshire, and almost in the centre of\nthe county is its ancient capital, Hereford. A Roman station is supposed\nto have been in the neighbourhood, under the name of Ariconium, which is\nconsidered to be identical with the present Kenchester. The present name\nof Hereford is derived from the pure Saxon. Like Oxford, it had no\nbridges at first. As the river had to be crossed, the shallowest part\nwas chosen.\n\nThis consideration probably determined the site of Hereford to be upon\nthe left bank of the river Wye, and the pass over it was called by the\nSaxons, Here-ford, or \"Military ford.\" We glean little information of\nthis place till the seventh century. An episcopal see is stated to have\nexisted in this place before the invasion of Britain by the Saxons. From\nthis uncertainty we arrive at something more definite, which took place\nin 655. Oswy, then King of Mercia, in that year made Hereford part of\nthe diocese of Lichfield, which already wielded jurisdiction over the\nwhole of the kingdom of Mercia.\n\nA few years later it was decided by a synod held here under the\npresidency of Theodore, then Archbishop of Canterbury, in 673, to make a\ndivision of the diocese of Lichfield. Very naturally Wilford, then\nbishop of that see, refused to recognise the decree, and for this piece\nof contumacy was subsequently deprived of part of his diocese. His\nsuccessor, Sexulph, however, was more amenable, and with his consent\nHereford was detached from Lichfield and restored to its original\nindependence as a separate diocese. Putta was straightway translated\nfrom Rochester See to become the first bishop of Hereford in 680. This\ninstance is one of many such in the history of the Church. The shuffling\nof dioceses, the enlargement of one at the expense of another, whether\nfrom motives of malice or a sense of right distribution, occurs usually\nin the early years of Christianity in England, and also at the general\nwinding up of the monasteries in the reign of Henry VIII.\n\nHereford was by no means the only see that suffered these changes. It\nwas simply a unit in the great policy of welding together the churches\nof the several kingdoms into one whole, which had never been carried\ninto effect till Theodore of Tarsus came to England. He was a Greek monk\nlittle known till the Pope elected to fill the vacant archbishopric of\nCanterbury. Only three bishops were left in the whole of England; of\nthese two were rivals for the See of York, and the third had bought the\nSee of London. The first thing that Theodore did after his arrival was\nto travel throughout the country. By consecrating new bishops and\ncreating a thorough organisation, he acquired a complete understanding\nwith the Church. He also instituted a system of synods, which he\nintended should meet annually to discuss the general welfare of the\nChurch. This, however, seems to have fallen into disuse.\n\nIn all, Theodore managed to divide England into a matter of fifteen\ndioceses, through the subdivision of the old dioceses. Truly a great\nachievement when we remember that the conversion of the English kingdoms\nmostly depended upon the good-will of their respective kings. Thus it\ncame about that one king in each kingdom had one bishop, generally his\nchaplain at first, who took his title, not from a see, but from the\npeople. He was either bishop of Mercia, or Northumbria, or some other\nlarge kingdom. As we have seen in the collision with Wilford,\nTheodore's policy did not suit every prelate's views. His influence,\nhowever, effected the installation of three bishops in Northumbria, four\nin Mercia, two in East Anglia, and two in Wessex. Kent already had two\nsince 604.\n\nThus the result was the complete conversion of England, effected by\nTheodore from about 673 to 688 A.D.\n\nPrior to the eighth century Hereford is known to have been the capital\nof the kingdom of Mercia, as it is now of Herefordshire, which is much\nreduced in size. From the years 765 to 791 Mercia was governed by King\nOffa. Apart from his connection with the Cathedral of Hereford, his\nreign must possess some interest to the collectors of coins. For though\nthe die-sinker's art was practised in England as far back as the Roman\noccupation, and an indigenous coinage came into existence in the seventh\ncentury, it is not till this monarch's reign that genuine English\ncoinage was properly in currency. It appears that Offa had to pay an\nannual tribute of 365 mancuses in coin to the Pope. As a mancus was\nequal to 30 pennies, the sum was a considerable one.\n\nIn the year 782 an event occurred which laid the foundation of the\nCathedral. From Marden, the original place of sepulture, the body of\nEthelbert, King of the East Angles (who, by the way, is not to be\nconfounded with Ethelbert of Kent, who welcomed St. Augustine), was\nremoved to Hereford. He had been treacherously slain by his intended\nmother-in-law, the Queen of Mercia. In expiation of the murder King\nOffa, with munificent donations, enabled a nobleman called Milfride, a\nviceroy under Egbert, to found the Cathedral about 825. The building was\ndedicated to St. Mary and St. Ethelbert. It fell into decay in less than\ntwo centuries and necessitated a rebuilding during the prelacy of Bishop\nAthelstan, between 1012 and 1015. It was burnt by the Welsh in 1055, and\nremained in ruins till 1079, when the first Norman bishop, Robert of\nLorraine, was appointed to the See.\n\nHe commenced a new edifice on the lines of Aken, now Aix-la-Chapelle. It\nwas carried on, with the exception of the tower left to be erected by\nBishop Giles de Braos in the following century, by Bishop Raynelm, in\n1107, and eventually completed in 1148 by Bishop R. de Betum.\n\n[Illustration: HEREFORD\n\nTHE NORTH TRANSEPT]\n\nThe plan is the usual cross. A lofty tower rises from the intersection,\nand was formerly surmounted by a spire, taken down for safety's sake.\nThe screen and reredos, the pillars, the arches of naves, and the north\nand south arches of the choir belong to the Norman period. The Early\nEnglish claims the triforium, the Lady Chapel, clerestory, and the stone\nvaulting. The north transept is by Bishop Aquablanca, 1245-1268, whilst\nthe south-east transept dates from the Late Decorated style.\n\nFor over 450 years a number of additions and restorations have afforded\nevery facility for the skill of the architect, not always happily taken\nadvantage of. The great western tower unfortunately fell down in 1786,\nand caused considerable damage to the west front and adjacent work. Mr.\nWyatt, during modern restorations, in 1842 and 1863, rebuilt the tower.\nThe west front, soon after its misfortune, was restored in a style\ndifferent from the original. The whole exterior of this edifice presents\na curious variety of architectural style. This capitulation of bishops\nand dates is possibly dry reading, but it is absolutely necessary to\ndetermine the date of the different erections and restorations, and\ntheir successive styles of architecture.\n\nNear the choir was the shrine of St. Ethelbert, which was destroyed\nduring the Commonwealth of Cromwell. Another attraction to the pilgrims\nwas the tomb erected to the memory of Bishop Cantelupe, who died in\n1282. His heart was brought to Hereford and buried in the north\ntransept of the Cathedral, and he was canonised in 1310. The pilgrims\nresorted to this place, as it was reputed that no less than four hundred\nmiracles had been performed there. In consequence of this the succeeding\nbishops altered the quarterings of their ancient arms, which were those\nof St. Ethelbert, and assumed the paternal coat of Cantelupe. This\nchange constitutes the present arms of the bishopric.\n\nAmongst many other memorials is one to Bishop Aquablanca. A plain marble\ntablet was also erected to the memory of John Philips, a well-known\nauthor of poems entitled \"The Splendid Shilling,\" and \"Cyder.\"\n\nPerhaps the most interesting item, as well as the most curious of all\nthe old maps, is the \"Mappa Mundi,\" preserved in the south choir aisle.\nIt was compiled somewhere about 1275 to 1300, by a monk of Lincoln. How\nit ever came to Hereford appears to be an enigma. The most likely\nsolution is that the monk may have been transferred from Lincoln to this\nsee.\n\nThe \"Hereford Map,\" as it is called, is a great picture, more to be\nclassed as a grotesque work of art than a valuable aid to geography. It\nis, at least, a gigantic attempt to represent the whole world, with the\nintroduction of the main features, the people, industries, and products\nof each country. It is one mass of legendary figures, and the farther we\nget from England, which is hardly recognisable, the more grotesque and\nimprobable become the monsters. The Minotaurs and Gog-Magog of Tartary,\nthe dog-faced, the horse-footed, and flap-eared freaks of nature of the\nfar east, together with the one-legged, one-eyed, four-eyed, headless,\nand hermaphrodite tribes who fringe the Torrid Zone, give us an\ninteresting idea of the imposition by travellers upon the minds of the\npeople of that period, the thirteenth century. Even the fishes, supposed\nto be peculiar to each sea, are carefully depicted. Truly it is a\nwonderful work of imagination, not the less to be respected for that,\nand quite alone deserves a journey to Hereford.\n\nAn epitome of the chief historical events of the city will be a\nsufficient guide to its status. Except cider making, it has no\nindustries of special note.\n\nTo the fortifications erected in the time of Athelstan, and nearly\nperfected in Leland's time, was added a castle by Edward the Elder. In\n1055, two miles from this place, Griffith the Prince of Wales defeated\nRalph Earl of Hereford; and the Welsh, having thus taken the city, spent\ntheir time in reducing it to a heap of ruins. Harold, afterwards king,\nattacked and defeated the Welsh, and repaired and enlarged the\nfortifications in view of further invasions. In the conflicts between\nStephen and the Empress Maud, Hereford was successfully defended for the\nlatter by Milo, to be reduced by the King in 1141. At the commencement\nof the parliamentary war, Hereford was garrisoned for the King, but\nsurrendered, without a blow being struck, to the army of Sir William\nWaller in 1643. On the retreat of this knight the Royalists occupied it,\nand under the governorship of Barnabas Scudamore, Esquire, made a\nstubborn resistance against the Scots, under the Earl of Leven, and\nobliged them to raise the siege.\n\nThe inhabitants, at the Restoration, for their loyalty to the royal\ncause, received from Charles II. a new charter with extended privileges,\nand new heraldic arms testifying to their fidelity to the House of\nStuart. Previous to this Charles I. had been generous enough to reward\nthe many sacrifices and sufferings of the loyal citizens by granting the\ncity its motto of\n\n    Invictae fidelitatis praemium.\n\n\n\n\nLincoln\n\nLincolia.\n\n(\"Doomsday Book.\")\n\n\nThe commercial importance of Lincoln, whatever it may be now, was at one\ntime considerable. At the time of the Norman survey it commanded\nsufficient attention to cause the entry of the city in the \"Doomsday\nBook\" as one of the leading centres of commerce. This happy state was\ncontinued, or rather increased, by the famous Ordinance of the Staple in\nthe reign of Edward III. He was an ambitious monarch, and desired to\nbecome master of France. If we recall the battles of Cressy and\nPoitiers, we can readily understand what an enormous expenditure would\nbe required for the proper conduct of the war. By some means or other\nthe English revenues had to be found. This was met to a great extent by\nthe Ordinance of the Wool Staple, enacted by Edward III., who, besides\nwaging war in France, was keen on the extension of foreign trade. By\ncharters granted to merchants of Gascony, who imported wine and other\ncommodities, and by giving special protection to the Flemish weavers in\nEngland, the King enhanced the prospects of trade. But the most\nimportant of all his commercial projects was, as we have said, his\nscheme, finally declared in 1353, by which a staple for English exports\nwas established under the direct control of the Crown. Thus the monopoly\nof wool, which accrued so advantageously to Bruges and other cities on\nthe Continent, and had become unbearable, was in 1353 transferred to\nEngland. For the exclusive sale of wool ten English towns were chosen.\nThey were situated within easy distance of the coast, or the town was in\nconnection with a convenient port. Of these ten towns with corresponding\nports, Lincoln with Boston was chosen as a staple town for wool. This\nwith other sources of trade, such as the staple of lead and leather,\nflourished in Lincoln from Edward III.'s time till the commencement of\nthe eighteenth century, when the trade of the town declined. Through the\nseveral plagues prevalent in the fourteenth century, such as the black\ndeath and other epidemics similar in death-dealing if not in character\nat that time, especially about the year 1390, many towns in England were\nmuch decayed. Except London, York, Bristol, Coventry, and Plymouth, the\nafflicted towns did not regain the population they enjoyed in the\nfourteenth century till the Tudor period, and some, notably Sarum and\nLeicester, not until late in the reign of Elizabeth. The decline of\nLincoln, though progressive, in a way appears to have been truly a\ngradual decay, and more terrible in its imperceptible undermining than\nany knock-down blow, for it never recovered its old trade prosperity;\nwhilst Norwich, which before the plagues was next to London, bore\nrelatively and even greater and sharper evidence of the terrible\nvisitation, yet managed somehow to hark back in a measure to days of its\nformer glory. The old saying which ran \"Lincoln was, London is, York\nshall be\" indicates, far more than anything else, the change of\nLincoln's fortunes. Whatever its shortcomings may be, Lincoln possesses\na most interesting record of antiquity. Its minster is truly a gem, for\nit is not only the earliest example of a pure Gothic building in Europe,\nbut presents a delightful study of every kind of style, from the early\nNorman down to the Late Decorated.\n\nOf the many characteristics of this interesting edifice--the foundation\nof Remigius--we will note the chief. The building material consists of\nthe oolite and calcareous stone of Lincoln Heath and Haydor, the\nsurface of which, when worked upon with tools, appears to become quite\nhardened.\n\nRemigius adopted the plan of the church at Rouen as the model of his\nfoundation, which he laid in 1086. It was completed by his successor,\nBishop Bloet. The accidental fire that broke out gave his successor,\nBishop Alexander, the opportunity of repairing it. To prevent a like\noccurrence, this prelate conceived and carried out his idea of covering\nthe aisles with a vaulted roof of stone. It had a disastrous effect in\nthat its pressure weighed too heavily upon the walls. It necessitated a\nthorough overhauling by St. Hugh, a subsequent bishop, in the reign of\nHenry II. He rebuilt the church upon a plan then newly introduced, and\ngreatly enlarged it by taking down the east end and re-erecting it upon\na far bigger scale. Since his time the Cathedral has undergone several\nalterations and embellishments at the fostering care of several\nsucceeding prelates. On the magnificent central tower there used to be a\nlofty spire, which was blown down in 1547. The two western towers were\nalso deprived of their spires in 1808 to avert a similar calamity. The\napproximate dates of the different portions of the Cathedral are:\n\n[Illustration: LINCOLN\n\nBY MOONLIGHT]\n\nThe central west front and the font belong to Remigius' period.\n\nThe three west portals and Norman portion of the west tower above the\nscreen to the third story are 1148.\n\nThe nave, its aisles, and north and south chapels of the west end were\nfinished in 1220.\n\nThe Early English work of the west front and the upper portions of the\nnorth and south wings with the pinnacle turrets date from 1225.\n\nThe west porch of the main transept is 1220.\n\nThe lower courses of the central tower date from 1235, while the upper\nones originated in 1307.\n\nThe gables, the upper parts of the main transept, the parapets of the\nsouth side of the nave, the south wing, the west front, and the screen\nin the south aisle take us back again to the year 1225. The subsequent\nadditions are:\n\nThe west door of the choir aisles in 1240; the south porch of the\npresbytery in 1256; the choir screens in 1280, and ten years later the\nEaster Sepulchre. The fine circular window at the end of the north\ntransept, and especially the ones in the south transept, attract\nconsiderable attention. They are called respectively \"The Dean's Eye\"\nand \"The Bishop's Eye,\" and are supposed to belong to the year 1350.\nPerhaps they are better known as the rose windows, which were more\npopular in France than in England. They exhibit a network of interlacing\nstems in imitation of the freedom of the briar-rose, and show the\nadvanced skill of the workmen upon the plate-tracery they formerly put\nup as a masterpiece in the close vicinity of the rose windows.\n\nFor purposes of fortification, if necessary, Remigius chose the summit\nof the hill close to the Castle as the site. The Cathedral, dedicated to\nthe Virgin Mary, thus, from its commanding station, forms a magnificent\nobject seen from many miles around, and in the days of pilgrimage must\nhave held out a welcome beacon of hope to the weary pilgrims.\n\nOf the many famous prelates of this see must be mentioned Remigius,\nBloet, St. Hugh, and Fleming, who died in 1431. The latter was the\nfounder of Lincoln College at Oxford. Just at the back of this college\nis situated the well-known college of Brazennose, the foundation of\nanother Lincoln Bishop, namely Smith, who died in 1521.\n\nAgain, Polydore Vergil, W. Paley, Cartwright the inventor of the power\nloom, and O. Manning the celebrated topographer are some of the many\ncapitular members of whom Lincoln may well be proud.\n\nAnother attraction that Lincoln possesses in its vicinity is the\nrace-course just beyond Newland.\n\nFor the early history of Lincoln we must go as far back as the Saxon\ndays. After the departure of the Romans, Lincoln was the chief city of\nthe district. It was the capital of the kingdom of Mercia, as it now is\nof the county of Lincolnshire.\n\nBesides being described like other cities as being locally in the county\nof Lincoln, it is said to be in the wapentake. This is a departure from\nthe \"hundred\" only in name, not in purpose. In the northern counties of\nEngland the wapentakes denoted the usual divisions answering to the\nhundreds of other counties. The origin of the wapentake is woepenge-toc,\nwoepentac, from the Icelandic vapnatak. It literally means a\nweapon-taking or weapon-touching, and became an expression of assent. It\nwas anciently invariably the custom to touch lances or spears when the\nhundreder, or chief, entered in his office. Tacitus, in the \"Germania,\"\ngives a full description of this interesting rite.\n\nIn the Low Countries words very similar appear as the names of streets.\nAt Bruges, in Belgium, there is the \"Wapen-makers Straat,\" which means\nnothing more or less than that in that street was originally carried on\nan industry of warlike implements made by \"weapon-makers.\"\n\nIn this wise Lincolnshire, Yorkshire, and Nottinghamshire were divided\ninto wapentakes instead of \"hundreds.\"\n\nAnother peculiar distinction of this city was its former government by a\nportreve. The term is now obsolete, but in the old English law it\ndenoted the chief magistrate of a port or maritime town. In its old form\nit was written \"portgerefa,\" a combined word meaning port, a harbour,\nand \"gerefa,\" a reeve or sheriff. In the third year of the reign of\nGeorge I. the city, with a district of twenty miles round it, was\nerected into a county, under the designation of \"The City and County of\nthe City of Lincoln.\" It was also entered as a maritime county. The\nextreme flatness of the Lincolnshire coast, with the slow sluggishness\nof the lower part of the course of the rivers, caused, in remote ages,\nthe inundation of a great tract of land. The feasibility of reclaiming\nsome portion of these fens received the attention of the Romans. They\nconstructed the large drain called the car-dyke, signifying the\nfen-dyke, carrying it from the river Witham, near Lincoln, to the river\nWelland on the southern side of the county, with the object of draining\nthe waters from the high grounds and of preventing the inundation of\nthe low grounds. This policy was adopted in subsequent reigns with great\nsuccess, and is even to this day continued. It has been the means of\nbringing rich tracts of land into cultivation, and of dispelling the\nunhealthy miasma which once caused the great prevalency of the ague\nfever. From fragments of vessels found near its channel it is affirmed\nthat large ships of bygone days could formerly sail up the river Witham\nfrom Boston to Lincoln, but now it is only navigable for barges.\n\n[Illustration: LINCOLN\n\nTHE STEEP HILL]\n\nIn 1121 Henry I. materially altered the great Foss-Dyke, extending a\nmatter of eight miles from a great marsh near Lincoln to the river\nTrent, to serve the double purpose of draining the adjacent level and of\nconstructing a high waterway for vessels from the Trent to Lincoln.\n\nFor defraying the expenses of draining, it appears that in general a\nrate was levied upon all lands in the contiguous wapentakes.\n\nWith this preface of the general character of the district, we propose\nto give a history of the city from its commencement.\n\nOn the summit of a hill close to the river Lindis, which is now called\nthe Witham, the ancient Britons established a city of considerable\nimportance from the most remote period of the British history. They\nchristened the city after the original name of the river. This, on the\ninvasion of Britain, passed into the hands of the Romans. They made it\none of their chief stations in this part of England and established a\ncolony. Instead of calling the city something \"cester,\" they appear to\nhave Latinised the Celtic name, signifying \"the hill port by the pool,\"\nand called it Lindum Colonia. Through process of time and differences of\npronunciation, consequent on the various dialects spoken successively by\nthe Saxons, Danes, and Normans, the title became abbreviated to\nLin-coln. The date of the Roman occupation is given as being in the year\n100 A.D.\n\nTheir plan of the city consisted of the form of a parallelogram about\n400 yards in length by the same number of yards in breadth, defended by\nmassive, strong walls and intersected by two streets running at right\nangles.\n\nPresumably the extremities of these streets pointed to the four cardinal\npoints. They terminated in gates, the sole one of which--an excellent\nexample of Roman architecture in England--is the North Gate, or, as it\nis generally called, Newport. It is composed of a central arch, with two\nlesser ones, one on either side, and is on a lower level than that of\nthe street. Through this gate passes the great Roman Road called Ermine\nStreet, out into the country for a distance of about ten miles or so. To\nthe south-west of this entrance is supposed to have been a mint. This\nseems to be borne out by the discovery of many Roman coins found in the\nvicinity. The Exchequer Gate is a very fine specimen of the thirteenth\ncentury. It bears a carved representation of the Crucifixion, which\nlends it considerable interest.