CHAPTER I.

Produced by Chris Curnow, Chuck Greif and the Online

Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This

file was produced from images generously made available

by The Internet Archive)

[etext transcriber's note. Text between <f> and </f> markup was in

old-english script in the original.]

WESTMINSTER

BY

SIR WALTER BESANT, M. A., F. S. A.

AUTHOR OF “LONDON,” ETC.

[Illustration]

_WITH 130 ILLUSTRATIONS BY WILLIAM PATTEN AND OTHERS_

New York

FREDERICK A. STOKES COMPANY

PUBLISHERS

Copyright, 1894 and 1895, by

Walter Besant.

Copyright, 1895, by

Frederick B. Stokes Company.

_All rights reserved._

TO

MRS. WILLIAM PATTEN

IN MEMORY OF HER

MANY WANDERINGS IN WESTMINSTER WITH HER HUSBAND

WHILE HE WAS ADORNING THESE PAGES

AND IN MEMORY OF

A STAY IN ENGLAND FAR TOO SHORT FOR HER MANY FRIENDS

THIS VOLUME IS DEDICATED

BY ONE OF THOSE FRIENDS

THE AUTHOR

PREFACE.

These papers in their original form first appeared in the _Pall Mall

Magazine_. Additions have been made in some of the chapters, especially

in the three chapters entitled “The Abbey.” As in the book entitled

“London,” of which this is the successor, I do not pretend to offer a

History of Westminster. The story of the Abbey Buildings; of the Great

Functions held in the Abbey; of the Monuments in the Abbey; may be found

in the pages of Stanley, Loftie, Dart, and Widmore. The History of the

Houses of Parliament belongs to the history of the country, not that of

Westminster. It has been my endeavor, in these pages, (1) to show,

contrary to received opinion, that the Isle of Bramble was a busy place

of trade long before London existed at all. (2) To restore the vanished

Palaces of Westminster and Whitehall. (3) To portray the life of the

Abbey, with its Services, its Rule, its Anchorites, and its Sanctuary.

(4) To show the connection of Westminster with the first of English

printers. And, lastly, to present the place as a town and borough, with

its streets and its people.

I hope that, with those who have made my “London” a companion, my

“Westminster” may also be so fortunate as to find equal favor.

I must not omit my acknowledgments to the Editors of the _Pall Mall

Magazine_ for the costly manner in which they presented these pages.

Nor must I forget to record my sense of the pains and thoroughness

brought to the work of its illustration by my friend Mr. William Patten;

nor my sense of the assistance rendered me by Mr. Loftie for many

consultations and suggestions; nor my thanks to the Benedictine Fathers

of Downside, near Bath, who kindly received Mr. Patten and myself as

their guests and showed us what a modern Benedictine House really means,

and how the House at Westminster may have been during its five centuries

of existence, even such as their own, a Home of Religion and Learning.

UNITED UNIVERSITY CLUB, _September, 1895_.

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER PAGE

I. THE BEGINNINGS, 1

II. THE KING’S PALACE OF WESTMINSTER, 38

III. THE ABBEY--I., 98

IV. THE ABBEY--II., 145

V. THE ABBEY--III., 165

VI. SANCTUARY, 173

VII. AT THE SIGN OF THE RED PALE, 211

VIII. THE VANISHED PALACE, 248

IX. THE CITY, 291

X. THE STREETS AND THE PEOPLE, 325

APPENDIX:

THE COURT OF CHARLES II., 381

INDEX, 395

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.