\n\nAt the top of High Street is Pottergate and Stonebow, over which is the\nGuildhall. The latter is an ancient embattled structure, rebuilt in the\nreign of Richard II.\n\nBesides the Northgate, the Romans appear, according to remains found, to\nhave contributed the inevitable bath and sudatorium. On their departure\nfrom Britain, Lincoln was made the capital of the kingdom of Mercia by\nthe Saxons in 518. Vortimer, who endeavoured to oppose them, was slain\nand interred here. From 786 Lincoln suffered repeatedly from visitations\nof the Danes, control being recovered by Edmund II., according to\nagreement with Canute in 1016. Throughout the whole of this period the\nonly peace the city had enjoyed was when Alfred the Great subdued the\nDanes. However, Edmund II., better known as Edmund Ironsides, did not\nlive many days longer, being murdered at Oxford. Whereupon, in 1017,\nCanute took possession of the murdered monarch's territory, in which\nLincoln was included. William I. then came along in 1086, swept away\nclose upon two hundred houses to make room for the erection of a\ncastle--on a site which meant the occupation of nearly one-fourth of the\nold Roman city.\n\nThe Castle still has traces of Norman work, the foundations of which\nwere formed of enormous beams of wood and a mixture of thin, coarse\nmortar, used for pouring into the joints of masonry and brickwork,\nusually called \"grouting.\"\n\nIn that wonderful survey of his--the \"Doomsday Book\"--fifty-two parishes\nare stated to have composed this city.\n\nThe Castle in 1140 figured in the disputes between the Empress Matilda\nand Stephen, the latter of whom was crowned here in 1141. Stephen was,\nhowever, made prisoner, but was afterwards exchanged, and lived three\nyears later to celebrate Christmas here. But prior to this period\nLincoln was for the first time erected into a see in the reign of\nWilliam Rufus.\n\n[Illustration: LINCOLN\n\nTHE WEST TOWERS]\n\nIn pursuance of a decree of a synod held at London at this time, that\nall the episcopal sees should be removed to fortified places,\nRemigius, the Bishop of Dorchester, determined to establish the seat\nof his diocese at Lincoln. He built the church and an episcopal palace,\nbut died just before its consecration.\n\nHis work was completed by his successor, Robert Bloet. In the reign of\nHenry II. the Diocese, which once extended from the Thames to the\nHumber, was curtailed to add a part to form that of Ely. It again\nsuffered diminution in Henry VIII.'s time, when the limits of the Sees\nof Oxford and Peterborough were defined. In spite of it all, Lincoln's\nsee is fairly extensive, though it suffered again in 1884. Prior to this\nmonarch's reign Lincoln had as many as fifty-two churches, but when he\ndecided upon reformation from Popery their number was greatly\ndiminished. Their names, still preserved, are the sole reminders of\ntheir former existence, with the exception of fourteen which remain.\nThese have probably been rebuilt.\n\nBefore entering further concerning the See, and the Cathedral founded by\nRemigius, which was constantly in the hands of the architect even down\nto recent years, we shall add the chief political events subsequent to\nStephen. On the death of this monarch, Henry II., probably not satisfied\nwith his coronation in London, underwent the ceremony again at Wigford,\na place just a little to the south of Lincoln city.\n\nJohn here early in his reign received the homage of David the King of\nScotland. During the struggle with the barons in 1216 the citizens\nremained loyal to their sovereign; but their city was taken at last in\n1217, and invested by the barons under Gilbert de Gaunt, afterwards\ncreated Earl of Lincoln. After the disaster that overtook John's army in\nthe passage across the Wash, and his death, which took place soon\nafterwards, his son Henry III. was loyally assisted by the inhabitants\nagainst the barons, who had summoned to their aid Louis, the Dauphin of\nFrance. The Castle, however, remained for many years in the possession\nof the Crown. Eventually it became the summer residence of the\ncelebrated John of Gaunt. He was Earl of Lincoln, and in 1396 married\nhere Lady Swinford, who was a sister-in-law to Chaucer.\n\nSeveral times Parliament was held in Lincoln; namely, twice by Edward\nI., and in 1301 and 1305; twice also by Edward II.; and in the first\nyear of Edward III.'s reign.\n\nHenry VI. paid a visit, as did also Henry VII., who held a public\nthanksgiving for his victory over Richard III. at the battle of Bosworth\nField.\n\nThroughout the parliamentary war the inhabitants were staunch\nsupporters of the Crown. The city was stormed by Earl Manchester, an\nindefatigable soldier of Cromwell. The Commonwealth troopers during\ntheir occupation created considerable havoc in the ecclesiastical\nbuildings. According to their invariable custom they stabled their\nhorses and housed themselves within the cathedral walls. Not satisfied\nwith that, they damaged the tombs and deprived the niches of their\nstatuary.\n\nTo go back a matter of four hundred years to this period, the population\nof Lincoln rose _en masse_ against the Jews. They were alleged to have\ncrucified a little Lincoln boy, presumably a Christian, at a place\ncalled Dunestall in the year 1255. The enraged mob wreaked their\nvengeance by causing the execution of eighteen Jews, murdering many\nmore, and later on making a saint of the victim, under the name of\n\"little Saint Hugh.\" The punishment seems to be out of proportion to the\ncrime. In fact little Hugh's crucifixion appears rather to have served\nas an excuse for the wrongful persecution of the Semitic race than for\nthe proper administration of the law irrespective of creed. Even to this\nday this regrettable racial feeling is kept alive. In the middle ages\nthis bitter feeling was fostered and brought about chiefly owing to the\nwonderful success of the Jews in England, who grew rich upon the profits\naccruing to usury, which they alone might exercise. Among many prominent\ninstances of popular vengeance, besides little St. Hugh's murder, are\nthe tombs of boy-martyrs, shrines which became often the most popular in\nthe Cathedral.\n\nThe most characteristic are the records of the burials, attended with\ngreat pomp, of St. William of Norwich in 1144, Harold of Gloucester in\n1168, Robert of Edmundsbury in 1184, a nameless boy in London in 1244,\nand St. Hugh of Lincoln in 1255; boys canonised by the populace simply\nthrough bitter racial feeling. Remains of the shrine of little St. Hugh\nare still extant at Lincoln.\n\nAmong the many interesting antiquities of Lincoln is a fine specimen of\nthe Norman domestic architecture. It is called the Jews' House, and it\nis an edifice of curious design. Its mouldings much resemble those of\nthe west portals of the Cathedral, a date which probably would be 1184.\nThe house belonged to a Jewess called Belaset de Wallingford. She was\nhanged in the reign of Edward I. for clipping the coin.\n\nBesides this are noticeable the ancient conduits of St. Mary le Wigford,\nwhich is Gothic, and the Greyfriars Conduit in High Street.\n\nIn the cloister garden are preserved a tesselated pavement and the\nsepulchral slab of a Roman soldier. From the same place the splendidly\ncarved stone coffin lid of Bishop Remigius has recently been removed\ninto the interior of the Cathedral.\n\nIn the years 1884 to 1891 excavations were conducted on the site of the\nold \"Angel Inn,\" when it was discovered that it had been a Roman\nburial-place. Amongst the debris were found several funeral urns. Under\nSt. Peter's at Gowts was brought to light a Roman altar, and remains of\na Roman villa were unearthed at Greetwell. In the same year, that is to\nsay 1884, the Blue Coat School was closed, its endowments were given to\nthe Middle School, and the buildings were sold to the Church Institute.\n\nWithin the last few years two memorable events occurred. In the year\n1884 the See of Lincoln was deprived of the county of Nottingham, which\nwas transferred from that see to the See of Southwell. This was followed\nshortly afterwards by the great lawsuit called \"The Lincoln Judgment.\"\n\nGreat controversy arose and came to a climax. In the year 1888 Dr. King,\nthe Bishop of Lincoln, was cited before his metropolitan, Dr. Benson,\nthe Archbishop of Canterbury, to answer charges of various ritual\noffences alleged to have been committed by himself at the administration\nof the Holy Communion.\n\nThe action was brought by certain gentlemen of Lincoln interested in the\ndoings of their prelate. Their religious scruples had been outraged, it\nappears, on two separate occasions; namely, in the Church of St. Peter's\nat Gowts on December 4, 1887, and in the Cathedral on December 10 of the\nsame year. An appeal had been made to the Archbishop to restrain these\nillegal practices. The celebrated ecclesiastical lawsuit was heard in\n1888. The judgment was confined to the declarations of the law, which\nwere summarised. No monition or sentence was pronounced against the\nBishop of Lincoln for having committed breaches of the ecclesiastical\nlaw. The dissension has happily ended. The Bishop of Lincoln has\nconformed his practice to the Archbishop's judgment from the date of its\ndelivery, and still retains his bishopric. Thus has ended the conflict\nbetween the Primate and the Suffragan, which agitated, for a brief space\nof time, the opponents of offences of ritualism, and brought about the\nfamous Lincoln Judgment.\n\n\n\n\nBath\n\nBaden-ceaster.\n\n(\"Doomsday Book.\")\n\n\nOn the banks of the river Avon, in the County of Somersetshire, is\nsituated the beautiful and ancient city of Bath. Its ecclesiastical\nhistory is closely bound up with that of Wells, and at one time with\nthat of Glastonbury, when it figures in the disputes concerning the See.\nThis unseemly quarrelling amongst prelates is now happily laid at rest.\nThough lacking in all authority, Bath is the joint partner of Wells in\nthe bishopric title.\n\nThe origin of the city of Bath takes us far back. Perhaps the strongest\nlink with the Roman days, besides the Roman roads, lies in the\npresent-day existence of the Roman baths, built about 55 B.C.\n\nThese baths were probably erected to confine the hot springs, and to\nenjoy more thoroughly the benefit derived from the medicinal properties\nof these waters, which are chalybeate and saline.\n\nThough we are told that in all probability it is a mere myth that the\nBritish king, Bladud, first founded this city of Bath, yet we are\ninclined to think that the presence of these springs would influence a\nsettlement of even the nomadic British, prior to the Roman invasion.\n\nWhen we remember what primitive ideas the early Britons had, we cannot\nwonder at the non-existence of any vestiges of their occupation. In\nthese days of materialism one loves to respect old traditions, however\nuncertain they may be in substance. We would therefore give the benefit\nof the doubt to an early British settlement.\n\nWith the arrival of the Romans the approximate date and origin of Bath\ncan be readily ascertained. From excavations on the place since the year\n1875, it has been proved that the Romans founded here a city, which they\nnamed Aquae Solis, in the reign of Claudius. In 55 B.C. the baths had\nbeen constructed for certain. In addition to this they erected a temple\nto Minerva, with votive offerings, and many other buildings, and carried\na line of fortifications and walls around the city. The remains of their\nmarvellous architecture still bear testimony, though they have suffered\nill-treatment and undergone restoration, to their former magnificence\nand grandeur.\n\nOn the retirement of the Romans Aquae Solis passed into the hands of the\nBritons, under the name of Coer Palladen (the city of the waters of\nPallas). During their possession of a century, two attacks made by the\nSaxon chieftains, OElla and Cerdic, were repulsed by King Arthur.\n\nThe Saxons, by the year 577, having practically subverted the rest of\nthe kingdom, turned their attention to the West. They seized and ravaged\nBath. The Roman structures were reduced to ruins. After a while they\nrebuilt the walls and fortifications upon the original foundations,\nemploying the old materials. The baths also were soon restored. By this\ntime the Saxons had renamed the city, \"Hat Bathur\" (Hot baths), and\n\"Ace-mannes-ceaster\" (City of invalids). The \"ceaster\" tacked on to the\nSaxon word is the first evidence we get of the Saxon recognition of the\nformer existence of the Roman occupation of this city.\n\nWith the spreading influence of Christianity travelling from the east to\nthe west of England in the seventh century, a nunnery was erected here,\nin 676, by King Osric. This was destroyed during the wars of the\nHeptarchy, and on its site a college of secular canons was founded, in\n775, by Offa, King of Mercia. This monarch had taken Bath from the King\nof Wessex, and had annexed it to his own kingdom. Possibly in\nrecognition of this victory he built an abbey in 775.\n\nAfter this the city evidently increased in prosperity, for it was\nimportant enough to witness the coronation of Edgar in 973, as King of\nEngland, by Dunstan, Archbishop of Canterbury. At the same time Edgar\nconverted the college of secular canons into a Benedictine monastery.\nThis, with the church, was again demolished by the Danes.\n\nThis city of Bath, like all other cities of that time, came under the\nNorman Survey, and was entered in Doomsday Book as Baden-ceaster.\nWilliam Rufus had scarce been crowned king when Bath was seized and\nburnt, the most part by Geoffry, Bishop of Coutances, and Robert de\nMowbray. They had jointly risen in support of the claim laid to the\nthrone of England by Robert Duke of Normandy. But under the abbacy of\nJohn de Villula it soon recovered prosperity. This abbot, on promotion\nto the See of Wells, about 1090, purchased the city from Henry I. He\nbuilt a new church, and removed the See from Wells to this place. Here\nit remained till 1193, when Bishop Savaricus handed it over to Richard\nI., in exchange for Glastonbury Abbey.\n\n[Illustration: BATH\n\nPULTENEY BRIDGE]\n\nAbout this time Bath received its first charter as a free borough\nfrom this monarch, and was represented in Parliament in 1297. In 1330\nthe manufacture of woollen cloth was established by the monks. By reason\nof this the shuttle was incorporated in the arms of the monastery. In\n1447, and in 1590, Henry VI. and Elizabeth respectively granted\ncharters, which materially increased the prospects of the city.\n\nThis present cruciform Abbey Church dates from 1499. It is dedicated to\nSt. Peter and St. Paul, and forms one of the best specimens of the later\nstyle of English architecture. It rests upon the site of the conventual\nchurch of the monastery founded by Osric. After a course of eight\nhundred years it became dilapidated, and was rebuilt from the old\nmaterials in 1495, by Bishop Oliver King. He is said to have been\nadmonished in a dream. He did not live to see the completion of the\nbuilding.\n\nAs the citizens refused to purchase it from the Commissioners of Henry\nVIII., the walls were left roofless till Dr. James Montague, Bishop of\nthe Diocese, with the aid of the local nobility and gentry, procured the\nnecessary funds, and finished it in 1606.\n\nOn the west front is sculptured the founder's dream of angels ascending\nand descending on Jacob's ladder. The church is crowned with a\nquadrangular tower of 162 feet in height from the point of intersection.\n\nThough the medicinal properties of the springs of Bath attracted from\nthe earliest times the continuous attention of invalids, it was only\nunder the guidance of Beau Nash, the gamester, and the enterprise of\nJohn Wood, the architect, that it reached to the highest pinnacle of\nfame as a place of fashionable resort in the eighteenth century. The\nworks of Fielding, Smollett, Jane Austen, Dickens, Thackeray, and\nothers, give us a clear insight into the meteor-like prosperity of the\ncity, for, after the death of Nash, it gradually relapsed to its normal\nstate, and, in fact, according to statistics, the number of inhabitants\nhas decreased even within the last few years.\n\nA brief sketch of Beau Nash and the means adopted will account in some\nmeasure for the marvellous change in Bath in the eighteenth century.\nNash was educated at Carmarthen Grammar School, and Jesus College,\nOxford. He then obtained a commission in the army. This he soon threw up\nto become a law-student at the Middle Temple. Whilst there he gained\nmuch attention by his wit and sociability. These qualities induced his\nfellow-students to elect him as the president of a pageant that they\nprepared for William III. The king was so pleased with Nash that, it is\nsaid, he offered him a knighthood. This Nash refused unless accompanied\nby a pension, which was not granted.\n\nHe was much addicted to gambling, which, in addition to a restless\nspirit and an empty purse, led him in 1704 to try his luck at Bath, a\nplace which then offered opportunities to a gamester. There he soon\nbecame master of the ceremonies, in succession to Captain Webster. Under\nhis authority reforms were introduced which speedily accorded to Bath a\nleading position as a fashionable watering-place. He formed a strict\ncode of rules for the regulation of balls and assemblies; allowed no\nswords to be worn in places of public amusement; persuaded gentlemen to\ndiscard boots for shoes and stockings when in assemblies and parades,\nand introduced a tariff for lodgings.\n\nAs insignia of his office he wore an immense white hat, and a richly\nembroidered dress. He drove about in a chariot with six greys, and laced\nlackeys blew French horns. When Parliament abolished gambling it caused\na serious check to the visits of fashionable people to the city.\nHowever, the Corporation, in recognition of his valuable services,\ngranted Nash a pension of 120 guineas a year, and at his death in 1761\nhe was buried with splendour at the expense of the town. A year after\nhis demise his biography was anonymously published in London by Oliver\nGoldsmith.\n\nJohn Wood, the architect, though hardly as well known to posterity as\nNash, must not be overlooked. Till he appeared in Bath in 1728, the city\nhad been confined strictly within the Roman limits. The suburbs\nconsisted merely of a few scattered houses. Wood improved and enlarged\nthe city by his architectural efforts, which led to the quarrying of\nfreestone found existing in the neighbourhood. His successors carried on\nhis enterprise.\n\nThe grand Pump-room, erected in 1797, with a portico of Corinthian\ncolumns; the King's Bath, with a Doric colonnade; the Queen's Bath; the\nCross Bath, so called from a cross erected in the centre of it; the Hot\nBath, on account of its superior degree of heat, were once thronged by\nfashionable gatherings in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.\n\nThe architecture in the eighteenth century at Bath was an adaptation of\nthe Doric and Ionic orders. Nearly all the principal buildings were\nconstructed after these classic principles. St. Michael's Church belongs\nto the Doric, with a handsome dome, and was erected in 1744. Even the\nGreek influence is the prevailing feature of Pulteney Bridge.\n\nIn conclusion, amongst eminent men of Bath may be mentioned: John Hales,\nGreek Professor at Oxford in 1612; and Sir Thomas Bodley, founder of the\nBodleian Library at Oxford, was a native of, and received his early\neducation in the Grammar School of this city. Benjamin Robins was born\nhere in 1707; he was a celebrated mathematician, and wrote the account\nof the voyage of Commodore Anson round the world.\n\nAmongst the tombs in the Abbey are those to the memory of Quin, Nash,\nBroome, Malthus, and Melmothe.\n\nThe hot springs of Bath still continue to alleviate the aches and pains\nof invalid visitors. The interesting history, the curious mingling of\nRoman and Later English architecture with the revival of the Ionic and\nDoric orders in the eighteenth-century buildings, can never fail to be\nof interest alike to the student and the casual visitor in Bath.\n\n\n\n\nSalisbury\n\nSalisberie.\n\n(\"Doomsday Book.\")\n\n\nSalisbury affords a remarkable instance of the complete transference of\nthe cathedral followed by the ultimate desertion of the city in the\nchange from old Sarum, the original site, to New Sarum, another within a\nshort distance--one might almost say within a stone's throw. In the old\ndays of prosperity Old Sarum, now simply a conical mass of ruins, was\npeopled with the Belgae, who came from Gaul and ousted the original\ninhabitants. How this site ever came to be chosen as a desirable place\nof settlement seems to be rather a mystery, for even in those early days\nconstant difficulties arose with regard to the insufficiency of water.\nThey aptly called it \"the dry city,\" which is supposed to be the meaning\nof the old name Searobyrig, which later underwent a further\ncontraction--Scarborough. This arid spot, however, received the\nattention of the Romans, who possibly were attracted by the natural\nadvantages of defence offered by the conical mound rising abruptly, as\nit does, from the valley. They carried on the old name and Latinised it,\nas they invariably seemed to have done, or rather made a compromise\nbetween the native and their own formation, and arrived at Sorbiordunum.\nThe scarcity of water seems not to have deterred them in any way, as\nwitness the many evidences of their fossae, extensive ramparts, and\nfortress--signs which indicate that in their hands Old Sarum was held to\nbe of considerable importance. Roman roads branched out of it, no doubt\npointing to the four cardinal points, in accordance with regular custom,\nthough their whereabouts may be difficult to define, seeing that several\ncenturies have passed since the desertion of Old Sarum.\n\nWith their passing away the Roman conquerors have left behind them many\nrelics, possibly in their day considered worthless, but the unearthing\nof which has caused, for many a year, unalloyed joy and given a\npriceless treasure to the unwearied antiquaries. Another great source of\nspeculation to the archaeologists has been the temple of the Druids\nerected some time at Stonehenge. It lies beyond the city on the great\nSalisbury plain. This primitive form of architecture takes us back to\nmany years before Christ, when the early Britons wore no clothes, save\nthe skins of animals they slew in the chase, and when they could neither\nread, write, weave, nor do anything which would be considered nowadays\nas civilising. They were to all intents and purposes mere savages, kept\nin control by their priests and lawgivers, the Druids, whom they held in\nthe greatest respect. The Britons, we are told, had the additional\ndiscomfort of dwelling in holes burrowed in the ground, or in miserably\nconstructed huts. In view of this poor state of domestic architecture,\nhow they ever managed to erect roofless temples, as at Stonehenge and at\nthe island of Anglesea, and to overcome, what must have been to them a\nvery great engineering feat, the setting up of the heavy blocks of stone\n_in situ_, seems marvellous and not easy of explanation.\n\n[Illustration: SALISBURY\n\nHIGH STREET GATEWAY INTO THE CLOSE]\n\nThe great veneration in which the Britons held these temples of the\nDruids is much accentuated by an incident during the second occupation\nof Britain by the Romans. Suetonius Paulinus, one of their greatest\ngenerals, thought that by destroying the temple at the island of\nAnglesea he would shake the faith of the Britons in their priests, and\ngain thereby a speedier conquest, much in the same way as when Clive in\nIndia knocked down Dupleix's column to undermine the French influence\nover the natives. In the latter case history has assured us of the\nultimate fulfilment of hopes, and it was the same with Paulinus in 61,\nonly on his return to the mainland he all but suffered a reverse from an\nunexpected rising of Britons under Boadicea. Nevertheless, the power of\nthe Druids was irretrievably broken by the slaughter of their order and\nthe felling of the groves at Anglesea, as Paulinus had foreseen. What\nthe object and origin of these remains at Stonehenge were, still serve\nas an interesting matter for controversy. Competent authorities, like\nGeoffrey of Monmouth, Polydore Vergil, and in the eighteenth century Dr.\nStukely, arrived more or less at the same conclusions. The first named\nsaid that Stonehenge was a sepulchral monument erected by Aurelius\nAmbrosius, who, according to a tradition, was thus led by the counsel of\nMerlin to commemorate the slaughter of 500 Britons by Hengist, the Saxon\nchief, about the year 450 A.D. Polydore Vergil confined himself to the\nstatement that it was the ancient temple of the Britons in which the\nDruids officiated, whilst Dr. Stukely asserted that the Britons here\nheld their annual meetings at which laws were passed and justice\nadministered. He was also fortunate enough to discover the \"cursus,\" in\n1723, in its vicinity. Perhaps it may be thought that Stonehenge is out\nof place in this account of Salisbury; but in leaving it out it would be\nas much as to doubt the genuineness of any one's visit to this ancient\ncathedral city if he had not also seen the Druidical remains.\n\nIn the neighbourhood of Old Sarum, Cynric won a victory over the Britons\nin the year 552. Though it steadily increased in importance, little\nworthy of notice occurred there till the close of the tenth century. At\nthe small town of Wilton, which is almost three miles distant from\nSalisbury, the seat of the Diocese was originally established in the\nfirst years of the tenth century, and remained under the superintendence\nof eleven succeeding bishops. The last one of them was Hermannus. On his\naccession to the See of Sherborne--an ancient and interesting town of\nDorsetshire--he annexed it to the Bishopric of Wilton. He thereupon\nfounded, for these united sees, a cathedral church at Old Sarum. This\neffort of his was afterwards completed by Osmund, who accompanied\nWilliam the Conqueror to England, and was by him appointed bishop. A\nmatter of sixty years prior to the Norman invasion Old Sarum had fallen\na victim in 1003 to the fury of Sweyn, the King of Denmark. This was in\naccordance with a vow of retaliation he had made when he learnt of\nthe murder of his sister in the general massacre of the Danes, which had\ntaken place the year before. This unhappy period, when many other\ncounties besides Wiltshire suffered extensively, was during the reign of\nEthelred the Unready.\n\n[Illustration: SALISBURY\n\nTHE MARKET CROSS]\n\nIn the great plain of Salisbury the Conqueror, in 1070, passed a review\nof his army, just flushed with their victories in the neighbourhood. On\nthe completion of his great survey, the \"Doomsday Book,\" in 1086, he\nhere at Salisberie, as he renamed the city, received the homage and oath\nof allegiance from the English landlords. Till the year 1217 the See\nremained at Old Sarum, and even after the complete depopulation and the\ndemolition of every house of this ancient Roman site, it still was\nrepresented regularly at Parliament by two members till the year 1832.\n\nThe reasons that led to the choice of the new site by Bishop Poore were\nthe many advantages offered, especially the abundance of water by New\nSarum, as it was called, as set against the exposure to the stormy winds\nwhich it was alleged went even so far as to drown the voice of the\nofficiating priest, the congestion of houses within its narrow limits,\nthe difficulty of procuring water, and finally the despotism of the\ngovernor at Old Sarum. To rid himself of these inconveniences, Bishop\nPoore procured the papal authority to the removal of the Cathedral from\nOld Sarum to its present site in the year 1218, though not till the\nReformation was the service discontinued in the old buildings.\n\nBy then New Sarum had reaped the full benefit of the new conditions and\nsurroundings. Though only two miles away, the old place, in proportion\nto the rising of the new township, sank to a few inhabitants, loth\nperhaps to part with old associations.\n\nThe first building to appear in New Sarum, or Salisbury as we shall\nhenceforth call it, seems to have been the wooden chapel of St. Mary,\nthe erection of which was commenced in the Easter of the year 1219. This\nwas followed in the year 1220 by the foundation of the new cathedral as\nplanned by Bishop Poore. It was completed and dedicated to the Blessed\nVirgin Mary in 1258. The ground-plan is that of a Greek or double cross.\nWith the slight exceptions of the upper part of the tower and the spire,\nwhich belong to a later date, the entire fabric represents the purest\nstyle of the Early English architecture. The cloisters, built by Bishop\nWalter de la Wyle, are the largest and most magnificent of any in the\nkingdom. They are of the late Early English style, and took, with the\naddition of the Chapter House by the same prelate, from 1263 till 1274\nto complete.\n\n[Illustration: SALISBURY\n\nTHE CLOISTERS]\n\nShortly after, the upper part of the tower was built in the Decorated\nstyle by Bishop Wyville, about 1330. Five years later it was capped by\nthe highest spire in England. A marvellous achievement of lightness of\ndesign, of slenderness and beauty of proportion, it reaches from base to\ncrown to the remarkable height of four hundred and four feet. Its great\nheight has caused much anxiety from time to time, through the enormous\npressure exerted upon the tower beneath it.\n\nThis unique example of a spire was followed next by a chapel built by\nBishop Beauchamp between 1450 and 1482. Another was carried out by Lord\nHungerford in 1476. These two chapels, together with an elegant\ncampanile, were entirely swept away in the restorations that took place\nunder the direction of the architect James Wyatt. No doubt the Cathedral\nrequired extensive repairs, but it seems regrettable that any architect\nshould have caused such demolition, instead of endeavouring to make good\nthe ravages of time. As for the old west front, the coloured drawing of\nMr. Collins gives an excellent idea of its rich sculpturesque beauty.\n\nThe Cathedral is isolated in the centre of an immense lawn, as it were.\nThis again can be kept private by the Close, the area of which extends\nto half a mile square. Within its limits is a delightful mall shaded\nwith trees, as there are also the Bishop's Palace,--a building of\nvarious dates, originated by Poore the founder,--the Deanery, and\nseveral other houses. We have said elsewhere that the Cathedral Close of\nSalisbury may be considered the best example of its kind in England,\nthough that at Wells is not far behind. The close was an enclosure,\nwithin the precincts of the cathedral, reserved for the dwellings\noriginally intended for the exclusive domestic use of the Bishop and\ncanons. This, however, is not strictly observed now.\n\nTwo or three delightful gateways of ancient character and beautiful\ndesign give access to the Cathedral Close of Salisbury. Appended to the\nCathedral is the beautiful Chapter House, lighted by lofty windows. It\nis octagonal in form, the roof of which is upheld by a central clustered\ncolumn. A frieze in bas-relief, carried round the interior of the\nbuilding, is ornamented with biblical subjects. At different times\nnumerous monuments, chiefly to the bishops of the See, have been\nerected, notably those to Bishops Joceline and Roger.\n\nA monument to one of the children of the choir has a sad interest. It\nwas customary during the festival of St. Nicholas for one of the\nchoristers to personate the character of a bishop. In this case the\nboy-bishop died while performing his role.\n\nThe other interesting buildings of the town are the parish churches of\nSt. Martin, St. Thomas, and St. Edmond; the banqueting hall of J. Halle,\nwho was a wool merchant in 1470; Audley House, which also dates from the\nfifteenth century, and which in 1881 underwent a thorough repair. It\nserves now as the Church House of the Diocese. Elizabeth's Grammar\nSchool, St. Nicholas Hospital, founded in Richard II.'s reign, and\nTrinity House, established by Agnes Bottenham in 1379, are interesting\nlinks of mediaevalism.\n\nIn this period must also be included the Poultry Cross. It is a high\ncross, hexagonal in form. Its space is well distributed by six arches\nand a central pillar. Lord Montacute erected it just prior to the year\n1335.\n\nThe city's prosperity depended upon that of the church. In fact it was\nlaid out according to Bishop Poore's plan. The citizens deserted Old\nSarum to settle around the new ecclesiastical establishment at New\nSarum. In 1227, by a charter of Henry III., the city enjoyed the same\nfreedom and liberties as those of Winchester. The government of the city\nbecame vested in a mayor, recorder, deputy-recorder, twenty-four\naldermen, and various other subordinate officers. The charter was\nconfirmed by successive sovereigns till the accession of Anne.\n\nSalisbury, or New Sarum, was first represented at Parliament in 1295. In\n1885, by the Redistribution Act, its two representatives were reduced to\none. The city itself has also witnessed the assembly of Parliament\nwithin its limits on various occasions. For being implicated in a\nconspiracy for deposing Richard III. to raise Henry Tudor, Earl of\nRichmond, to the throne, the Duke of Buckingham was in 1484 executed at\nSalisbury. For a reward of L1000 the Duke was betrayed by a dependent\nwith whom he was in hiding in Shropshire.\n\n[Illustration: SALISBURY\n\nTHE CATHEDRAL]\n\nDuring the Civil War the city was held alternately by both parties.\nSince then the citizens have been left in comparative peace, intent on\ntheir several industries. At one time they were actively engaged in the\npreparation of woollen articles and in the manufacture of excellent\ncutlery. These are now declined, and such commodities as boots and\nshoes take the first rank, whilst the shops depend mainly on the\nvillages and agriculture around. The many places of antiquity in this\nancient city of the county of Wiltshire have furnished many interesting\npalaeolithic relics for the reception of which the Blackmore Museum was\nestablished. The library was instituted by Bishop Jewal, in 1560 to\n1571.\n\nThere have been many men of note from Salisbury. The celebrated poet and\nessayist Addison, born near Amesbury in this county of Wiltshire, was\neducated at the Grammar School for choristers within the Close. Amongst\nthe many eminent natives of the city are included William Hermann,\nauthor of several works in prose and verse; George Coryate, who wrote\n\"The Crudities\"; John Greenhill, a celebrated portrait painter; William\nand Henry Lawes, both musicians and composers; and James Harris, author\nof \"Hermes.\" But the most conspicuous, or rather the best known, is\nHenry Fawcett, the politician and economist.\n\nBorn in 1833, he was the second son of a draper who, starting as an\nassistant, became afterwards his own master. He was enabled to afford\nhis son Henry a good education at King's College and Peterhouse,\nCambridge, from which he migrated to Trinity Hall. He became Seventh\nWrangler and Fellow of his College. At the Cambridge Union, Fawcett\ngained considerable notice for his oratory. His ambition conceived the\nidea of attaining the highest honours in the kingdom through the\nprofession of a barrister. For this purpose he entered Lincoln's Inn,\nbut at the age of twenty-five a terrible accident happened to him. His\neyesight was lost by two stray pellets from the gun of his father.\n\nThough his plans of advancement were altered, he determined within ten\nminutes of the catastrophe to continue his old pursuits of rowing,\nfishing, skating, riding, and even playing at cards which were marked.\nHe became Liberal candidate for Brighton in 1865, and entered Parliament\njust when Palmerston's career came to a close. He opposed Gladstone's\nscheme for universal education in Ireland. He was an opponent to\nDisraeli's Government.\n\nOn the return of the Liberal Party to power Fawcett was offered the post\nof Postmaster-General, though without a seat in the Cabinet. He\nintroduced five important postal reforms; namely, the parcels-post,\npostal-orders, sixpenny telegrams, the banking of small savings by means\nof stamps, and increased facilities for life insurance and annuities.\nHe also invented the little slot label, \"next collection,\" on the\npillar-boxes.\n\nThe employment of women he greatly advocated. The defeat of the scheme\nfor the deforestation of Epping Forest and the New Forest was entirely\ndue to the exertions of this great politician.\n\nAfter a marvellous career of many years Fawcett died in 1884. From\nhumble origin, and in spite of his blindness, if he did not realise his\nfull ambition, he reached to an exalted position in the State--an\nachievement never accomplished by any one under like disability.\n\n\n\n\nExeter\n\n\nIn the great peninsula that runs out into the Atlantic is Devonshire,\nadjoining Cornwall, that dwindles to the Land's End, the point eagerly\nwelcomed by visitors to England, the last of the Old Country to which a\nfarewell is given. Through the northern portion of Devonshire meanders\nthe river Exe, having established its source in Somersetshire. Quite ten\nmiles before the river empties its waters at the mouth into the English\nChannel, on a broad ridge of land rising steeply from the left bank of\nthe Exe, is the old city of Exeter. It is the chief of the county, and\nhas had a varied existence.\n\nFor the earliest period of Exeter, Geoffrey of Monmouth supplies much\ninformation, which has been greatly borne out by subsequent researches.\nHe considered that Exeter was a city of the Britons some time before the\nRomans elected to establish their camp. The British named it\nindifferently Caer-Wisc (city of the water), or Caer Rydh (the red city),\nfrom the coloured nature of the soil. When captured by the Romans they\nmade it a stipendiary town. They called it Isca, to which was added\nDanmoniorum, to avoid confusion with the other Isca, a Latinised name\ngiven also to a town on the river (now Usk) in Monmouthshire. Many\nproofs of Roman occupation have turned up in the shape of numerous coins\nand other relics.\n\nThe year 1778 was especially notable for the excavations which brought\nto light many important objects. Small statuettes of Mercury, Mars,\nCeres, and Apollo, evidently the household gods of the Romans, together\nwith urns, tiles, and tessellated pavements, were unearthed. Exeter at\none time went by the name of Augusta, which was due to its having been\noccupied by the Second Augustan Legion, whose commander, Vespasian,\nincluded the city under his conquest Britannia Prima. The same legion,\nduring the period 47 to 52, had also a permanent station at Isca\nSilurum, as Caerleon-on-the-Usk in Monmouth was called. But as Vespasian\ncontinued the conquest, 69 to 79, it seems fair to surmise that the\nSecond Legion of Augusta was advanced or a portion sent from Isca\nSilurum to garrison Isca Danmoniorum, the present Exeter.\n\nFor a considerable time it was the capital of the West Saxon kingdom.\nIt was probably during the Saxon occupation that the city changed its\nname to Excestre, which would easily be contracted into that of Exeter.\nIn violation of a compact made with Alfred, who was a Saxon monarch, the\nDanes seized the city. They were, however, compelled to evacuate it,\ntogether with the surrender of all their prisoners within the West Saxon\nterritory, by Alfred, in 877. This monarch was again called upon in 894\nto relieve the Saxons from their Danish oppressors. The next century\nwitnessed a marked improvement in the prosperity of the city. It had\nfrom quite an early period been distinguished for its numerous monastic\ninstitutions, so much so that it was said to have been called \"Monk\nTown\" by Britons in Cornwall and the heathen Saxons. They were pleased\nto deride it thus, but when Athelstan came he clearly made them\nunderstand that it was no happy state to be without the pale of the\nChurch. He so thoroughly instilled into them the necessity of imbibing\nthe principles of religion that those who were unwilling to become\nconverts were expelled.\n\n[Illustration: EXETER\n\nFROM THE PALACE GARDENS]\n\nWith the exception of a few, we may take it that many embraced\nChristianity as a matter of compulsion or for expediency's sake, for in\nthose days of hard knocks it was hardly likely that any mass of\nignorant peasants would comprehend anything but the most stringent\nmeasures. The transition from heathen darkness to the light of\nChristianity must have meant a severe initiation to two-thirds of the\npopulation of Exeter at the time of Athelstan's accession. He came\nwestward about the year 926 and found the Britons and Saxons living\namicably and enjoying equal rights. The city had by them already been\ncalled Exenceaster, that is, the \"cester\" or fortified town on the\n\"Exe.\" Athelstan augmented the number of religious institutions by the\nfoundation of a Benedictine monastery. The building was dedicated to St.\nPeter, the establishment of which there seems no reason to doubt gave\nbirth eventually to the present cathedral. Besides this he materially\nincreased the importance of the town by appointing two mints and\nerecting regular fortifications with towers and a wall of hewn stone.\nAthelstan's monastery was destroyed by the Danes. King Edgar in 968\nrestored it, and appointed Sydemann to the Abbacy, as it then became.\nUltimately this abbot was raised to the Bishopric of Crediton, which was\nthe seat of the Devonshire Diocese about 910. In 1003 Exeter, after a\ngallant defence of some three months' duration, was betrayed by its\ngovernor into the hands of Sweyn. As has been said elsewhere, this king\ncame from Denmark especially to punish Ethelred the Unready for having\nallowed the massacre of Danes, in which the sister of Sweyn had\nperished. The monastery of St. Peter was not spared, nor was the city,\nwhich did not recover from the terrible visitation till the accession of\nCanute.\n\nFrom this time Exeter increased to such importance and wealth that in\nthe reign of Edward the Confessor it was deemed advisable and for better\nsecurity to make it the head of the Diocese.\n\nFor this purpose the Sees of Crediton and St. Germans (Cornwall) were\nunited under one bishop. To uphold worthily the new dignity, the abbey\nchurch of St. Peter was erected into a cathedral by the Confessor, who\nappointed his chaplain Leofric as first bishop of the united see.\nLeofric had the monks removed to Westminster Abbey, and installed in\ntheir stead were twenty-four secular canons. The date of Leofric's\ninstallation is about 1040, which is, of course, that of the foundation\nof the Cathedral. This arrangement was altered on the re-erection of the\nCornish See in 1876.\n\nIn William the Conqueror's time Githa, the mother of Harold, gave the\nNormans considerable trouble. It was only on the appearance of that\nmonarch before the city's walls that the citizens surrendered. They\nwere made to pay a heavy fine, whilst Githa escaped with her treasures\nto take refuge in Flanders. William in the end relented and renewed all\ntheir former privileges. Nevertheless he took the precaution to erect a\nfortress in Exeter, the charge of which was entrusted to Baldwin de\nBrioniis, who, by virtue of his office, became Earl of Devon and sheriff\nof the county. The chief remains of the Castle is a gateway tower.\n\nThis same castle was held by the partisans of the Empress Matilda for\nthree months, when it was compelled in 1136 through scarcity of water to\nsurrender to Stephen. Contrary to expectation, they were treated very\nwell. Henry II., for their loyalty, was pleased to grant additional\nprivileges.\n\nIn 1200 the city for the first time was governed by a mayor and\ncorporation. Subsequently their importance was increased by the charters\nof Edward III., Edward IV., and Henry VIII., whilst Henry VIII.\nconstituted Exeter a county of itself. These privileges were extended by\nCharles I.; and in 1684 a new charter of incorporation was granted by\nCharles II., but not put into effect. In 1770 George III. renewed and\nconfirmed the charter, since when the government has been invested in a\nmayor assisted by subordinate officers. In the meantime a curious\nincident occurred in 1824, which greatly interfered with the prosperity\nof the city, inasmuch as the navigation of the river Exe was obstructed\nby a dam erected by Hugh Courtenay, at that time Earl of Devon.\n\nExeter, through its happy situation on the river Exe, had for many years\nreaped full benefit. At the time of the Conquest it had gained\nconsiderable importance through the river being navigable for ships\nright up to its quays. Among many petty matters that annoyed the Earl\nthe following is alleged to have been the chief. There were three pots\nof fish in the market-place. The Earl wanted them all. The Bishop\nlikewise. Neither would give way, and the Mayor was called in to\nadjudicate. He allotted one to the Earl, the second to the Bishop, and\nthe third to the town. This distribution did not suit the Earl. Out of\npique he caused a dam to be constructed across the Exe at Topsham. There\nhe built a quay, and had the satisfaction of greatly curtailing the\ntrade of Exeter.\n\n[Illustration: EXETER\n\nMOL'S COFFEE TAVERN]\n\nIn 1286 Edward I. assembled a parliament at Exeter, whilst in 1371 the\nBlack Prince brought here his royal prisoner of France and stayed\nseveral days. The Duchess of Clarence, accompanied by many royal\nadherents, took refuge within the city walls in 1469. It was besieged by\nSir William Courtenay, who eventually raised it on the mediation of the\nclergy.