PAGE

ARMS OF THE ABBEY OF WESTMINSTER, _Vignette_

WESTMINSTER, 1

SOME COATS OF ARMS, 5

SARCOPHAGUS OF VALERIUS AMANDINUS, 9

MAP SHOWING THE POSITION OF THE ABBEY, 13

SHIELD OF CELTIC WORK, FOUND IN THE THAMES, 1857, 17

A ROMAN ROAD, 19

BRITISH HELMET, FOUND IN THE THAMES, 1868, 21

TOMB OF KING SEBERT, WESTMINSTER ABBEY, 25

THE FUNERAL PROCESSION OF KING EDWARD THE CONFESSOR

TO WESTMINSTER ABBEY, 28, 29

_From the Bayeux Tapestry._

EAST END OF THE PRINCE’S CHAMBER, 41

SOUTH SIDE OF THE PRINCE’S CHAMBER, 43

A BIT OF THE OLD WALL FROM BLACK DOG ALLEY, 47

PLAN OF WESTMINSTER PALACE IN 1834, 48

COLLEGIATE SEAL OF ST. STEPHEN’S, 50

INTERIOR OF THE CRYPT CALLED THE “POWDER PLOT

CELLAR,” BENEATH THE OLD PALACE OF WESTMINSTER,

LOOKING TOWARD CHARING CROSS. TAKEN DOWN IN

JUNE, 1883, 51

WEST END OF THE PAINTED CHAMBER AS IT APPEARED AFTER

THE FIRE OF 1834, 55

CURIOUS NEWEL STAIRCASE AT THE SOUTHEAST ANGLE OF

PAINTED CHAMBER, 57

GUY FAWKES’ DOOR, 58

VAULT UNDER THE PAINTED CHAMBER, 59

EAST FRONT OF ST. STEPHEN’S CHAPEL AS IT APPEARED

AFTER THE FIRE OF 1834, 63

PASSAGE FROM ST. STEPHEN’S CHAPEL TO THE CLOISTER, 65

CLOISTER COURT AS IT APPEARED AFTER THE FIRE, 67

THE STAR CHAMBER. DEMOLISHED IN 1834, 71

NORTH PORCH, 83

LAURENTIUS, 98

ARMS OF THE ABBEY OF WESTMINSTER, 99

PLAN OF THE BENEDICTINE ABBEY OF WESTMINSTER, 101

HABIT OF A NOVICE OF THE ORDER OF ST. BENEDICT, 104

ENTRANCE TO CHAPTER HOUSE, 107

WALL OF THE REFECTORY, FROM ASHBURNHAM HOUSE, 109

THE ABBOT’S DINING HALL AT WESTMINSTER; NOW USED AS

THE DINING ROOM OF THE SCHOOL, 111

TOWEL AUMBRIES IN THE SOUTH WALK, 113

CHAPEL OF THE PYX, 115

DOOR TO THE CHAPEL OF EDWARD THE CONFESSOR; NOW

PYX OFFICE, 119

TREASURE CHEST IN THE CHAPEL OF PYX, USED IN THE

TRANSPORTATION OF THE KING’S EXCHEQUER, 123

A PILLAR NOW STANDING IN MR. THYNNE’S GARDEN AND

FORMING PART OF THE RUINED CHAPEL OF ST. CATHERINE, 126

JERUSALEM CHAMBER. ABBOT’S RESIDENCE, WESTMINSTER, 127

ABBOT’S PEW (SHOWING THE MEDALLION OF CONGREVE

BELOW), 129

SQUARE WINDOW (NOW WALLED UP) USED BY THE ABBOT

TO MAINTAIN SURVEILLANCE OF THE MONKS AT NIGHT, 131

MONK OF THE ORDER OF ST. BENEDICT, 133

ABBOT ISLIP’S CHAPEL, 137

THE WESTMINSTER SCHOOLROOM, FORMERLY THE ABBOT’S

DORMITORY, 140

TOMBS OF VITALIS, GERASMUS DE BLOIS, AND CRISPINUS,

ABBOTS OF WESTMINSTER, 142

TALLY FOR 6_s._ 8_d._ ISSUED BY TREASURER TO KING EDWARD

I. TO THE SHERIFF OF LINCOLNSHIRE ABOUT 1290, 143

THE KING STREET GATE, WESTMINSTER, DEMOLISHED 1723, 175

SOUTHWEST VIEW OF THE ENTRANCE TO THE LITTLE SANCTUARY

FROM KING STREET, 177

VIEW OF LITTLE SANCTUARY FROM THE WEST, AS IT APPEARED

ABOUT A. D. 1800, 179

THE SANCTUARY. PULLED DOWN IN 1775, 181

THE BOAR’S HEAD INN, KING STREET, 183

THE COCK, TOTHILL STREET, 187

ROOM IN THE KING’S ARMS, TOTHILL STREET, 189

THE GATE HOUSE, 192

THE HOLBEIN GATE, 199

BROKEN CROSS WITHIN THE ABBEY PRECINCTS, 201

PICKERING CUP, BELONGING TO THE BURGESSES OF WESTMINSTER, 204

THE SOUTHERN EXTREMITY OF THIEVING LANE, A. D. 1800, 205