\n\nThe next event of importance not only affected Exeter, but threw into\nagitation the whole of the British Empire. Of two impostors that laid\nclaim to the Crown which Henry VII. was wearing, the second was a youth\ncalled Perkin Warbeck. He bore such a striking resemblance to the\nPlantagenets that he had been secretly instructed to impersonate Richard\nDuke of York, the younger brother of Edward V., who it was pretended had\nescaped from the Tower and from the fate that overtook his brother. So\ningratiating was his manner that he successfully enlisted the aid of the\nDuchess of Burgundy, who was holding her court at Brussels. His first\nattempt to land in England was in Kent; his second in Ireland. Both\nventures being unsuccessful, he tried Scotland. There he convinced King\nJames IV. that he was a true Plantagenet, and through him he raised an\narmy and invaded England. However, the two kings having come to an\nunderstanding, Warbeck retired to Ireland. He there received an\ninvitation from the Cornishmen, acting on which he landed at Whitsand\nBay in that county.\n\nAt Bodmin he was joined by a considerable force of men, with whom he\nmarched and laid siege to Exeter in the year 1497. At the approach of\nthe royal forces his followers were dispersed, whilst he fled to\nBeaulieu in Hampshire. Two years afterwards he ended his career at\nTyburn.\n\nIn 1536 Exeter was erected a county of itself. The year 1549 saw the\ninvestment of the city by a numerous body of popish adherents, from whom\nit was relieved by John Lord Russell in August. On the very day of its\ninvestment, the second of July, the strange spectacle of Welch being\nhanged from the tower of his own church, in which he had been accustomed\nto officiate as vicar, took place. He suffered on the charge of being a\nCornish rebel. During the parliamentary war it was taken and retaken,\nfinally to be surrendered to the Roundheads in 1646. Throughout it all\nthe citizens were warm supporters of the Stuarts, as they had always\nbeen to the Crown. So much so was their loyalty that in a previous\nreign, that of Elizabeth, she presented to the Corporation, with many\nother marks of her royal favour, the motto \"Semper Fidelis.\" During the\nstay of the parliamentary troops under General Fairfax, the Cathedral\nwas ruthlessly defaced and divided into places of worship for\nPresbyterians and Independents. The palace adjoining was also turned\ninto barracks, and the Chapter House converted into stables. During\nthese troubles Queen Henrietta Maria, the consort of Charles I., had\nreturned to Exeter from Oxford, believing herself to be in danger from\nthe hatred with which she feared she was regarded by the people. Here\nshe gave birth to her youngest child, the Princess Henrietta. Leaving\nthe infant at Exeter she escaped to France.\n\nIn the Guildhall, which is a picturesque Elizabethan building, are two\nfull-length portraits: one depicts the features of General Monk, Duke of\nAlbemarle, painted by Sir Peter Lely; the other was given by Charles II.\nto the Corporation as some slight acknowledgment of the city's loyalty.\nIt represents the portrait of his sister, Princess Henrietta, then\nDuchess of Orleans. James II. was the next sovereign to bestow favour,\nwhich he did by establishing a mint in 1688. His influence was\nshortlived, for on the arrival of the Prince of Orange in the August of\nthe same year the inhabitants readily submitted. This prince is credited\nwith establishing a mint at Exeter, or it may be he simply completed or\nconfirmed that of his predecessor. The following year saw him on the\nthrone of the kingdom as William III., which ratified the declaration he\nhad caused to be read by Burnet in the Cathedral of Exeter. Though\nvisited by subsequent reigning princes, their presence may be said to\nhave conferred more honour than to have promoted any material changes to\nthe prosperity of Exeter.\n\nThe mainstay of the city is the glorious Cathedral, and the quaintness\nof some of its houses and streets is unique. They afford a great\nattraction to visitors, who are willing to go a long railway journey\nwest simply to see and compare the merits and demerits of the Cathedral\nwith the many others dotted throughout Great Britain.\n\nThe actual date of the Cathedral is in 1049. Its origin, as we have\nseen, occasioned no turning of the soil to receive foundations, but\nmerely the conventual church of the monks, removed by Edward the\nConfessor to his new abbey at Westminster, adapted to meet the\nrequirements of Bishop Leofric and his secular canons appointed to the\nunited Sees of Devon and Cornwall. The head of the Diocese was at\nExeter. What was the size and character of the converted monastic church\nat that time no two authorities seem able to agree. According to an old\nrecord at Oxford its lease soon ran out, for in the year 1112 a new\nchurch was commenced by Bishop Warlewast, continued by his successors,\nand finally completed by Bishop Marshall, who died in 1206. They are\nsupposed to have carried out the plan of Warlewast; but as the whole of\nthe fabric, with the exception of the towers, was entirely rebuilt in\n1280, the original design is chiefly conjectural. The body of the church\nprobably corresponded in character with the two massive transeptal\ntowers. These are quite a feature in that, with the exception of those\nat the collegiate church of Ottery in Devonshire, they exist nowhere\nelse in England. This arrangement of the towers did away with the\nnecessity of either a central tower or lantern. It enabled the architect\nto extend a long unbroken roof throughout the nave and choir. The\naisles, with the intervention of richly clustered pillars and pointed\narches springing from their caps, range along on either side of the\nnave. With the sets of ribs starting each from a clustered centre, and\nspreading out as they soar towards the highest limit of the roof, as\ngrand an exposition of beauty and noble gradations of perspective lines,\nas conceived by architects of the Decorative period, have been realised.\nThe period of this rebuilding was commenced in 1280 with the Early\nEnglish style of architecture by Bishop Quivil, and was completed in\n1369 in the best years of the Decorated style, just a few years before\nthe Perpendicular came into vogue. It is said that this cathedral served\nas a model for the church at Ottery. Though this cathedral in miniature\nresembles the great edifice in Exeter in certain points, notably the\ntranseptal towers, yet, if the principal part of it dates from 1260, it\ncan hardly, with the one exception, have been a copy of the chief church\nof the Diocese. The Early English work of Ottery church takes, by\ncomparison of dates, priority over that at Exeter by some twenty years.\n\n[Illustration: EXETER\n\nINTERIOR OF THE NAVE]\n\nThe west front, which is one mass of elegant tracery and canopied niches\nadorned with statuary, is the Decorated period merged into that of the\nPerpendicular, covering the years from about 1369 to 1394, under the\nepiscopacy of Brantingham. The windows are excellent examples of elegant\ntracing. Under successive bishops after Quivil, the chief alteration was\nthe lengthening of the nave and the roof vaulted by Grandison. The year\n1420 really saw the completion of the building under Bishop Lacey. Time\nand weather having caused certain decay, Sir G. G. Scott was directed in\n1870 to restore it. The undertaking took seven years. A new stall, a\nreredos, the choir repaved, rich marbles and porphyries used, and\nstained glass put up mainly by Clayton and Bell, were the chief items of\nrestoration. When erecting the reredos Scott could never have foreseen\nthe little storm it gave rise to, just when he was half-way through with\nthe general renovation. Prebendary Philpotts, the Chancellor, and\nseveral others had their conscientious objections, which they laid\nbefore the Bishop's visitation court in 1873. It was ruled that the\nBishop had the jurisdiction in the matter. He ordered the removal of the\nreredos in April 1874. In August of the same year Dean Boyd appealed to\nthe Court of Arches, and had the previous decision reversed by Sir R.\nPhillimore. However, Prebendary Philpotts saw fit to appeal to the\nJudicial Committee of the Privy Council. They decided that the reredos\nshould remain. Thus in 1875 was ended the controversy; and there rests\nSir G. G. Scott's design, open to the criticism of all who are capable\nof framing an impartial one.\n\nIn this same year of 1875 much excitement arose over the church-tax. It\nwas called indifferently \"dominicals\" and \"sacrament money,\" which were\nsaid to be of the nature of tithes. However, the disputes were ended by\nthe distraints for payment.\n\nIn the Chapter House is preserved an important manuscript, including the\nfamous book of Saxon poetry presented by Leofric on his accession to the\nSee of Exeter. It is called the \"Exeter Book,\" and is the life of St.\nGuthlac, by Cynewulf, who was an early English writer. Born somewhere\nbetween 720 and 730 at Northumbria, Cynewulf was a wandering bard by\nprofession. Late in life he suffered a religious crisis, and devoted his\nremaining years to religious poetry. An early work of his is a series of\nninety-four Riddles.\n\nIt is an example of the effects of Latin influence, which in the end\nrevolutionised the style of Old English literature as a whole. Cynewulf\nappears to have been a prolific writer. Besides the Riddles, the \"Crist\"\n(dealing with the three advents of Christ), the lives of St. Juliana and\nSt. Elene, and the \"Fates of the Apostles\" are ascribed to him, as well\nas \"The Descent into Hell,\" \"Felix,\" and the lives of St. Andreas and\nSt. Guthlac. A valuable treasure is that in the possession of Exeter.\nMany such precious relics are to be found distributed among the various\necclesiastical buildings in England, known only to antiquarians and\npeople with interest akin to theirs. The quaint, picturesque old coffee\ntavern, with its bow windows of square-leaded panes, ends curiously at\nthe top with a moulded outline so reminiscent of many houses in Belgium.\n\nThe tombs are mostly to the memory of bishops who each in his own time\nmaintained the dignity of the See. Of those natives who came to the\nfront through sheer ability may be enumerated the following: Josephus\nIscanus, or Joseph of Exeter, a distinguished Latin poet of the twelfth\ncentury; his contemporary, Baldwin, Archbishop of Canterbury; John\nHooker, author of \"A History of Exeter in the Sixteenth Century\"; Sir\nThomas Bodley, who founded the magnificent Bodleian Library at Oxford;\nMatthew Lock, a seventeenth-century musical composer of note; and many\nothers.\n\nAmongst many notable institutions is the Grammar School, which dates\nfrom the reign of Henry VIII.\n\nThe manufactures are few. The woollen trade, at one time only surpassed\nby Leeds, has now entirely departed from Exeter. If it were not for its\nglorious minster and the river Exe, up which vessels of three hundred\ntons' burden can come up right to the city's quay, Exeter would have\nlong ago sunk to mere insignificance.\n\nThe river, which decided the early Britons to settle on its banks, the\nRomans to station the Second Legion of Augusta, the monks to establish\ntheir humble monastery, eventually to be absorbed into a see, has from\nthe early times afforded facilities for exports and imports. The ship\ncanal from Exeter to Topsham, which is in the estuary of the Exe, begun\nin 1564, enlarged in 1675 and again in 1827, materially assisted and\nrescued commerce from a serious decline. Those vessels that are too deep\nin the water remain at Topsham, whilst those of still greater tonnage\ndischarge their holds at Exmouth, a port at the mouth of the river.\n\n\n\n\nNorwich\n\nNorwic.\n\n(\"Doomsday Book.\")\n\n\nWhen this city first came into being it is puzzling to say. The\ndifficulty is as to where the site was originally fixed. Three miles to\nthe south of Norwich is the village of Caistor (St. Edmunds). Owing to\nits position on the river Wentsum, or Wensum, it was called Caer Gwent by\nthe Britons, and for the like reason it was named by the Romans Venta\nIcenorum. It formed their principal station, as it before had served as\nthe residence of the kings of the Iceni. From the ruins of Venta\nIcenorum gradually arose Norwich. As to when it was firmly established\non its present eminence under the name of Nordewic, or North Town, there\nseems to be no reliable evidence. It first appears by that name in the\nSaxon Chronicle of the year 1004. It may possibly mean the town north of\nthe old settlement. For one thing it is certain, in proportion as\nNordewic rose Caistor sank from an important town to a mere village in\nruins. According to an authority, an earlier date is arrived at than the\nentry in the Saxon Chronicle. He conjectures that the keep, the only\nremnant of the castle built on the summit of the steep mound by William\nRufus, was the Saxon \"burh,\" erected in 767. This, if correct, would\nclearly indicate that Norwich had already attained considerable\nimportance. According to Spelman, it was the residence of the kings of\nEast Anglia. They established a mint, where it is supposed coins of\nAlfred and several succeeding monarchs were struck. From its\ngeographical position Norwich was frequently exposed to the attacks of\nthe Norsemen, who could easily land on the Norfolk coast and cover the\nfew intervening miles in a short time. The city was alternately in the\npossession of the Saxons and the Danes. Against the latter Alfred the\nGreat repaired and fortified the citadel, to whom, however, he\neventually handed it over after a treaty of peace. The Saxons afterwards\nregained it and held it till 1004, when it had to surrender to the Danes\nunder their leader Sweyn. The terrible weak reign of Ethelred II. had\nearned him the epithet of Unready. His indolence caused his territories\nto be terrorised, the towns to be racked, and their inhabitants to be\nmassacred by the Danes under Sweyn, who, under pretext of avenging the\nmurder of his sister, took the opportunity of ravaging and laying waste\nthe land. On the accession of Canute, however, though a Dane, the cities\nbegan to prosper again. Thus it came about that Norwich, which had\nremained in a state of desolation till 1018, came again into Danish\npossession, but under Canute. With this fresh beginning it rapidly rose\nto great importance. By the time of the Norman Conquest, Norwich was\nclassed as second only to York in extent and prosperity, being described\nin the \"Doomsday Book\" as having 1320 burgesses with their families, 25\nparish churches, and covering an area of not far short of 1000 acres. It\nwas bestowed by the Conqueror on Ralph de Guaer, or Guader, in 1075, who\nrewarded his master's kindness by joining a conspiracy formed by the\nEarls of Hereford and Northumberland against the Crown. After having\nunsuccessfully defended the Castle, he retired into Brittany, leaving\nhis wife to sustain the siege. The city was very much damaged, and the\nnumber of burgesses woefully reduced in numbers, some 560 only being\nleft on the capitulation to the Conqueror. In view of the gallant\ndefence by Guader's wife and garrison of Britons, William granted them\nall the honours of war and permission to leave the kingdom in perfect\nsecurity. This siege was a great check to the advancement of the city.\nAt the same time the value of the property must have been considerably\nlessened. This depreciation after the drawing up of the \"Doomsday Book\"\nin 1086 could hardly have suited the views of the Conqueror. To obviate\nthe difficulty it would be necessary to introduce some new element, some\nattraction that would bring added interest and fresh residents willing\nto ply their industries in the town. The commencement of a new period of\nprosperity was soon realised after the establishment of a see at\nNorwich, though not until the time of William Rufus. One of his\nfollowers from Normandy was Herbert de Lozinga, or Lorraine, who having\nbeen made Bishop of East Anglia, decided to remove the See from Thetford\nto Norwich. In addition to the Cathedral, he established an episcopal\npalace and a monastery to maintain sixty monks, all in the year 1094. It\nhad the desired effect; the city rapidly improved, the number of\ninhabitants greatly increased, and trade extended. In the reign of\nStephen it was rebuilt. In 1122 Henry I. granted Norwich the same\nfranchise as that enjoyed in London, incorporated in a charter. The\ngovernment of the city was at the same time separated from that of\nthe Castle, and entrusted to the chief magistrate, or Praepositus\n(provost), as he was styled. Another factor in the city's welfare was\nthe colony of Flemish weavers who settled at Worstead, about thirteen\nmiles from Norwich. They introduced the manufacture of woollen stuffs. A\nsecond colony, however, came in Edward III.'s time and settled right in\nNorwich, when it was made a staple town for the counties of Norfolk and\nSuffolk.\n\n[Illustration: NORWICH\n\nTHE MARKET PLACE]\n\nThe citizens, in the reign of John, suffered considerable loss from the\ndepredations of the Dauphin, who had been invited from France to assist\nthe barons. In 1272 a riot between the monks and the citizens caused the\nburning of the priory. The terrible plague, called the black death, that\noccurred between 1348 and 1349, destroyed two-thirds of the population.\nThe city no sooner was beginning to recover from this terrible\nvisitation than one of its residents, John Listher, a dyer by\nprofession, incited an insurrection called the Norfolk Levellers. They\nmanaged in 1381 to do much damage before the rebellion was quelled by\nthe Bishop of Norwich, who defeated Listher and had him executed. From\nHenry IV. the citizens received permission to be governed by a mayor and\nsheriffs in 1403, and Norwich was made a county of itself. But in spite\nof it all the city severely suffered: what with the continued dissension\nbetween the monks and the citizens, when the monastic buildings were\nburnt down, and the tumults by tradesmen all too ready to lay aside\ntheir tools and follow some hare-brained leader with a grievance, and\nlater on, after the peaceful period of Elizabeth, the Civil War. The\nmost notable insurrection was that conducted under the reign of Edward\nVI. by a tanner, Robert Kett, and his brother William. Under the\npretence of resisting the \"enclosure of waste lands,\" they contrived to\nexcite a most formidable rising. They seized upon the palace of the Earl\nof Surrey, and, converting it into a prison, confined many of the\naristocracy. They then encamped upon Mouse-hold Heath, where eventually\nthey were routed by the army under the Earl of Warwick in 1549. The two\nbrothers were taken prisoners, Robert being hanged on Norwich Castle,\nand William suffering a like penalty on the steeple of Wymondham church,\nthe parish from which they had both come. During the reign of Elizabeth\na large body of Dutch and Walloons settled in Norwich, and introduced\namong many other articles the manufacture of bombazine, for which the\ncity soon became noted. These refugees were Protestants, who had sought\nan asylum in England to escape the persecution of the Duke of Alva, and\nthough many Roman Catholics and even some of the Protestants were\nunwilling martyrs to the stake at Norwich during this same reign of\nElizabeth, the city no doubt appeared to these exiles to offer a better\nchance of life than that in the Netherlands. By the year 1582 their\nnumbers had increased to five thousand. The Queen, who had encouraged\nand protected these emigrants, thus laid the foundation of the\ncommercial and manufacturing prosperity of the town, as she had done\nelsewhere, and on her visit to Norwich was sumptuously feted. But the\nCivil War in Charles I.'s reign did much to upset trade in Norwich. It\nwas held by the Parliamentarians, who seem to have got out of control.\nThe Cathedral was barbarously defaced, all its plate and ornaments\nlooted, and the Bishop's Palace greatly damaged. The Castle, on the\nother hand, was strongly fortified for Cromwell. After the Restoration,\nNorwich was one of the first to swear allegiance to Charles II., who\nwith his consort paid it a visit. He went away richer than he came, the\ncity having assigned its fee-farm to him, with the presentation of L1000\nsterling besides. Since then the citizens have been content to lead a\nquiet life, and carry on such manufactures as ironworks, mustard,\nstarch, and brewing of ale, though the textile manufacture, once\nimportant, has now declined. Printing, which was introduced here in\n1570, but discontinued for several years, was revived in 1701, when\nnewspapers began to be printed and circulated. Though, as we have seen,\nthe monks and citizens often did not agree, yet we must not forget that\nit was mainly owing to the establishment of the See that prosperity came\nto Norwich. The presence of the Cathedral immediately rescued the city\nfrom oblivion, and, more, it raised it above the commonplace. All credit\nmust be awarded to Herbert de Lozinga. For some reason or other he was\ndissatisfied with Thetford, which was then the seat of the Diocese, and\ndetermined to transfer it elsewhere. For this purpose in 1094 he\npurchased a large plot of ground near the Castle and soon commenced the\nbuilding of a magnificent cathedral. It was purely Norman. Though it has\nundergone many alterations, additions, and restorations, Lozinga's plan\nis still in great evidence, much more so than many other examples of\nNorman work in England. With the establishment of a Benedictine\nmonastery, Lozinga brought his work to a close, and dedicated it to Holy\nTrinity in 1101. As presented to us now, it is a spacious cruciform\nstructure, with a highly finished and ornamental Norman tower rising\nfrom the centre. This again is surmounted by an elegant octagonal spire\nof the Later Decorated style, and crocketed at the angles. The spire is\n315 feet, and its height is exceeded in England only by that at\nSalisbury. The west front is of Norman character, with a central\nentrance, over which was placed a large window in the Later English\nstyle. The nave, remarkable for its elaborate 328 bosses, was\nstone-vaulted in the fifteenth century. The vaulting of the transepts\nand the chantry of Bishop Nix dates from the sixteenth century. The\nchoir is richly ornamented with excellent design in tracery work of the\nLater English style, whilst the east end has several circular chapels.\nThe Lady Chapel, which was early English, was unfortunately demolished\nabout 1580. The cloisters are very fine. They are 12 feet wide, and\ncover an area of 175 square feet, with 45 windows inserted. They were\ncommenced in 1297 and completed in 1430. Though mainly composed of the\nDecorated period, they range in character from the early years of that\nstyle down to the Later English style. The Cathedral, in common with the\ncity, suffered severely. At one time it was very much destroyed by fire.\nThe dome was repaired soon after by John of Oxford, who was the fourth\nbishop.\n\n[Illustration: NORWICH\n\nTHE AETHELBERT GATE]\n\nBesides this it received repeated assaults arising from the numerous\ndisagreements between the monks and the citizens. It is always\nmarvellous to think how such great works of art have come down to the\npresent day exhibiting, in spite of fires, Commonwealth defacements,\nrepairs and alterations, so much evidence of the skill of those great\nmasters of mediaeval architecture. The Chapter House, usually a great\nfeature of the cathedral, is missing at Norwich, though it once existed.\nThere are two monumental effigies, one to Bishop Goldwell about 1499,\nand the other to Bishop Bathurst in 1837, the work of Chantrey. Of the\nmural monuments there is one to Sir William Boleyn. He was the\ngreat-grandfather of Queen Elizabeth. His remains were interred on the\nsouth side of the Presbytery, in the midst of which once stood the tomb\nof Herbert de Lozinga, the founder. \"Best viewed from the east,\" wrote\nGeorge Borrow in \"The Lavengro\" in a description of Norwich Cathedral.\nPerhaps the advice of this extraordinary man is the best one to follow.\nBorn at East Dereham, Norfolk, in 1803, of Cornish descent, educated at\nNorwich Grammar School, which he supplemented with the study of some\ntwenty languages, he passed an adventurous and varied career from\nrunning away from Norwich to be a footpad to travelling partly with\ngypsies over Europe and Asia, the latter part being supposed to account\nfor his disappearance--the veiled period he called it, lasting from 1826\nto 1833. In subsequent years he found time between his restless\nwanderings to write \"The Gypsies in Spain\" (1841), \"The Bible in Spain\"\n(1843), the much delayed auto-biography, appearing in 1851, and \"The\nRomany Rye\" in 1857. After another long disappearance, when it was\nbelieved he was dead, he came to life again by publishing his \"Romano\nLavo-Lil\" (Gypsy Word-Book) in 1874. From this year till his death in\n1881 the famous philologist, traveller, and author spent most of his\ntime in lodgings in Norwich, where he became a familiar figure. The\nlives of many men can lay a better claim to be recognised by Norwich\nthan Borrow, through virtue of their birthright. In the fourteenth\ncentury William Bateman, one time Bishop of Norwich, founded the great\ncollege of Trinity Hall at Cambridge. His great example was followed by\nanother native of Norwich, Dr. Kaye or Caius, who established the\nbeautiful college of Gonville and Caius at the same university. Matthew\nParker, second Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury, as chaplain attended\nQueen Anne Boleyn to the scaffold; Robert Green became a popular writer\nin the reign of Elizabeth. In 1734 Edward King was born here. He gained\nmuch recognition as author of a work on ancient architecture entitled\n\"Munimenta Antiqua,\" and for his many antiquarian researches was\nadmitted Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries. The Reverend William\nBeloe acquired a reputation by his translation of Herodotus, though\npossibly only known to classical scholars. The Linnaean Society owes its\ninception to Sir James Edward Smith, M. D., whose first president he\nbecame. This distinguished native of Norwich was also the author of the\n\"Flora Britannica.\"\n\nThe beautiful gate of Erpingham, which was erected in 1420 and faces the\nwest end of the Cathedral, recalls the munificence of Sir Thomas\nErpingham, by whom it was built. He greatly distinguished himself at the\nbattle of Agincourt, and was eventually interred in the Cathedral of\nNorwich, the town of his residence, though not of his birth. Another\nresident was Sir John Fastof, who lived fighting as a renowned warrior\nfor Henry IV., V., and VI. in their wars in France.\n\n[Illustration: NORWICH\n\nFROM THE NORTHEAST]\n\nFrom the old Grammar School came, besides Borrow, Sir Edward Coke, who\nwas born in Norfolk. When only forty years of age he became\nAttorney-General, and lived in the reign of Elizabeth, always at\nstrife with his dangerous and brilliant legal rival, Francis Bacon.\nCoke, by his opposition to the royal prerogative of raising money on the\nvalidity of the Court of High Commission, and in taking a considerable\nshare in the drawing up of the Petition of Right, and in the debates\nupon the conduct of Buckingham, earned the dislike of James I. Though\ntreading on dangerous ground, Coke nevertheless received active\nemployment, and appears to have got on quite well in spite of royal\ndispleasure.\n\nTwo other scholars were Brooke and Lord Nelson. Brooke entered the East\nIndia Company's army in 1819 at the age of sixteen. In his remarkable\ncareer he assisted the Sultan of Brunti to reduce the marauding Dyak\ntribes of Sarawak, and with such success that the Sultan created him\nrajah of the province of Sarawak in 1841.\n\nA famous school of landscape painting was that at Norwich. It flourished\nin the first part of the nineteenth century, the principal artists of\nwhich were Crome,--who by the way was a native of Norwich,--Cotman,\nVincent, and Stark.\n\nOf recent years the Cathedral has undergone extensive restoration,\nnamely, in 1892 and 1900.\n\nBefore closing this account we think it would be of interest to outline\nthe causes that embittered the existence of the Jews and led to their\npersecution through the disappearance of a Christian boy in 1144 from\nNorwich.\n\nWe have had occasion, under Lincoln, to mention the attitude adopted by\nthe citizens towards the Jews. If anything, the feeling was more intense\nat Norwich. It is uncertain when they first resided in England, though\nit is supposed they visited before the Conquest for purposes of the\nslave trade, of which they held a monopoly. The position of the Jews in\na Christian State entirely depended upon the attitude of the Church,\nwhose stringent measures effectually precluded any Semitic from the\nexercise of any public office unless the reception was confirmed by\noaths of a Christian character. As this clause was foreign to the tenets\nof the Hebrew religion, and as the Church regarded the means of loans\nlent out on interest as prohibited by the Gospel, and as a disreputable\ncalling and unworthy of a Christian, usury became the only means of\nsubsistence to the Jew in England. They were not affected by the views\nof the Church, and soon made themselves felt. As, however, capital was\nneeded for the building of monasteries, abbeys, and cathedrals by the\nChurch, and the kings of England, especially John and Henry III., found\nit convenient to extort tallage, the Jews were tolerated. The rate of\ninterest demanded for what was in the first place a trifling loan in a\nfew years increased to a formidable debt. The means adopted by the\nChristian Church and kings of the middle ages to free themselves from\nthis bondage in no way reflect any honour. The custom appears to have\nbeen for the king to seize the whole of the estate, both treasure and\ndebts, of the Jew on his demise, though there may have been sons to\ninherit. Another was to burn the proofs of indebtedness after having\nslain the creditors, as the attack against the Jews organised by a set\nof nobles, who were deep in their debt, is recorded to have taken place\nat York. For the Jew being a usurer, the estate fell into the hands of\nthe King, who might be influenced to cancel the debt for a much smaller\namount. We cannot then wonder that the lower classes followed in the\nsteps of their superiors. But above all, in the twelfth century the\nChurch encouraged the circulation of a suspicion that the Jews\nsacrificed Christian children in their Passover. However, the suspicion\nor \"blood accusation,\" as it was called, first took root with a case in\nwhich a boy of the name of William disappeared at Norwich. This terrible\naccusation against the Jews has since been proved to have been founded\non the shallowest pretexts, but at the time the myth was nevertheless\nencouraged by the clergy, since it attracted vast numbers of pilgrims to\nany cathedral or church which might contain the martyred remains of\nthese boy-saints. The example of Norwich was followed in the same\ncentury by one at Gloucester and Edmondsbury, whilst in the following\ncentury the supposed martyrdom of Hugh of Lincoln served only to\nincrease and confirm the popular belief. Hence the intense ill-feeling\nbetween the Christian and the Jew.\n\n\n\n\nLondon\n\nSt. Paul's.\n\nSi quaeris monumentum, circumspice.\n\n\nNo epitaph more noble and impressive can have possibly been conceived\nthan the simple Latin inscription placed upon the modest tomb of\nChristopher Wren: \"If ye seek my monument, look around.\" When building\nthis magnificent structure, the great architect was preparing a glorious\nsepulchre to receive his remains. Some thirty-five years it took Wren to\nrealise this great achievement--an achievement the more astounding when\nwe learn that he was actively engaged throughout the whole time in the\nplanning and personal superintendence of some thirty churches in London,\nno two of which are alike. Daily he walked around jotting down a sketch\nof the next detail to be worked upon, deciding, as the work progressed,\nand maturing his plans, throwing out one day a course, another day\nrealising an idea that had just occurred to him. Thus the fabric rose\nhigher day by day, month by month, year by year. He adhered to no\ncarefully prepared plans; he entrusted nothing to his subordinates; he\nhugged the entire responsibility. They did not know what phase of work\nthe morrow would bring. On the day each workman would receive a rough\nsection and plan jotted down on the spot, accompanied with verbal\ninstructions. If, even when finished according to his directions, Wren\nwas dissatisfied with this gem of his brain, down it had to come, to be\nsubstituted by some other improved idea. Of course Wren had in the first\nplace to submit plans for the proposed cathedral. It is not likely that\nany committee would engage in anything so important blindfolded. But\nthese plans only formed the shell on which to peg any new suggestions\nthat might crop up in the progress of the work, very much after the\nfashion of a plastic sketch submitted by the sculptor to a committee,\nwho look wise and generally make foolish comments. The sketch is merely\nan indication of what is to come after, and is intended as some\nguarantee. Without this no conscientious committee would commit\nthemselves to any agreement. They control the expenditure of the public\nsubscriptions. If the finished work does not come up to the promised\nstandard of excellence, the committee can fall back upon the sketch and\nget exonerated of all culpable blame. The artist gets the abuse for the\nfailure or departure from the original. When such necessarily rough\nsketches are faithfully carried out, they often are failures; for what\nlook well in a rough sketch often become serious blemishes in the\ncompleted work. The true artist is never satisfied--that is, that\nextraordinary being who has a greater love for art than for mere\ncoin--and will alter and improve upon his original design at every\nsuggestion (and they crowd thick upon him) that makes itself manifest,\nwith a total disregard to his own pocket and that punctuality so\nessential to the successful city man. He has got his ideal, and he is\ndetermined to reach it if he has to go through a brick wall.\n\nVery much in the same way, we may be sure, Wren was actuated. His pay\nwas no inducement. He received only L200 a year throughout the whole\ntime of building, and then at one time a certain portion of this\nmiserable pittance was withheld by order of Parliament, because his\ndetractors accused him of delaying the final completion of the work from\ncorrupt motives. Wren's clerk of the works, by name Nicholas Hawksmoor,\nwho afterwards became famous as the builder of several London churches,\nwas paid only twenty pence a day. Tijou, his ironworker, and Grinling\nGibbons, the famous carver in wood, were all actuated by the same ideal\nwhen they helped to give expression to their master's genius. However,\nin one or two particulars, which will be mentioned later on, Wren's\nsuperior judgment was overruled by his committee. Much to his intense\nand lasting mortification they carried the day and stamped themselves as\nincompetent judges. This process of realisation, this seeking after an\nideal, sometimes led Wren into strange architectural difficulties, only\nto be overcome in a masterly way. By discovering these little\ninconsistencies, the architect's skilfulness in taking advantage of\naccidents, in turning what appeared an irremediable blunder into a great\nsuccess, shows what a complete understanding he had in that great branch\nof art--architecture--and endorses more than ever the great position he\nwill always be accorded.\n\nAn example will serve to illustrate his ingenuity.\n\nHow many people, when climbing up the stairs that lead to the whispering\ngallery and elsewhere, have ever noticed any peculiarity about them? Yet\nthere is one. When first they were being built each step was meant to be\nof the same height, but as they mounted higher, Wren suddenly discovered\nthat the top one would be an ugly tall one to ascend. To avoid this\nmeant one of two things, either to demolish what had already been\ncompleted and start afresh, or to turn this accident to good account.\nThe latter alternative was chosen. By gradually reducing the height of\nthe remaining steps, he contrived to overcome the difficulty so\nsuccessfully that he has tricked the eye and foot, so slight is the\ndifference of each tread. They appear to be equidistant as the ones\nlower down, and the illusion can only be dispelled by measurement.\n\nIf any one is observant on reaching the top of Ludgate Hill, one\npeculiarity of the great building will strike him. It is that the great\nwest facade does not squarely face Ludgate Hill, but bears considerably\nto the right. In fact its axis does not run due east and west.\n\nOn the advancement of Wren to be principal architect, he was not only\ncommissioned to erect the Cathedral, but was to rebuild the city. His\nscheme was very thorough. It comprised the widening of the streets; the\ncomplete insulation of all important churches; the public buildings were\nto have good frontages; and the halls of the City Guilds were to form a\nquadrangle around the Guildhall. To carry these improvements into\neffect, Government issued orders that none except Wren's rebuilding\nwould be recognised. Unfortunately much valuable time was wasted in an\nattempt at the restoration of the old cathedral, insisted upon by the\ncommittee, against Wren's wishes, and it was only when a portion of the\nnave fell down that Dean Sancroft was able to obtain the consent of the\ncommittee to raze the old walls to the ground and to allow Wren to build\nfrom the very foundations. The delay of this decision had in the\nmeanwhile given opportunity to individuals to erect buildings much as\nthey pleased upon their own properties in spite of Government\nprohibition, with the result that to a great extent streets and\nboundaries, which existed before the Great Fire, were reproduced. It\nalso caused the loss of a far more spacious frontage than now exists,\nwhich we may be sure formed an important item in Wren's design for the\nCathedral. The architect, however, by receding the west front from the\nold site now occupied by the statue of Queen Ann, has cleverly spaced\nout a noble frontage. Another consideration that determined Wren to\nalter the axis of the Cathedral was his great aversion to utilising the\nold foundations. His great ambition was to strike out for himself and to\nbe dependent on no one else's work. In order to realise this he laid the\naxis of the new work to a point farther north of that of the old\ncathedral, and the plan by this projection has in a marvellous way\ncovered practically the same ground, whilst at the same time Wren\nmanaged to secure fresh ground for his foundations almost throughout the\nwhole church. The plan of St. Paul's is a Latin cross, and is based upon\nclassical lines. The principal front, the west, is composed of a double\nportico of Corinthian fluted pillars, with two flights of steps leading\ndown to the road-level. In fact the entire body of the ground floor is\nabove the elevation of the street. Overhead is a large pediment, with\nits panel sculptured in high relief. On either side the west front is\nflanked by a campanile tower, composed at the summit of grouped circular\npillars. Just inside, on the left, is the Morning Chapel, whilst\nstraight on the opposite side lies the Chapel of the Order of St.\nMichael and St. George. Proceeding eastwards, the nave is flanked by\nthree massive and imposing arches. Then comes the dome or cupola, rising\nto a height of 365 feet, or 404 feet to the top of the cross. Viewed\nfrom the interior the inner dome is 225 feet, and rests at the\nintersection of the cross. The transepts are carried one arch to the\nnorth and one to the south, each of which are bound by semi-circular\nrows of Corinthian pillars.\n\nContinuing again towards the east, a couple of steps mark the\ncommencement of the choir leading from the dome, and is carried forward\nby three arches on either side. Behind the altar the colossal building\nterminates in the apsidal Chapel of Jesus. Throughout the entire length\nand breadth of the building is the crypt below. There under the choir,\nthe nearest to the south wall in the crypt chapel, is the modest slab\nthat covers the remains of the great architect of the grand edifice.\nNext to him lies the body of Lord Leighton, the greatest president the\nRoyal Academy has ever had. Just in the one corner are buried some of\nthe most eminent of England's painters, sculptors, and musicians. Those\nmore generally known are Sir Joshua Reynolds, the first president of the\nRoyal Academy; Benjamin West, who succeeded him in office; Sir Thomas\nLawrence, who next filled it, and Sir John Millais, who held the dignity\nonly a few months after Leighton's death. The remains of J. M. W.\nTurner, James Barry, John Foley, Sir Edwin Landseer, and Sir Arthur\nSullivan, musician, who are also some of the many great builders of art,\nhave all been accorded a little plot of ground close to their very great\nbrother-artist and predecessor, Sir Christopher Wren. In the centre of\nthe crypt, or rather right underneath the dome, is a noble mausoleum\ncontaining the body of England's greatest admiral, Viscount Horatio\nNelson, whilst just close to him between the crypt chapel and the dome\nis the massive sarcophagus of granite, encased in which is the body of\nthe Duke of Wellington. The monument of this hero of Waterloo is the\nchief feature of the plastic art that attracts the visitor on looking up\nthe nave. It is the great artistic expression of Stevens, the sculptor,\nand dwarfs all other monuments in its immediate neighbourhood. We would\nlike to enumerate the names of all the great men that lie in the mighty\nshadow of St. Paul's, and pay some tribute to the many artists who have,\nthrough their monuments, endeavoured their best to honour the memories\nof those who have so worthily upheld the traditions of the great empire;\nbut any such attempt we feel we must relinquish, and devote all the\nspace we can to Wren's work and to that of his predecessors.\n\nThe wonderful wood-carving of the choir stall, and especially the\nremarkable realistic floral designs of the Bishop's throne, were\nexecuted by Grinling Gibbons, who lived between 1648 and 1720. He was\nborn at Rotterdam, and as a youth came over to England, and was\ndiscovered by Evelyn, the diarist. So astonished was Evelyn by the\ngenius of Gibbons, who had just carved in wood a copy of Tintoretto's\n\"Crucifixion,\" that he introduced him to Wren, Pepys, and the King. With\nsuch powerful friends and his marvellous talent he soon became the most\nfamous carver of his age. In viewing the great edifice one cannot help\nthinking from whence came the money which enabled Wren to carry on the\nwork. With the exception of the Tillingham farm there were no\nendowments, and people were, after the fire, far from being generous\ndonors. As funds were absolutely necessary, royal warrants were issued\nto authorise the building committee to borrow on the security of the\ncoal and wine taxes. As the remuneration of Wren, Grinling Gibbons, and\nTijou was nothing to speak of, we may take it that practically the whole\nof the proceeds was sunk in the materials and the workmen's wages.\n\nThroughout the whole time of building Wren was harassed by petty\nannoyances on the part of the committee, who interfered in small matters\nof technical and artistic knowledge which lay quite beyond their\nprovince. Against the architect's will they insisted upon the erection\nof the heavy iron railings which fence in the Cathedral and mar the\nbeautiful gradations of lines from the lowest step of the transept\nentrances to the summit of the dome's cross. This only serves as one of\nmany such instances. Finally, Wren's persecutors went so far as to\nsuspend his patent in the year 1718, being the forty-ninth of his\noffice and the eighty-sixth of his age, and William Benson was appointed\nto succeed him.\n\nThis abrupt dismissal entirely upset any plan of internal decoration\nwhich Wren might have been thinking of, though it is supposed he had\nproposed to enrich and beautify St. Paul's with a scheme of colour\ncomposed of marble and mosaic work with gold and paintings. With the\nexception of the frescoes in the dome by Sir James Thornhill, nothing of\nimportance was done for fifty years after Wren's death. A proposal to\ncontribute a number of paintings from Sir Joshua Reynolds and the\nmembers of the Royal Academy was negatived by Dr. Terrick, who was\nBishop of London at that time. In 1891 W. B. Richmond, A.R.A., was\ncommissioned to decorate the choir and the dome with mosaic work, it\nbeing considered the most suitable material on account of the brilliancy\nof its surface, and the easiest to clean without risk of injury to the\nwork. Sir William Richmond, K.C.B. (as he has since been created),\ndecided to depart from modern methods in favour of the ancient way of\nembedding in cement cubes, so chosen and disposed to suit the various\nshades of his subjects. They represent various incidents taken from the\nBible, treated most skilfully, as one would naturally expect from such\na talented artist.\n\nThe difficulties of such an undertaking, restricted within certain\nlimits as it must be by the nature of the material, together with the\nmany attendant side-issues of which the outside public have not the\nfaintest idea, can only be known to the artist himself, and perhaps to\nsome of his _confreres_.\n\nIn course of erection is the gilt iron balustrade upon the cornice that\nruns round the church in continuation of that commenced by Wren at the\nwest end. This is the gift of Mr. Somers Clarke. He has also designed\nthe fittings for the installation of the electric light, which is the\ngenerous presentation of Mr. Pierpont Morgan.\n\nIn conclusion, we cannot help recalling the incident that cheered the\nclosing years of Wren. Once every year the aged artist came from his\nretirement at Hampton Court to London, to spend the day seated beneath\nthe great dome, happy to view the creation of his great intellect,\nthough possibly disturbed now and then by a little grain of discontent:\nhow much better he could do it now, if only he had youth and\nopportunity--a worry that only assails the true artist.\n\nIn the natural sequence of dates we ought to have opened this account\nwith the earlier foundations. This we purposely disregarded, and\nintroduced the reader straightway to the most beautiful and impressive\nbuilding of St. Paul's that the site has ever had, leaving the others to\nbe dealt with until now.