BUTTRESSES OF KING HENRY VII.’S CHAPEL, 209

CAXTON’S DEVICE, 212

SUPPOSED PORTRAIT OF CAXTON. FROM BLADES’ “PENTATEUCH

OF PRINTING,” 213

THE “DOMUS ANGLORUM,” BRUGES, 223

CAXTON’S HOUSE IN THE ALMONRY, WESTMINSTER, 231

FACSIMILE OF THE “RECUYELL OF THE HISTORYES OF

TROIE,” 235

FACSIMILE OF THE “GAME AND PLAYE OF THE CHESSE,” 236

FACSIMILE OF THE “DICTES OR SAYINGS OF THE PHILOSOPHERS,” 241

CAXTON’S MEMORIAL WINDOW IN ST. MARGARET’S, WESTMINSTER, 243

FACSIMILE OF CAXTON’S HANDWRITING, FROM THE PEPYSIAN

LIBRARY, 245

INIGO JONES, 1614, 251

HOLBEIN’S GATE AND THE BANQUETING HALL, 255

_From the Original Picture by Samuel Scott._

THE WATERSIDE ELEVATION OF INIGO JONES’ PALACE, 260, 261

ST. JAMES’S PALACE, 263

KENSINGTON PALACE, 266

BUCKINGHAM PALACE, 267

THE HORSE GUARDS, 268

OLD SCOTLAND YARD, 271

ROSAMOND’S POND, ST. JAMES’S PARK, 275

THE WATER GATE, NEW PALACE YARD, 278

A REDUCED COPY OF FISHER’S GROUND PLAN OF THE ROYAL

PALACE OF WHITEHALL, TAKEN IN THE REIGN OF

CHARLES II., 1680, 280

THE MACE, 291

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS AND WESTMINSTER HALL FROM

THE RIVER IN 1798, 293

_From a Contemporary Drawing._

OAK DOORWAY DISCOVERED IN THE SPEAKER’S DINING ROOM

AFTER THE FIRE, 295

THE HOUSE OF LORDS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE CENTURY, 297

THE HOUSE OF COMMONS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE CENTURY, 299

THE ENTRANCE TO SPEAKER’S YARD AS IT APPEARED BEFORE

THE FIRE, 301

“THEMISTOCLES” (LORD HOOD), FROM “THE RIVAL CANDIDATES,” 304

“DEMOSTHENES” (CHARLES JAMES FOX), FROM “THE RIVAL

CANDIDATES,” 305

“JUDAS ISCARIOT” (SIR CECIL WRAY), FROM “THE RIVAL

CANDIDATES,” 307

“THE WESTMINSTER MENDICANT” (SIR CECIL WRAY), 309

“PROCESSION TO THE HUSTINGS AFTER A SUCCESSFUL

CANVASS,” 315

_After a Print_, A.D. 1784.

THE SPEAKER’S COURT AS IT APPEARED BEFORE THE FIRE, 319

GRIFFINS FROM THE ROOF OF HENRY VII.’S CHAPEL, 326

GRIFFINS FROM THE ROOF OF HENRY VII.’S CHAPEL, 329

GRIFFIN FROM THE ROOF OF HENRY VII.’S CHAPEL, 330

ROOM IN THE KING’S ARMS, TOTHILL STREET, WESTMINSTER, 333

GRIFFINS FROM THE ROOF OF HENRY VII.’S CHAPEL, 337

WOOD CARVING AND ORIGINAL SIGN OF THE COCK INN,

TOTHILL STREET, WESTMINSTER, 339

ORIGINAL SIGN, COCK INN, 341

MILTON’S HOUSE IN PETTY FRANCE, 343

EMANUEL HOSPITAL, LATELY DEMOLISHED, 345

THE GRILLE, EMANUEL HOSPITAL, 347

GREY COAT HOSPITAL: THE ENTRANCE, 351

GREY COAT BOY, } 353

GREY COAT GIRL,}

_From the Statue in front of the Hospital._

GREY COAT HOSPITAL FROM THE GARDEN, 354

CARVING FROM THE DOORWAY OF EMANUEL HOSPITAL, 355

MEDAL WORN BY THE CAPTAIN OF THE GREY COAT BOYS, 356

BLUE COAT SCHOOL, CAXTON STREET, 357

BLUE COAT SCHOOL, FROM THE GARDEN, 361

LOVING CUP PRESENTED TO THE GUARDIANS OF ST. MARGARET’S,

WESTMINSTER, BY SAMUEL PIERSON, IN 1764, 365

OLD PYE STREET AND THE RAGGED SCHOOL, 367

BLACK DOG ALLEY, WESTMINSTER, 369

THE WESTMINSTER SNUFFBOX, 373

THE WESTMINSTER TOBACCO BOX, 379

[Illustration: WESTMINSTER.]