\n\nThe earliest known house for religious observance on the site of the\npresent cathedral was a temple. In accordance with the usual practice of\nearly founders, it is not surprising to find that the site selected for\nit was upon the highest spot of ground in the city. If we follow the\naccounts of old London, it would have been folly for the Romans to have\nerected an important building like a temple upon a lower level, which\nmight have got swamped by an unusual rising of the tidal Thames. Apart\nfrom such consideration, it was not the Roman custom to debase, but\nrather to elevate as high as possible, any object they held in great\nreverence. It would form also a convenient centre to rally round in\ndefence of any attack. In all accounts of the site of St. Paul's the\nwriters have plenty to say about the three churches, but seldom, if\never, allude to the temple erected by the Romans.\n\nThis is the more curious when etymologists have endeavoured to explain\nthe affinity of Christian symbols to those of heathenism, showing how it\nwas clearly impossible, and hardly to be expected, that pagan customs\nshould be suddenly arrested and completely abolished, and an entire set\nof new observances introduced expressly for the new faith--Christianity.\nSuch a sudden change could not, they contend, be thrust upon a people\nbrought up to revere the old heathen deities and observe customs\nrendered sacred through superstition and countless ages. They required a\ngradual weaning, and this, so they say, was done by christianising the\npagan symbols derived from nature-worship and adapting them to meet the\nrequirements of the new faith,--symbols which, in course of time, became\nso clothed that their original significance was lost sight of.\n\nIt would greatly astonish all devout Christians to learn that the many\nobjects they look up to with sacred awe and wonder of mystery, the\ninverted triangles which often form an ornament in church windows, the\nfacing towards the east, even the derivation of the very nave they may\nhappen to be in, with a variety of other symbols, existed long before\nChristianity was ever thought of. It may also be a little disturbing to\nlearn that, quite unintentionally, they are indirectly paying respect to\nmany of the most heathen observances cloaked under the garb of Christian\nreligion. It is far from our intention to advocate a return to pagan\ndarkness, but if this be really true, surely there is a very close\nconnection between the temple and the Christian church. For this very\nreason, and the more so in that certain lines of their argument are not\nto be refuted, we would accord a greater importance than has been\nhitherto done to the Roman temple that undoubtedly first stood on the\nprominent piece of land in the London of those days. We do not mean to\nsay that at the time this temple was erected to Diana the sufferings and\ncrucifixion of Our Lord had not already borne fruit, but the very\nexistence of the temple clearly indicates that in London, at any rate,\nthe new faith was very much in its infancy, if it existed at all. But\nthe demolition of the temple, to make room for the first Christian\nchurch, which was in turn destroyed in 302 during the Diocletian\npersecution, clearly gives evidence that there must have been growing\nindications of the presence of converts and missionaries which led to\nthe erection of the latter from the ruins of the former.\n\nA matter of twenty years later, in the reign of Constantine, the church\nwas rebuilt, and completed by 337. What the shape of the first one was\ncan only be conjectured. It would most probably be based upon the\ntemple. The second was undoubtedly Romanesque, if we can rely upon the\ndates of its rebuilding. They fall conveniently between 306 and 337, a\nperiod of marvellous development of ecclesiastical architecture based\nupon classical remains, which the favourable attitude of Constantine\ntowards Christianity encouraged. Converts in Rome had increased to such\nnumbers that it was felt that some covered-in space was essential to\nprotect the congregation against the sun's hot rays and inclement\nweather, the more especially as such a building, far from attracting\nhostile attention, would serve to the furtherance of Christianity. The\nform it took was the conversion of the basilica. As anything that came\nfrom Rome was looked upon as a correct thing to copy, it is not\nsurprising to learn that travelling merchants and missionaries were able\nto control the taste of the cities they passed through. In this way each\ncountry adopted the basilica, though in many features they differed from\neach other, consequent on customs, surroundings, and climatic\nconditions. However, about the year 597, the pagan Saxons appear to have\ndestroyed the church. We come then to the first church of St. Paul's of\nwhich we have authentic record. It was built by Ethelbert, King of Kent,\nin 607. He had first to obtain the sanction of Sebert, who claimed\nLondon as being in his dominion of the East Angles. To this see\nMellitus was appointed as the first bishop. He was one of the forty\nmonks who had accompanied Augustine in 597 to help to carry out Pope\nGregory the Great's scheme, which was to divide England into two\nprovinces with metropolitans of equal dignity at London and York, with\ntwelve suffragans to each. Since then London's see has become third,\nranking next to York. In the course of four hundred and eighty years,\n607-1087, no doubt Ethelbert's church underwent considerable alteration,\nprobably commencing with a very humble building, perhaps chiefly of\nwood, and as portions got out of repair such characteristics of stone\nbuildings, as learnt from travellers returning from Italy, were\nintroduced, thus gradually transforming the Saxon church to architecture\n\"in the Roman way.\" For after the departure of the Romans the Britons at\nfirst appear to have returned to primitive methods of architecture. It\nis only as time progressed that they gradually became initiated, through\nthe visits of travellers, into the working of stone, which, after the\narrival of the Normans, came into more general practice.\n\n[Illustration: LONDON\n\nST. PAUL'S AND LUDGATE HILL]\n\nTo provide for the maintenance of St. Paul's, Ethelbert endowed it with\na farm at Tillingham in Essex. The property is still managed, the rents\nof which are controlled by the Dean and Chapter.\n\nThe chief event which took place within its walls was the first great\nEcclesiastical Council of the English Church under the presidency of\nArchbishop Lanfranc. Twelve years afterwards, in 1087, a great\nconflagration completely destroyed the church. No time was lost, for\napparently in the same year building operations were put in hand for\nwhat many writers call Old St. Paul's, the second church. By this time\nwe may take it that architecture in England had advanced considerably,\nand if anything it was a rather fortunate accident that overtook\nEthelbert's building. The nation had by now realised that 1000 A.D. was\nthe dreaded millennium of the past; they recognised they had a stern\nmaster in William the Conqueror, who, though he might be harsh upon\nthem, would allow no one else to be so. For some years prior to the\nmillennium few buildings of any importance were erected, so thoroughly\nhad the mind been terrorised at the prospect of the world coming to an\nend, and even after it had proved false, the reaction does not seem to\nhave taken place till the accession of the Norman. When it did occur, we\nsee by examples now extant what a great advance architecture had made,\nor rather, the knowledge of stone-work had become more general. This\ncan only be attributed to the monks and stonemasons who followed in the\nwake of the Conquest. The plan of the Norman church of St. Paul's was\nthe Latin cross. The body of it appears to have been narrower and\nconsiderably longer than Wren's cathedral. In fact we are much indebted\nto the numerous discoveries of Mr. Penrose, and we learn that the west\nfront came right to the fore of Queen Anne's statue, which then did not\nexist. Another great difference was that the axis of Old St. Paul's, as\none faces the west front, was more to the left of the statue, whereas\nthat of the present building runs right through the centre of it. At the\noutset the Cathedral consisted of a nave of twelve bays, transepts, and\na short apsidal choir built in the round arched style peculiar to Norman\narchitecture. The whole then stood within spacious precincts enclosed by\na continuous wall. In the wall were six gates. The principal one opened\nin the west on to Ludgate Hill, whilst the second, at St. Paul's Alley,\nled to \"Little North Dore\"; the third, at Canon's Alley, showed the way\nto the north transept door; the fourth was called Little Gate, and led\nfrom Cheapside to Paul's Cross (where now stands a fountain); the fifth,\nSt. Augustine's Gate, faced Watling Street; and the sixth was the\nentrance from the side of the river to the south transept. A matter of\n130 years later, it was decided to extend eastwards from the choir and\nintroduce the newly developed style, which was the use of the pointed\narch. The new work, consisting of eight bays, was carried out, but it\ncaused the demolition of the old parish church of St. Faith, which lay\nright in the course. As some compensation the parishioners were allowed\nto use a portion of the crypt under the new choir as their parish\nchurch. After the Great Fire much controversy arose. The parishioners of\nSt. Faith's claimed their right to bury their dead in the whole space\nbeneath the choir of Wren's cathedral. This the Chapter disallowing, a\nlawsuit ensued, which resulted in a compromise, the parishioners being\nsatisfied with rights of burial in the north aisle of the crypt. The\n\"new work\" was solemnly dedicated in 1240. In the meantime a spire, 489\nfeet in height, was put in hand and was finally completed in 1315. The\nspire of Old St. Paul's proved to be a great source of anxiety. It was\nstruck by lightning three times, and eventually was completely destroyed\nby fire, from a fourth lightning in the reign of Elizabeth, in 1561. It\nwas never put up again. Right in the angle of the south transept and\nthe nave existed a fair-sized Chapter House, which appears to have had\ncloisters, the remains of which can still be seen in the gardens on the\nsouth side of the nave, whilst on the north side of the choir the\nposition of Paul's Cross is defined by the insertion of stones let into\nthe ground. Paul's Cross, which by order of Parliament was demolished in\n1643, was a pulpit of wood, mounted upon steps of stone, and covered\nwith lead. At this place, the Court, the Mayor, the Aldermen, and the\nchief citizens used to assemble to listen to sermons from the most\neminent divines, who were appointed to preach every Sunday in the\nforenoon. It was used as early as 1259, and not only were sermons\ndelivered from it, but also political and ecclesiastical discourses were\nheld.\n\nOld St. Paul's, by the time of Charles I., got into such a terrible\nstate of dilapidation that steps were taken to put it into thorough\nrepair. A fund was established and the work was intrusted to Inigo\nJones. He got as far as the refacing of the Cathedral inside and out,\nand the adding of a classical portico, when his labours were interrupted\nby the Commonwealth. The famous architect died before the Restoration.\nIn the meantime Cromwell's troops did considerable damage, what with\nstabling their horses within the sacred edifice and employing their\nleisure time in defacing the building. They removed and sold the\nscaffolding, which Inigo Jones had set up for the purpose of restoring\nthe vaulting, and in consequence much of the roof-work fell down. At the\nRestoration, Dr. Wren, as he was then called, was appointed\nAssistant-Surveyor-General of his Majesty's Works, and instructed to\nrepair the fabric. However, on September 2, 1666, the Great Fire of\nLondon broke out and completely destroyed Old St. Paul's. Instead of\ncarrying out his scheme of restoration, Wren was afterwards enabled to\nleave to posterity this masterpiece of genius that took him from the\nyear 1675 till the year 1710 to realise.\n\nHow is one to describe London, the capital of the British Empire, and\nthe largest city in the world? The subject-matter would take volumes, if\nan exhaustive treatise be required. Here it necessarily can only be a\nslight sketch. If we are to put any reliance on Geoffrey of Monmouth, a\ncity existed here 1107 years before Christ was born, and 354 even before\nRome came into existence. The founder, he asserts, was Brute, a lineal\ndescendant of the Trojan AEneas, by whom the city was called New Troy, or\nTroy-novant, till the advent of Lud, who changed it to Coer Lud or\nLud-town, and encompassed it with walls. Though the king's name is made\nevident in Ludgate Hill, which runs up to St. Paul's west front, this\nauthor's statements are considered as pleasing fictions by\nserious-minded authorities. Again, it is said to have been the capital\nof the Trinobantes in 54 B.C. With the arrival of the Romans we get\nmore definite information, yet we are inclined to think that they must\nhave found some kind of a British settlement, the more especially if we\nbear in mind that, until the Romans came, the mouth of the Thames was\nclose at hand. The Thames of to-day was not the Thames of that time. It\nwas very much shallower, possibly quite easy to ford at low tide. This\nwas caused by the great inundation over large tracts of the counties of\nKent and Essex, which took place every time it became high tide.\n\nTill the Romans set the example of reclaiming the land and confining the\nriver to its channel, a great volume of water had thus expended itself\nand reduced the depth considerably. But to the early Britons, where the\nhigher level of land checked and brought back the wandering Thames, to\ncontinue its upward course within its proper confinement, must have\nappeared the mouth. In their belief that such was the case it is only\nnatural to suppose that the Britons would take advantage of such an\nexcellent site. A clearing was gradually made, for London was well\nwooded once, on the highest ground, which would be somewhere from the\nsite of St. Paul's to as far as the Bank of England, and a temple was\nerected within some groves. To the Romans in 61 A.D. it was known as\nLondinium or Colonia Augusta, the former, no doubt, being a Latinised\nform of Lyn-Din, meaning \"the town on the lake.\" Boadicea, Queen of the\nIceni, in the same year is credited with having reduced it to ashes, and\nto have put 70,000 Romans and strangers to the sword. This wholesale\nslaughter was punished, in the same year, by Suetonius, who retaliated\nby a massacre of 80,000 Britons, a defeat that so preyed upon Boadicea\nthat she promptly poisoned herself. Tacitus, the Roman historian, who\nlived about 90 years after Christ, relates how Suetonius felt\nconstrained to abandon London, \"that place of busy traffic and thronged\nwith traders,\" to the British, because he did not feel equal to the task\nof defending it. This is surely a proof that London was no mushroom\ncity, though Tacitus makes no mention of a mint, as he does when he\ndescribes Verulamium and Camulodum. There also appears to have been\nanother British settlement on the south bank, now known as Southwark.\nThis district, by the way, has just within the last few days been\nerected into a see with the cathedral, or throne, installed in its fine\nold church of St. Saviour. This is where Gower, the father of English\npoets, is interred, and is honoured with a quaint coloured monument\nprincipally of carved wood, and the holy precincts also contain the\nremains of Shakespeare's brother. Southwark is the Londinium attributed\nto Ptolemy's description as being on the south bank of the Thames,\nthough it does not discredit the existence of that on the north. As to\nthe actual size and exact site of early London, it will be many years\nbefore that can be accurately determined. As old buildings are pulled\ndown and excavations are made for foundations, speculation becomes much\nnarrowed. The discoveries by Wren, and recently by Mr. Arthur Taylor,\nthe late Mr. H. Black, Mr. Roach-Smith and Mr. J. E. Price, one of our\ngreatest authorities, have thrown much light on early London. It has\nbeen found that cemeteries once existed in Cheapside, on the site of St.\nPaul's, close to Newgate and elsewhere, which are known to date from the\nLater Roman period. On the assumption that it was an illegal Roman\npractice to bury the dead within the city walls, it follows they must\nhave been outside, thus limiting the habitable area.\n\nAs to when and where the first bridge spanned the Thames are points\ndifficult to decide. Sir George Airy supposes that the bridge mentioned\nby Dion Cassius (43 A.D.) at the mouth of the Thames was not far from\nthe site of London Bridge, on the inference that the mouth of the Thames\nof early times was close to this site. Dr. Guest, on the other hand,\nrecognises it as a bridge made by the Britons, but places it as being\nconstructed over the marshy valley of the Lea, near Stratford, his\ntheory being that the Britons would have been unable to bridge over a\ntidal river like the Thames with the width of three hundred yards, and a\ndifference of nearly twenty feet in the rise and fall of the water. From\nremains found of ancient piles in the river-bed, and the great number of\nRoman coins, a well-known practice observed by this Latin race to\ncommemorate any important undertaking, antiquarians seem to agree that\nthere was a Roman bridge in the Anno Domini period of their occupation,\nand that indications point to its location at London Bridge. In their\ntime London was a port of considerable importance. As many as eight\nhundred vessels are said to have been employed in exporting corn alone\nin the year 359, which shows that agriculture was in full swing. With\nthe departure of the Romans in 409 the city became the capital of the\nSaxon kingdom of Essex, and was called Lundenceaster. Subsequent events\nof importance are those that occurred under the dynasties of the Norman\n(1066-1154), the Plantagenet (1154-1485), the Tudor (1485-1603), the\nStuart (1603-1714), interrupted in the midst by Cromwell's Protectorate,\nand finally the Hanoverian succession, which brings us down to this year\nof grace, with Edward VII., King of Great Britain and Ireland, Emperor\nof India, and monarch of the greatest and most prosperous empire. To\nattempt to give a detailed account of all that happened under the\nsuccessive heads of the State is clearly impossible. Two events,\nhowever, stand out prominently. One was the Great Plague of London that\ncommenced in December 1664, and carried off a matter of ninety thousand\nvictims. The horrors of this pestilence are graphically described in the\nDiary of Samuel Pepys, who was an eye-witness. Daniel Defoe, though\nwriting some years after, has given us a wonderfully realistic account\nin his \"History of the Plague.\" Fires were kept up night and day, to\npurify the air, for three days. No sooner did the infection come to an\nend than the great conflagration of September 2, 1666, broke out. It\nbegan at one o'clock in the morning in a baker's shop in Pudding Lane,\nbehind Monument Yard. It spread from the Tower to the Temple Church of\nthe Middle Temple in Fleet Street, and away to Holborn. In the short\nspace of four days it destroyed eighty-nine churches (including St.\nPaul's), the city gates, the Royal Exchange, the Custom House,\nGuildhall, Sion College, and many other public buildings, besides some\nfourteen thousand houses and the ruin of four hundred streets. The\nMonument, built by Wren in 1671-1672, commemorates the origin of the\nfire, 202 feet from its base.\n\nIt is only within recent years that London--by which is meant London in\nits broadest sense; that is, including the city and excluding the\nsuburbs--has been divided into a number of townships. It is now no\nlonger correct to call Marylebone, Paddington, and many other such,\n\"parishes.\" They are all boroughs, and possess a mayor and corporation\nof their own, each with a townhall to support the dignity. They have a\ncertain amount to say in local affairs, the more important being under\nthe control of the London County Council, who in turn hold themselves\nresponsible to Parliament.\n\nThe jurisdiction of the Lord Mayor of London proper is confined within\ncertain limits, as defined by an irregular line of boundary commencing\nfrom the Tower, northward through the Minories, past Aldgate, behind\nLiverpool Street Station, working round to Holborn, across Chancery\nLane, to end at Middle Temple. His career is generally marked by an\napprenticeship of seven years' duration to some city guild, such as the\nMercers', the Grocers', Merchant Tailors', Vintners', Armourers and\nBraziers', and some seventy others. At the end of this period he\nobtains, on the payment of a certain fee and a glance at a series of\nHogarth's \"Progress of the Rake\" at the Guildhall, the freedom of the\nAncient City of London. As a vacancy occurs in his company he fills it\nas a \"Liveryman.\" After these initial stages he is open to become a\nMaster of the said company, and becomes eligible for alderman, sheriff,\nand Lord Mayor. The candidate's ambition, however, is tempered according\nto his means; for to worthily fill the office of the first magistrate he\nmust be prepared to be considerably out of pocket, though the loss is\ngenerally compensated by a knighthood, and on special occasions by a\nbaronetcy. Though he may be entirely devoid of any legal training, the\nLord Mayor during his tenure of office, or the aldermen, are always\npresent on the bench at the Central Criminal Court, which sits at the\nOld Bailey. This court was created in 1834 to bring under one\njurisdiction the criminal cases that are supplied by the immense\npopulation around the city. Opposite the Mansion House, the official\nresidence of the Lord Mayor, is the Bank of England. The Royal Mint\nfaces the Tower of London, and was constituted as now about 1617, whilst\nthe buildings date about 1810. The first known Warder or Master was in\nthe reign of Henry I., the wardership becoming extinct with Lord\nMaryborough (1814--23), and the last Master was Professor Thomas Graham,\nwho died in 1869. By the Coinage Act in the following year the Master of\nthe Mint, who as such had existed up till then, was abolished, and the\npost was combined with that of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. On the\nother side of the road is the famous Tower of London, the White Tower or\ncentral keep of which was built in 1078 by Gundulph, Bishop of\nRochester, in obedience to the command of William the Conqueror. By the\nside of this historic pile is the Tower Bridge, the marvellous\nengineering feat of Sir Horace Jones and Sir J. Wolfe Barry. It opens\nupwards in the centre to allow the shipping to pass through. Right away\ntowards the east are the great docks, the principal of which are the\nLondon Docks and the East India Docks.\n\nPassing west of the city are the great Law Courts in the Strand,\ndesigned by Streeter.\n\nBehind them is Lincoln's Inn, and in front across Fleet Street, is the\nTemple. Gray's Inn is in Holborn, as well as Staple Inn, with the\npicturesque old-fashioned frontage, once the prevailing style of\nLondon's domestic architecture. Smaller Inns are Clifford's Inn,\nthreatened with demolition, with Old Serjeant's Inn adjoining, while\nSerjeant's Inn is on the other side of Fleet Street, nearer to Ludgate\nCircus, and not far from the Temple.\n\nIn Trafalgar Square a priceless collection of old masters' paintings are\nhoused in the National Gallery, once the premises of the Royal Academy\nof Arts, who moved to Burlington House, Piccadilly.\n\nRegent Street, with its shops, and Bond Street, the great centre for art\ndealers and picture galleries, hardly require further description. The\nBritish Museum, the South Kensington Museum, and numerous others; the\ngreat hospitals,--St. Bartholomew's, Guy's, Charing Cross, and many more\nequally as well known; the wonderful open spaces as typified by Hyde\nPark; the Palaces of Buckingham, St. James, and Kensington; besides the\nCathedral of St. Paul, the Abbey, and Houses of Parliament, Westminster,\nwith the newly erected Roman Catholic Cathedral, close to Victoria\nStation, comprise only a tithe of what can be seen in the capital of the\nBritish Empire.\n\n\n\n\nYork\n\nEboracum.\n\n(\"Doomsday Book.\")\n\n\nOne can hardly think of York without recalling the wonderful ride of\nDick Turpin on his famous mare Black Bess. It came about one day that he\nwas resting at the Kilburn Wells--a site now taken up by a modern\nbanking-house--in the company of another notorious highwayman, King, who\nseemed very much depressed. \"Dick,\" he said, \"I have had a most curious\ndream. I seemed to be dying from a pistol-shot by you.\" \"No, no,\"\nprotested Dick, and was doing his best to cheer up his friend when\nsuddenly unusual commotion arose outside, followed by the immediate\nentrance of the bailiffs to apprehend King dead or alive. One of his\nnumerous mistresses had given him away in a mad fit of jealousy. It took\nlittle time for Turpin and King to reach their horses, which were always\ntethered close by. Turpin was soon in the saddle, but turning round he\nperceived that his comrade was in difficulties. The horse was restive,\nand its master was making vain attempts to mount. To draw his pistol out\nof the holster and empty its contents towards the man who had by now\nlaid his hand on King was a moment's thought. But to Turpin's horror he\nsaw the dream realised. His friend dead, it was folly to dally longer.\nAmidst a volley of shots he quickly wheeled his mare round and galloped\noff, hotly pursued by the excisemen, who had soon recognised him. Along\nWest End Lane into Finchley, away towards Barnet, his mare, gallantly\ntaking every toll-gate, soon carried her master out of immediate danger.\nIt was then that Dick Turpin determined to try the fettle of Bess by\ncarrying out his long-cherished ambition of riding ninety miles to York.\nWithout a change of mounts, and only an occasional rinse-out of his\nfaithful animal's mouth with some strong stimulant, he accomplished his\nwish, but at the sacrifice of his mare. She died from exhaustion,\nhaving, however, saved her master and cheated justice. This is no\nlegend, but an absolute fact--a story that has quickened the imagination\nof every English schoolboy, accompanied with a regret that such good old\nrollicking days no longer exist, that there is no relieving rich\nmerchants of well-filled purses, no opportunity of calming the fears\nof fair ladies, no chance of acting the grand seigneur towards the poor,\nno languishing in Newgate with a glorious death at Tyburn. No, that is\nall a dream now.\n\n[Illustration: YORK\n\nSTONEGATE]\n\nThough customs have greatly changed since those days of unsafe\ntravelling, the quaint streets, the great gateways of bold architecture,\nand the magnificent church all lend the city of York the wonderful\nfascination of age, heightened by the situation of the river Ouse at its\njunction with the Foss.\n\nIn what county of England the famous city and glorious minster of York\nare, requires little mental effort. It is the most ancient metropolitan\nsee in England. At one time great controversy arose between York and\nCanterbury as to precedence. It was thought that whichever one of them\ncould successfully prove that the one first confirmed was meant by Pope\nGregory to be the senior, should be the superior. As, however, no\nsatisfactory understanding could be arrived at, the question was left to\nthe Papal Court at Rome. By its decision it was determined in favour of\nCanterbury, so the Archbishop of Canterbury styles himself Primate of\nAll England, whilst the Archbishop of York rests content with Primate\nof England; the reduction of one word, but it means a great deal. In\nthe history of England we see what part these two metropolitans have\ntaken, how they have occasionally fallen out over what now appears to us\nthe most trifling matters, but which no doubt were considered of most\nvital importance at the time. In this account they need no\nrecapitulation, for they can be turned up in any history book on\nEngland.\n\nIn the very early years of Anno Domini, when Christianity in England was\nquite in its infancy,--or to be more exact about the year 180,--it is\nsaid that King Lucius established the Metropolitan See at York. In those\ndays, however, it could hardly have been called by that name. Prior to\nthis monarch's time it was the town of the Brigantes, and was known as\nEvrauc. They appear to have been a very hardy race. Through them it was\nthat Caractacus, one of two sons of Cymbeline, after the Silures were\ndefeated by Ostorius, made the last important stand against the Romans.\nThat is to say, with the submission of the Brigantes and the capture of\nCaractacus, all unity among the British tribes came to an end, so that\nit became comparatively an easy task for the Romans to complete the\nconquest of England.\n\n[Illustration: YORK\n\nTHE SHAMBLES]\n\nThis they did in the second campaign of Agricola, about the year 79\nA.D., and the Roman power was due to the divided factions and parties\nof the Britons, who, though they might have kings and all the outward\nshow of sovereignty, were merely puppets in the hands of the conquerors.\nFrom this year to 400 the Romans steadily evolved a unity of their own\nin Britain. On their departure, history tells us how the British\nimplored them to come back and protect them, so helpless had they become\nin the art of attack and defence.\n\nAs Evrauc belonged to the Brigantes, we may take it that it was the\nchief town of the British in the north when it passed into the hands of\nthe Romans after the defeat of Caractacus. By them it was called\nEboracum, and became the metropolitan of the north, the military capital\nand centre of the Romans in Britain.\n\nThe original Roman city was rectangular in form and of considerable\ndimensions. It is supposed to have been laid out in imitation of ancient\nRome, on the east bank of the Ouse. A temple to Bellona was erected as\nwell as a praetorium, in which the emperors sat, for Eboracum was\nhonoured by the great heads of Rome. The first to reside here was\nHadrian, in 120, whilst Severus died in the city in 211. This last had\ncome over with his sons, Caracalla and Geta, and a large army, and the\nattendance of his whole court. His time was busily engaged in reducing\nthe troublesome Britons to proper submission. The two sons nobly helped\ntheir aged father. Caracalla completed the erection of a strong wall of\nstone nearly eighty miles long, close to the rampart of earth raised by\nHadrian, in accordance with the wish of Severus, to form a more\neffectual barrier against future incursions of the natives. During the\nresidence of the court, Eboracum reached to the highest state of\nsplendour. The constant visits of tributary kings and foreign\nambassadors, who came to pay their allegiance to Rome, caused it to be\nunsurpassed among the cities of the world, so much so that it came to be\ncalled \"Altera Rome.\" The remains of the Emperor Severus, though he died\nhere in 212, were enclosed in an urn and sent to Rome.\n\nThe Emperor Constantius Chlorus died also in Eboracum in 307. His son,\nConstantius the Great, was present at his father's death, and by the\narmy proclaimed emperor.\n\nAfter 409 the Greek and Latin writers tell us that Britain was no longer\nruled by the Romans. Their statements are borne out by the Saxon\nChronicle. This did not mean that there was a general exodus of the\nLatin race or civilisation, for the connection of Rome with its British\nprovinces did not cease suddenly, though the tie gradually became\nweakened, because from 409 Roman officials probably ceased to be sent\nregularly. Britain still considered itself to be Roman, and the\ninhabitants, or rather the upper classes, continued to speak Latin. Even\nin the sixth century they were pleased to call themselves \"Romani,\" and\nheld themselves aloof from the surrounding barbarians--a term which we\nknow was applied by the Romans to tribes, not necessarily because they\nwere uncivilised, but rather as a convenient mark of distinction from\nthemselves. Since their departure from Britain, archaeologists have found\nrich mines of Roman remains in every place of their occupation, and none\nmore so than at York; but to enumerate the many discoveries would\nrequire more space than can here be allotted. Suffice it to say that the\n\"multangular tower\" is a notable evidence of the Roman occupation,\nthough it is much dilapidated.\n\nThe city was frequently assailed by the Picts and Scots, and after the\narrival of the Saxons it suffered considerably from the many wars that\narose between the Britons and their new allies, as well as in the\nstruggle for supremacy during the establishment of the several kingdoms\nof the Octarchy, and other minor wars. Early in the seventh century\nEboracum underwent a change. By the Saxons the city was called Euro wic,\nEuore wic, and Eofor wic, which by Leland is supposed to have been\nborrowed from its situation on the river Eure, now known as the Ouse;\nbut by what process these titles came to be contracted into its present\nname of York seems rather difficult to account. However, under the name\nof Eoforwic, the city flourished as the capital of the Bretwaldas early\nin the seventh century. Consequent on the conversion of Edwin, King of\nNorthumbria, to Christianity, resulting from his marriage to Ethelburga,\ndaughter of King Ethelbert of Kent, the city was erected in 624 into an\narchiepiscopal see, over which Paulinus, the confessor of the Queen, was\nmade primate. In addition to this, Edwin had constituted the city as the\nmetropolitan of his kingdom. Edwin's work upon the church, which he\ndedicated to St. Peter, and the missionary work of Paulinus, were\nsuddenly suspended by an attack of the Britons under Cadwallo in 633.\nEdwin was killed, whilst Ethelburga escaped into Kent with Paulinus. The\nchurch in the meantime was allowed to decay until it was restored by\nOswald, successor to Edwin. He managed to regain possession of his\nkingdom after a sanguinary conflict with Cadwallo, who, with the\nchief officers, was killed during the fight.\n\n[Illustration: YORK\n\nBOOTHAM BAR]\n\nWe have it by Bede that on the site of the wooden church, in which the\nbaptism was conducted by Paulinus, Edwin erected \"a large and more noble\nbasilica of stone,\" dedicated to St. Peter; but, as we have seen, the\nwork was interrupted by the untimely death of the founder. Finally it\nwas repaired by Archbishop Wilfrid, the third prelate to succeed to the\ngovernment of the See and provinces. His predecessor had been Cedda, who\nhad been appointed on the death of Paulinus in Kent. The establishment\nwas continued on its original lines by Wilfrid and his successors till\nthe Norman Conquest. In the meantime York, under Archbishop Egbert, from\n730 to 766, became a most celebrated centre of learning, and reached to\nits height under Alcuin. The former had repaired the ravages caused by\nfire in 741 to the Cathedral, which is described by Alcuin as \"a most\nmagnificent basilica.\" The city fell into the hands of the Danes. They\nsoon made it an important seat of commerce, and constituted it the\ncapital of the Danish jarl. In 1050 the Abbey of St. Mary's was founded\nby Siward, who is supposed to have died at York five years later and to\nhave been buried in St. Olave's Church. William the Conqueror then\nseized York in 1068 and erected a tower. The new condition of things was\nnot allowed to remain long. Sweyn, in the following year, sent his two\nsons, Harold and Canute, with a numerous following of Danes. They\ndisembarked on the shores of the Humber, and, joined by Edgar Atheling\nand his army, advanced to York, laying waste the land they passed\nthrough. To prevent the enemy from fortifying itself, the garrison fired\nthe houses in the suburbs; but the flames were fanned by a strong wind\ninto a devastating conflagration, in the midst of which the Danes\nentered and put to the sword the whole Norman garrison. This slaughter\nwas eventually punished by the Conqueror, who, harbouring a suspicion of\ntreachery on the part of the citizens, reduced them to his idea of\nsubmission by burning the city about their ears and desolating the\nneighbouring country from the Humber to the Tyne. Nevertheless the city\ngradually recovered in the two succeeding reigns. Archbishop Thomas\nendeavoured to patch up the Cathedral, but eventually pulled it down and\nrebuilt it. The city continued to advance in prosperity in spite of many\nattacks from the Scots. In 1088 William Rufus laid the first stone for a\nlarge monastery for the Benedictine Order, which was dedicated to St.\nMary.\n\n[Illustration: YORK\n\nMONK BAR]\n\nIn 1137, during the reign of Stephen, a terrible fire broke out which\ndestroyed, it is said, the Cathedral, the monastery, and some forty\nparish churches. On the accession of Henry I. the city received its\nfirst charter of incorporation, whilst in 1175 Henry II. held here one\nof the first meetings which came to be afterwards called Parliament. It\nalso served as an occasion for William of Scotland to pay his homage to\nthe King in the Cathedral. In the reign of Richard I. the fury of the\npopulace was excited against the Jews for having mingled with the crowd\nat the Coronation in London. In spite of a royal proclamation in their\nfavour, they were terribly persecuted throughout the country, especially\nin the big towns. York was by no means behind the times in 1190. Many of\nthe Jews, having defended the castle in which they had taken refuge, put\ntheir own wives and children to death, and then committed suicide. Those\nwho did not were cruelly tortured to death by the Christians. In the\nmeantime it is pleasing to note that certain portions of Yorkshire had\nbeen reclaimed from its wild state wherever the Cistercians and other\norders of monks had settled. They introduced sheep-farming, besides\ntilling the reclaimed wilderness. The subsequent history of York is\ntaken up with the many visits of royalty and benefits conferred, till\nwe get to the year 1569, when the Council of the North was established,\nafter the suppression of the rebellion known as the \"Pilgrimage of\nGrace.\" This was consequent on the dissolution of the monasteries, the\ndemolition of ten parish churches, and the wholesale appropriation of\nrevenues and materials by Henry VIII. The principal leader was Robert\nAske, who, with 40,000 men attended by priests with sacred banners,\nseized this city and Hull. They were soon dispersed, Aske being brought\nto York and hanged upon Clifford's Tower. Though suppressed for a time,\npublic feeling broke out into an insurrection during Elizabeth's reign\nto restore Roman Catholicism. It ended in their discomfiture, Thomas\nPercy, Earl of Northumberland, being beheaded at York as the chief\nringleader, and his head stuck on the Micklegate Bar as a warning to\nothers. History records a Parliament held here by Charles I. in 1642,\nwhen he promised to govern legally. In fact, he seems to have removed\nhis entire court here, or rather those willing to follow him. However,\nas all attempts at negotiation had failed, he advanced to Nottingham and\nthere erected his standard. After the battle of Marston Moor, which is\nabout six miles out, York was taken for the Parliament by Sir Thomas\nFairfax in 1644.\n\n[Illustration: YORK\n\nMICKLEGATE BAR]\n\nAfter the Restoration, Charles II. was royally welcomed. James II.\naroused public indignation by attempting to introduce Roman Catholicism\nat York, which only led to the persecution of the followers of that\nreligion. Subsequent events have been principally the visits of royalty.\nIn 1829 terrible consternation arose at the sight of smoke issuing from\nthe roof of the Cathedral. The act was afterwards proved to have been\nthat of a madman who had secreted himself for that purpose in the\nCathedral after the evening service was over. The whole of the choir was\ngutted by the flames. The Cathedral, after Sweyn's visitation, had been\nrebuilt by Archbishop Thomas of Bayeux.\n\nIt was commenced in 1070 and finished by 1100. Of this building little\nnow remains, it having been destroyed by an accidental fire in 1137. It\nremained in a desolate state till Archbishop Roger rebuilt the apsidal\nchoir and crypt (1154-1191). To this was added the south transept by\nArchbishop Walter de Grey (1215-1255) in the reign of Henry III., whilst\nthe north transept and the central tower were erected by John le\nRomaine, who was at that time treasurer of the Cathedral. The two\ntransepts, besides the crypt, are the oldest portions of the present\nbuilding. They belong to the best years of the Early English style. The\nsouth transept has a distinctive feature in its magnificent rose window,\nwhilst the north transept is adorned with a series of beautiful worked\nlancet windows, known as the Five Sisters. The son of the treasurer, who\nbecame also Archbishop, laid the foundation of the nave about 1290,\nwhich was completed about forty years later by Archbishop Melton, who\nalso built the west front and the two western towers. The Chapter House\nalso belongs to the same period. In 1361 Archbishop Thoresby commenced\nto erect the Lady Chapel and presbytery after the Early Perpendicular\nstyle. He also in eight years completed the central tower, which he had\ntaken down in 1370, whilst previous to this he had started to rebuild\nthe choir in 1361 to render it more in accordance with the character of\nthe nave, though it was not finished till about 1400. It is a very fine\nexample of the Late Perpendicular style. By this time all traces of the\nancient Norman architecture, with the exception of the eastern portion\nof the crypt by Archbishop Roger, which still remains, had been\neliminated. To keep in character it was decided to recase the central\ntower and alter it into a perpendicular tower with a lantern, which was\ncompleted in 1444. With the erection of the south-west tower in 1432,\nand the north-west tower in 1470, the church was completed, and two\nyears later was reconsecrated. Besides the fire of the madman in 1829,\nwhen the woodwork was entirely destroyed, another one broke out in 1840\nin the south-west tower, reducing it to a wreck. Since then it has\nundergone the usual restoration. The whole resembles a Latin cross, and\nconstitutes a glorious minster, the beauty of which can be more readily\nappreciated by a glance at Mr. Collins' work than by any amount of\nword-painting. The other illustrations give also a faithful description\nof the old gateways. They are the four principal gates or \"bars\" to the\nwalls of the city--walls which contain Norman and Early English work,\nbut principally belong to the Decorative style. Micklegate Bar is the\nsouth entrance, upon which were exposed the heads of traitors, and is\nNorman. Monk Bar leads on to the Scarborough Road, and probably belongs\nto the fourteenth century. It was formerly called Goodramgate, which was\nchanged after the Restoration to Monk Bar, in honour of General Monk.\nWalmgate Bar dates from the reign of Edward I., and still retains the\nbarbican rebuilt in 1648, whilst Bootham Bar, with a Norman arch, is the\nmain entrance from the north. Stonegate is situated practically in the\nheart of the city, not far from the minster. It is a curious piece of\narchitecture. York has been most happy with regard to the birth of men\nwho have distinguished themselves. It has yielded to the Church of Rome\neight saints and three cardinals, and to England no less than twelve\nlord chancellors, two lord treasurers and lord presidents of the north.\nBut the earliest recorded birth of an eminent native takes us out of the\nordinary ranks of men. If any name is well known it is certainly that of\nthe first Roman emperor who embraced Christianity. He is Constantine the\nGreat. Flaccus Albanus was also born here. He was a pupil of the great\necclesiastical historian, the Venerable Bede. Waltheof, Earl of\nNorthumberland and son of Siward; Thomas Morton, in turn Bishop of\nChester, Lichfield, Coventry, and Durham, first came into the world at\nYork; whilst of more recent times there was Gent, an eminent painter and\nhistorian; Swinburn, a distinguished lawyer; and Flaxman, one of\nEngland's most celebrated sculptors, who is perhaps as well known by his\nbeautiful designs for the Wedgwood pottery as by any other work of his.\nNot to know who Flaxman was is almost as bad as to admit ignorance of\nthe existence of Michael Angelo.\n\n\n\n\nWinchester\n\n\nThis ancient city on the river Itchen in Hampshire is inseparably bound\nwith William of Wykeham. He it was who rebuilt a great part of the\nmagnificent cathedral now extant, and who founded the great public\nschool of Winchester, at which so many celebrated men have received\ntheir education. These form the great attraction of the city, and rescue\nit from oblivion. It is with sorrow we foresee that the inevitable\nrestoration will take place in the east end of this venerable structure.\nFor many years past the foundations were known to be in an unsafe\ncondition, but recently great alarm was caused by the appearance of\nlarge cracks in the upper masonry and of the bulging in of the groining\nof the crypt. There was no doubt that the foundations were slowly\nsubsiding, and speculation was rife as to the cause. With a view to\nascertaining the state of the foundations, excavations were made. It was\ndiscovered that the original builders had rested them on marshy ground,\nstrengthened with oak piles, which have gradually decayed during the\nlapse of centuries. At the same time the presence of an underground\nstream, thought to be part of the river Itchen, was seen to be bubbling\nup through the gravel, saturating the upper soil of peat.\n\nIn much the same way as the site of St. Paul's Cathedral in London\nprobably was covered, in the first instance, with buildings for pagan\nworship, so we find that the Romans at Winchester erected temples to\nApollo and Concord upon the ground that eventually came to be the\nprecincts of the Cathedral. The presence of a Christian church appears\nto have been in the third century, when the city is said to have become\none of the chief centres of the Christian Britons. This first church,\nhowever, was destroyed during the persecution of Aurelian and was\nrebuilt in 293, to be made a wreck in 495 by the Saxons, who fired it.