CHAPTER I.

THE BEGINNINGS.

He who considers the history of Westminster presently observes with

surprise that he is reading about a city which has no citizens. In this

respect Westminster is alone among cities and towns of the

English-speaking race; she has had no citizens. Residents she has

had,--tenants, lodgers, subjects, sojourners within her boundaries,--but

no citizens. The sister city within sight, and almost within hearing,

can show an unequaled roll of civic worthies, animated from the

beginning by an unparalleled tenacity of purpose, clearly seeing and

understanding what they wanted, and why, and how they could obtain their

desire. This knowledge had been handed down from father to son.

Freedom, self-government, corporations, guilds, brotherhoods,

privileges, safety, and order--all have been achieved and assured by

means of this tenacity and this clear understanding of what was wanted.

Westminster has never possessed any of these things. For the City of

London these achievements were rendered possible by the existence of one

single institution: the Folk’s Mote--the Parliament of the People.

Westminster never possessed that institution. The history of London is a

long and dramatic panorama, full of _tableaux_, animated scenes,

dramatic episodes, tragedies, and victories. In every generation there

stands out one great citizen, strong and clear-eyed, whom the people

follow: he is a picturesque figure, lifted high above the roaring,

turbulent, surging crowd, whom he alone can govern. In Westminster there

is no such citizen, and there is no such crowd. Only once in its

history, until the eighteenth century, do we light upon the Westminster

folk. Perhaps there have been, here and there, among them some mute

inglorious Whittington--some unknown Gresham. Alas! there was no Folk’s

Mote,--without a Folk’s Mote nothing could be done,--and so their

possible leaders sank into the grave in silence and oblivion. Why was

there no Folk’s Mote? Because the land on which Westminster stood, the

land all around, north, west, south,--how broad a domain we shall

presently discover,--belonged to the Church, and was ruled by the Abbot.

Where the Abbot was king there was no room for the rule of the people.

Nor could there be any demand in Westminster for free institutions,

because there were no trades and no industries. A wool staple there was,

certainly, which fluctuated in importance, but was never to be compared

with any of the great city trades. And Westminster was not a port; she

had no quays or warehouses: neither exports nor imports--save only the

wool--passed through her hands. There was no necessity at any time for

the people who might at that time be her tenants to demand corporate

action. Westminster has never attracted or invited immigrants or

settlers.

Again, a considerable portion of those who lived in Westminster were

criminals or debtors taking advantage of sanctuary. The privilege of

sanctuary plays an important part in the history of Westminster. It is

not, however, from sanctuary birds that one would expect a desire for

order and free institutions. Better the rule of the Abbot with safety,

than freedom of government and the certainty of gallows and

whipping-post therewith.

We may consider that for five hundred years the Court and the Church,

the Palace and the Abbey, divided between them the whole of Thorney

Island. Until, therefore, the swamps were drained, there was no

place--or a very narrow place--for houses and inhabitants on the south

and west. Toward the north, between New Palace Yard and Charing Cross,

houses began and grew, but quite slowly. Even so recently as the year

1755 the parish of St. Margaret’s had extended westward no farther than

to include the streets called Pye Street, Orchard Street, Tothill

Street, and Petty France, now York Street. King Street was the main

street connecting Westminster with London by way of Charing Cross; and

east and west of King Street, at the Westminster or southern end, was a

network of narrow streets, courts, and slums, a few of which still exist

to show what Westminster of the Tudors and the Stuarts used to be.

After the Dissolution--though the Dean succeeded the Abbot--there was

some concession in the direction of popular government. The Dean still

continued to be the over-lord. He appointed a High Sheriff, who in his

turn appointed a Deputy; the city was divided into wards, in imitation

of London, with a burgess to represent each ward. The court thus formed

possessed considerable powers of police; but neither in authority, nor

in power, nor in dignity, could such a chamber be compared with the

Court of Aldermen of London. Edward VI. granted two members of

Parliament to the City of Westminster.