\nWhat with the religious convulsion of England, which, with the exception\nof Kent, fluctuated with the rise and fall of circumstances chiefly\ncontrolled by the policy of kings either heathen at one time and\nChristian at another, or the deposition and death of a Christian\nmonarch, caused by one more powerful and deeply imbued with heathenism,\nthe See of Winchester does not appear to have come into existence till\nabout the middle of the seventh century. The establishment of its\nbishopric in a way marks the commencement of a new epoch in the English\nChurch.\n\n[Illustration: WINCHESTER\n\nTHE NORTH AISLE]\n\nThe mission of St. Augustine, backed with the royal countenance of\nEthelbert, had, though not completed, done much towards conversion; but\non their death practically the whole of the Christian territory,\nexcepting Kent, relapsed into heathenism, and to such an extent that\nAugustine's successor, Laurentius, was on the point of giving up the\nwhole mission and taking refuge in Gaul. Not until 625 did a mission\nagain venture forth from the Kentish kingdom, and then their tentative\nefforts were rendered abortive by the battle of Hatfield in 633, which\nfor a while seems to have crushed all hope at Rome. But a couple of\nyears later an independent missionary, Birinus, was consecrated in\nItaly, and was sent by the people to make fresh attempts to break down\nthe barriers of heathenism in England. Through his influence Cynegils\nbecame the first Christian king of the West Saxons. To inaugurate his\nconversion the monarch decided to establish a bishopric, and immediately\nbegan to collect materials for building, at his capital of Winchester, a\ncathedral, which was eventually constructed by his son Cenwahl in 646.\nThe Danes in 867 broke up the establishment, and the year following,\nsecular priests were substituted. They remained till 963, when\nEthelwold, by command of King Edgar, expelled them to make room for the\nmonks of the Benedictine Order from Abendon. They enjoyed uninterrupted\npossession, and were richly endowed with royal donations, as the\ndissolution revealed the extent of its revenue. Henry VIII. then\nrefounded it for a bishop, dean, chancellor, twelve prebendaries, and\nother subordinate officers. The Cathedral was first dedicated to St.\nAmphibalus, then jointly to St. Peter and St. Paul, and afterwards to\nSt. Swithin, once bishop here. With Henry VIII.'s regime the title was\naltered to the Holy and undivided Trinity. The church of Cynegils having\nbecome entirely ruined, a new cathedral was commenced in 1073-98 by\nBishop Walkelyn. The two Norman transepts and the low central tower, as\nalso the very early crypt, still exist. The church is a spacious,\nmassive, and splendid cruciform building of Norman architecture with\nsubsequent additions in the Gothic style. The whole of the Norman nave\nwas demolished and re-erected on a far grander scale by William of\nWykeham at the end of the fourteenth century, though not quite completed\ntill after his death. The choir was much restored in the fourteenth\ncentury, whilst it underwent considerable alteration by Bishop Fox\nfrom 1510 to 1528. Here is the tomb of William II. A great feature is\nthe magnificent reredos behind the altar. It extends the full width of\nthe choir, with two processional entrances pierced through its lofty\nwall, and covered with tier upon tier of rich canopied niches. They once\ncontained colossal statues. Behind this reredos there is a second stone\nscreen, which enclosed the small chapel in which stood the magnificent\ngold shrine studded with jewels. It contained the body of St. Swithin,\nand was the gift of King Edgar. The Cathedral, in fact, received at one\ntime and another great treasures of gold and jewels by many of the early\nkings of England. Canute is said to have caused his crown of gold and\ngems to be suspended over the great crucifix above the high altar.\n\n[Illustration: WINCHESTER\n\nFROM ST. CATHERINE'S HILL]\n\nThe magnificent chantry of Cardinal Beaufort is of the Later style of\nEnglish architecture. Bishop Waynfleet's chantry is in the same style,\nand has been kept in excellent repair by the trustees of his foundation\nat Magdalene College. Both chantries contain tombs of their founders.\nThere are several other chapels, all deserving close study of their\nbeautiful architecture. The most notable of the many examples of\nmediaeval recumbent effigies are those of the monuments to Bishops\nEdingdon, Wykeham, Langton, and Fox. The famous authoress, Jane Austen,\nis buried here.\n\n[Illustration: WINCHESTER\n\nFROM THE DEANERY GARDEN]\n\nThe black marble font is an interesting relic of eleventh-century skill.\nThe sides are composed of scenes taken from the life of St. Nicholas.\nThe Cathedral, situated in an open space near the centre of the city\ntowards the south-east, is a marvellous combination of beauty and\ndignity, surpassed, if at all, by few. It is the central feature of\nWinchester, and will always command the greatest admiration. One of\nEngland's great public schools is that founded by William of Wykeham and\nbuilt between 1387 and 1393. The foundation originally consisted of a\nwarden, ten fellows, three chaplains, seventy scholars, and sixteen\nchoristers. The prelate had previously established a school here in\n1373. Thus the oldest of England's great schools was called \"Seinte\nMarie College of Wynchester,\" the charter of which was dated October\n1382. The ancient statutes were revived in 1855, and were still further\ninfluenced by the Public Schools Act of 1868. The establishment has a\nfine chapel, hall, cloister, and other necessary buildings, all in\nexcellent preservation. Another interesting structure is that afforded\nby the hospital of St. Cross, founded in 1136 by Henry de Blois, Bishop\nof Winchester. It lies about a mile out of town. Its general plan can\nbe readily seen by a glance at Mr. Collins' drawing. Henry de Blois\nintended it to provide board and lodging for thirteen poor men, and a\ndaily dinner for one hundred others. It was mostly rebuilt by Cardinal\nBeaufort between 1405 and 1447. The whole has undergone much\nrestoration, which was not entirely happy, though it has certainly kept\nthe buildings in a good state of preservation. On the precincts is also\nthe very stately cruciform chapel, dating roughly from the year 1180.\nThe city of Winchester was at one time proverbial for its splendour,\nwhich was owing to the many kings that preferred to reside within its\nwalls than elsewhere.\n\nMainly owing to its central position on the high roads in the south of\nEngland, Winchester was from early times a town of great importance.\nThis Hampshire city is first ascribed to the Celtic Britons, who settled\nhere in 392 B. c., having emigrated from the coasts of Armorica in Gaul.\nThey remained in undisturbed possession till within a century prior to\nthe Christian era, when they were expelled by the Belgae, who advanced\nfrom their settlements on the southern coasts into the interior. Soon\nafter it had become the capital of the Belgae, the settlement passed into\nRoman occupation. The Coer Gwent (White City) of the Britons became\nthe Venta Belgarum of the Romans. The Roman word Venta eventually became\ntransformed to \"Winte,\" \"Winte-ceaster,\" from which was derived\nWinchester. Under Cedric, about 520 A.D., it became the capital of the\nWest Saxons, and of England in 827 by Egbert. He had obtained the\nsovereignty of all the other kingdoms of the Octarchy, and was crowned\nsole monarch in the Cathedral of Winchester. On this occasion the\nmonarch published an edict commanding all his subjects throughout his\ndominions to be called English. The union of the kingdoms gave that\nimportance to Winchester which it had never had previously, and the fact\nof being not only the capital of Wessex, but the metropolis of England,\ncaused it to leap into great prominence. This state, however, suffered a\nsevere check when London, in the reign of William the Conqueror, began\nto rival it, and was brought almost to the verge of ruin through the\ndissolution of the monasteries by Henry VIII. However, at different\nperiods, Winchester received much unwelcome discomfiture. It was seized\nby the Danes in 871; whilst in 1013 it was ravaged by Sweyn on his path\nof vengeance. In 1100 the body of William Rufus was solemnly interred in\nthe Cathedral. During the parliamentary war the city was taken and\nretaken by Cromwell, and the castle dismantled. Here it was that Charles\nI. commissioned Wren to build a palace in 1683, which was only begun.\nPrevious to this the plague of 1666 greatly reduced the number of\ninhabitants, and it was possibly to help the city recover itself that\nCharles thought of building a palace.\n\n[Illustration: WINCHESTER\n\nST. CROSS]\n\nThough the great regal prosperity has long since departed, the many old\nhouses and the great extent of the city still bear testimony to the once\ngreat importance of Winchester.\n\n\n\n\nWestminster\n\n\nOf the three cathedrals in London, Westminster Abbey may be said to\npossess the greatest charms. Compared to it St. Paul's is a new church,\nwhilst St. Saviour's, Southwark, is little known. It is true that the\nfoundation of St. Paul's is coeval with that of the Abbey, and St.\nSaviour's is an old church, but St. Paul's dates from the Great Fire of\nLondon, and the merit of its architecture is the wonderful genius of\nWren. In more ways than one Westminster is bound up with the history of\nthe great empire. Within her precincts repose the greater number of\nreigning heads who inaugurated their reigns in the sacred interior with\nthe coronation, a ceremony which was last performed when our present\nking came to the throne, though the last monarch to be laid to rest in\nthe venerable pile ceased with the interment of King George II. in 1760.\n\nThe Abbey is also the favourite sepulture for eminent statesmen, poets,\nauthors, and great travellers,--men whose intellects have done far more\nfor the wonderful rise of Great Britain than the average crowned head,\nmen whose ability and personality in many cases were little understood\nduring life, preyed upon, as is often the case, by others who could turn\nit to good pecuniary account. But when death claims them, the nation,\nsensible of their loss, pay homage by interring the remains in the noble\nsepulchre of a cathedral, or perpetuate the memory by an epitaph on the\nwall.\n\nTo wander around the Poets' Corner along the echoing aisles, and stand\nin front of each memorial and read off the few cold lines that seem a\nmockery to regard as a record of some mighty intellect, serve only to\nawaken the imagination and to recall their sad biographies read at one\ntime or another. Were Chaucer, Shakespeare, Spenser, Dryden, Milton,\nOliver Goldsmith, Handel, Thackeray, David Garrick, to mention only a\nfew, ever made peers, much less knights? No; yet many of their\ncontemporaries of inferior intellect enjoyed such worldly distinction.\nTo stand in the presence of the great dead, or in lieu to read their\nepitaphs, casts a great fascination over the mind, and makes one linger\nwithin the precincts of the historic abbey till a rude awakening comes\nfrom the verger that it is closing-time. With a sigh we emerge from the\ngreat mausoleum into the hard, glaring daylight, for a few seconds\ndazed. The fascination still clings to us, and when we get home we are\neager to consult authorities and learn more of the beautiful church at\nWestminster.\n\nThe Abbey, like nearly all our great cathedrals, is the growth of\ncenturies. Looking at it under present-day conditions, we can hardly\nrealise that in the dim past the site was an island of dry sand and\ngravel, bound on the one side by the river Thames, and on the other by\nmarshes watered by the little stream called the Eye. This stream still\nruns, though out of sight, under New Bond Street, the Green Park, and\nBuckingham Palace, to empty itself into the Thames near Vauxhall Bridge,\nand has lent its name to Tyburn (Th' Eye Burn). In the early years of\nthe seventh century, possibly within a few months of his restoring the\nchurch on the site of St. Paul's, which would take us back to about the\nyear 610, Sebert, the King of the East Saxons, decided to build a church\nto the honour of St. Peter on this Isle of Thorns, or, as it is\nsometimes called, Thorney Island. The fact of the vicinity being\nwestward of the neighbouring hill of St. Paul's eventually gave rise to\nthe name of Westminster. According to tradition, on the eve of the new\nchurch being consecrated by Bishop Mellitus, the boatman Edric, whilst\nattending to his nets by the bank of the island, was attracted by a\ngleaming light on the opposite shore. Rowing across, he found a\nvenerable man, who desired to be ferried over. On landing at the island,\nthe mysterious stranger proceeded towards the church, accompanied by a\nhost of angels, who gave him light by candles as he went through the\nforms of church consecration. On his return to the boat, the old man\nbade Edric tell Mellitus that St. Peter had come in person to consecrate\nthe church, and promised him that fish would always come plentifully to\nhis nets, provided he did not work on a Sunday and did not forget to\noffer a tithe of that which he caught to the Abbey of Westminster. On\nthe morrow, Mellitus, hearing the fisherman's story, confirmed by the\nmarks of consecration in the chrism, the crosses on the doors, and the\ndroppings from the candles of the angels, acknowledged the work of St.\nPeter as sufficient consecration, and changed the name from Thorney\nIsland to Westminster, to distinguish it as being to the west of the\ncity of London and to the Church of St. Paul's on the neighbouring hill.\nHowever incredible Edric's story may be it bore fruit, in that till 1382\na tithe of fish was paid by the Thames fisherman to the Abbey, in\nexchange for which the bearer had the privilege to sit, on that day, at\nthe Abbot's table, and to ask for bread and ale from the cellarman. By\ndegrees the neighbourhood became peopled, partly on account of the\nchurch and partly from the erection of a palace close to it, which led\nthe nobility to build houses in the vicinity. The Abbey, becoming\nruinous through the Danes, was rebuilt by Edward the Confessor as the\n\"Collegiate Church of St. Peter at Westminster.\" In fact this monarch is\nusually regarded as the founder of the Church. According to Matthew\nParis, it was the first cruciform church erected in England, the immense\nsize and beauty of which can be seen in the Bayeux tapestry. The\nfoundation was laid somewhere about 1052, and the church was consecrated\nin 1065, a few days prior to the Confessor's death. The monastery was\nfilled with monks from Exeter, whilst Pope Nicholas II. constituted the\nAbbey for the inauguration of the kings of England. Throughout the\nsuccession of reigning heads, Edward V., who died uncrowned, was the\nonly exception.\n\nOf the Confessor's church and monastery the only remains appear to be\nthe Chapel of the Pyx, the lower part of the refectory below the\nWestminster schoolroom, a portion of the dormitory, and the walls of\nthe south cloister.\n\n[Illustration: LONDON\n\nWESTMINSTER ABBEY. THE NORTH TRANSEPT]\n\nThe Abbey, with these few exceptions, was demolished and rebuilt on a\nmagnificent scale by Henry III. between 1220 and 1269. The material\nemployed was first a green stone and afterwards Caen stone. The portions\nthat remain to us from that rebuilding are the Confessor's chapel, the\nside aisles and their chapels, and the choir and transepts, all\nbeautiful examples of the Geometrical Pointed period of architecture.\nHenry's work was continued by his son Edward I., who added the eastern\nportion of the nave after the same style; it was afterwards carried on\nby successive abbots till the erection of the great west window by Abbot\nEstney in 1498. The College Hall, the Abbot's House, Jerusalem Chamber,\nand part of the cloisters had also in the meantime been added by Abbot\nLittlington in 1380. Amongst various improvements Henry VII. built the\nwest end of the nave, his own chapel, the deanery, and portions of the\ncloisters in the Perpendicular style.\n\nThe choir, a fine specimen of Early English with decorations added in\nthe fourteenth century, is where the coronation of English sovereigns\ntakes place, and contains the tombs of Sebert, King of the East Angles,\nAnne of Cleves, and Edmund Crouchback, Earl of Leicester. Henry VII.'s\nchapel displays the architect's skill to perfection, with the wonderful\nfretted work of the roof and the graceful fan-tracery. It contains the\nglorious tomb of Henry VII., the work of the great sculptor Pietro\nTorrigiano. It is composed chiefly of black marble with figures and\npilasters of gilt copper. The figures once wore crowns, but some\nsacrilegious hands have stolen them. In the chapel of Edward the\nConfessor are the shrine of Edward the Confessor in Purbeck marble, the\naltar-tomb of Edward I., the coronation chairs of the English\nsovereigns, besides the stone of Scone, the old coronation seat of the\nScottish kings. The beautiful chapels of St. Benedict, St. Edmund, St.\nNicholas, St. Paul, St. Erasmus, and St. John the Baptist chiefly\ncontain the monuments of ecclesiastics and nobility.\n\nThe entrance generally used is the North Porch, known as Solomon's\nPorch. It was erected in the reign of Richard II., but entirely changed\nits character in the hands of Wren, who appears not to have appreciated\nthe beauties of Gothic architecture. The same architect is said to have\nbuilt the two western towers, though they are sometimes ascribed to his\npupil Hawksmoor. Wren's work upon the north porch was again altered by\nSir G. G. Scott, who introduced the present triple portico. On passing\nunder it we come to the north transept, generally known as the\nStatesmen's Aisle. Here in the same grave lie the Earl of Chatham and\nhis famous son, William Pitt. Close to them are either the graves or\nmonuments of Fox, Castlereagh, Grattan, Palmerston, Peel, the three\nCannings, and Disraeli. Right in the centre of the aisle is a slab\nmarking the resting-place of W. E. Gladstone and his wife (1898 and\n1900), over whom unconsciously the people tread, gradually wearing out\nthe simple words of memorial. The south transept is the Poets' Corner,\ncontaining the memorials from Chaucer to Ruskin. In the nave lie David\nLivingstone (1873), a great missionary and traveller, whose remains were\nreverently brought from Central Africa; Robert Stephenson (1859), the\nfamous engineer; Sir Charles Barry (1860), architect of the Houses of\nParliament; Sir G. G. Scott (1873); George Edmund Street (1881),\narchitect of the Law Courts; Colin Campbell; Lord Clyde (1863), who\nrecaptured Lucknow. We have mentioned these names, not for the sake of\ninvidiousness, but have chosen them at random.\n\nLeading from the cloisters up a flight of stone steps is the Chapter\nHouse. The original structure was built by King Edward in the eleventh\ncentury, and it is noticeable in that it departed from the usual\nBenedictine form. In 1250 it was rebuilt by Henry III., and is an\noctagonal structure, second only to that at Lincoln in size. Here the\nmonks were accustomed once a week to hold their chapters. In ornamental\nstalls opposite the entrance the Abbot and his four chief officers were\nenthroned, whilst the monks ranged themselves along the stone benches\nwhich go around the walls. Criminals were tried, and if found guilty\nwere tied up to the central pillar of Purbeck marble (thirty-five feet\nhigh) and were flogged publicly. The monks, however, were not left in\nundisturbed possession of the Chapter House, for on the separation of\nthe Houses of Lords and Commons in the reign of Edward I., the House of\nCommons held sittings here and continued to do so till 1547. The last\nparliament held here was on the day that Henry VIII. died, when it sat\nto discuss the Act of Attainder passed upon the Duke of Norfolk. At the\ndissolution of the monastery the Chapter House passed to the Crown, and\nseven years afterwards the House of Commons removed to St. Stephen's\nChapel in the Palace of Westminster.\n\nFrom that time the Chapter House was used as a Record Office till the\nremoval of the records in 1865 to the Rolls House.\n\nThere are now two or three glass cases filled with interesting ancient\ndeeds and illuminated parchments relating to the history of the Abbey.\nAdjoining the Abbey is the great public school of Westminster, or St.\nPeter's College as it was called when founded by Queen Elizabeth in 1560\nfor the education of forty boys, denominated the Queen's scholars, and\nprepared for the university. Since then the numbers have greatly\nincreased, and to have been educated there is something to boast of, for\nit is so much sought after that preference is given to the sons of old\nWestminster boys. We might go on for ever, so vast is the\nsubject-matter, but before closing we would draw attention to St.\nMargaret's Church, which stands in front of Solomon's Porch. It was\nfounded by the Confessor, and is the especial church of the House of\nCommons. Curiously enough, it gives scale to the whole Abbey. The Houses\nof Parliament are across the road to the east of the Abbey and on the\nbank of the river Thames. In the Tudor style Sir Charles Barry, R.A.,\nbuilt the New Palace of Westminster, containing the two Houses of\nParliament (1840-1859). It is a stupendous work and a marvellous mass of\nrich architecture. Some authority states that the clock tower is much\nafter the style of the belfry at Bruges. This statement, we would point\nout, is hardly correct. The two no more resemble each other than do\nblack and white.\n\nHow is it possible to describe in a few cold words the wonderful\nbeauties that lie hidden in the architecture of the Abbey, the best\nartistic expressions of its several architects? Impressions created\ndepend upon the temperament of the individual who gazes upon them. All\nacknowledge the great beauty, but each from his own standpoint,\naccording to his tastes and inclinations, which are moulded by his\npursuits in life, or more rarely endowed by that inherent sense of all\nthat is noble and refined he is enabled to sink his own individuality\nfor a moment, and to enjoy the brain-product of a fellow-being. To the\ndull intellect the Abbey appeals as a mystery; to the commercial man it\nrepresents so much outlay of capital, and a proud possession of the\nempire's city; to the poet and artist the memorials must recall the\nwonderful lines of Longfellow:\n\n    \"Lives of great men all remind us\n     We can make our lives sublime\";\n\nto the architect a marvellous insight into the great possibilities\noffered by architecture; to the musician the ambition to create a great\ncomposition that will be worthy to echo throughout the lofty and\nbeautiful aisles, whose music is so unconsciously based upon those laws\nof harmony which should exist in architecture, sculpture, painting, and\nliterature.","title":"Cathedral Cities of England","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":61515}