Another reason which hindered the advance of the city in the last

century was that the Dean and Chapter would neither sell their lands nor

grant long leases. Therefore no one would build good houses, and the

vicinity of the Abbey remained covered with mean tenements and populated

by the scum and refuse.

For these reasons Westminster has had residents of all conditions--from

king and noble to criminal and debtor. But it has had no citizens, no

corporate life, no united action, no purpose. The City of London is a

living whole: one would call its history the life of a man--the progress

of a soul; the multitudinous crowd of separate lives rolls together and

forms but one as the corporation grows greater, stronger, more free,

with every century. But Westminster is an inert, lifeless form. Round

the stately Abbey, below the noble halls, the people lie like sheep--but

sheep without a leader. They have no voice; if they suffer, they have no

cry; they have no aims; they have no ambition; without crafts, trades,

mysteries, enterprise, distinctions, posts of honor, times of danger,

liberties to defend, privileges to maintain, there may be thousands of

men living in a collection of houses, but they are not citizens. In the

pages that follow, therefore, we shall have little to do with the people

of Westminster.

[Illustration]

The following is Bardwell’s account of the original site of Westminster

(“Westminster Improvements,” p. 8):

“Thorney Island is about 470 yards long and 370 yards broad, washed on

the east side by the Thames, on the south by a rivulet running down

College-street, on the north by another stream wending its way to the

Thames down Gardener’s-lane: this and the College-street rivulet were

joined by a moat called Longditch, forming the western boundary of

Thorney Island, along the present line of Prince’s and De la Hay

streets. This Island was the Abbey and Palace precinct, which, in

addition to the water surrounding it, was further defended by lofty

stone walls (part of which still remain in the Abbey gardens): in these

walls were four noble gates, one in King-street, one near New

Palace-yard (the foundations of which I observed in this month, Dec.,

1838, in excavating for a new sewer), one opening into Tothill, or as it

was called by William the First Touthull-street, and one at the mill by

College-street. The precinct was entered by a bridge, erected by the

Empress Maud, at the end of Gardener’s-lane in King-street, and by

another bridge, still existing, though deep below the present pavement,

at the east end of College-street.”

The beginning of city and abbey is an oft-told tale, but, as I shall try

to show, a tale never truly and properly told. Antiquaries, or rather

historians who have to depend on antiquaries, are apt to follow each

other blindly. Thus, we are informed by everyone who has treated of this

beginning, that the place on which Westminster Abbey stands was chosen

deliberately as a fitting place for a monastic foundation, because of

its seclusion, silence, and remoteness. “This spot,” writes the most

illustrious among all the historians of the Abbey, when he has described

the position of Thorney, “thus intrenched, marsh within marsh, forest

within forest, was indeed _locus terribilis_--the terrible place, as it

was called, in the first notices of its existence; yet, even thus early,

it presented several points of attraction to the founder of whatever was

the original building which was to redeem it from the wilderness. It had

the advantages of a Thebaid as contrasted with the stir and tumult of

the neighboring forest of London.”[1] And the same theory is adopted by

Freeman, when he speaks of the site as “so near to the great city, and

yet removed from its immediate throng and turmoil.” There is no doubt as

to the meaning of both writers. The idea in their minds was of a place

deliberately chosen by the founders of the first abbey, and adopted by

Edward the Confessor as a wild, deserted, secluded place, difficult of

access, remote from the ways of men, where in silence and peace the holy

men might work and meditate. Let us examine into this assumption. The

result, I venture to think, will upset many cherished opinions.

In the examination of ancient sites there are five principal things to

ascertain before any conclusion is attempted--that is to say, before we

attempt to restore the place as it was, or to identify it. The method

which I began to learn twenty years ago, while following day by day

Major Conder’s Survey of Palestine, and studying day by day his plans

and drawings, his arguments and identifications, of a land which is one

great field of ruins, I propose to apply to Thorney Island and the site

of Westminster Abbey. These five points are: (1) the evidence of

situation; (2) the evidence of excavation; (3) the evidence of ancient

monuments, ruins, foundations, fragments; (4) the evidence of tradition;

and (5) the evidence of history.

Let us take these several points in order.

1. _Evidence of Situation._

The river Thames, which narrowed at London Bridge, began to widen out

west of the mouth of the stream called the Fleet. There was a cliff or

rising bank along the Strand, which confined the stream on its north

bank as far as Charing. At this village the course of the river turned

south, and, after half a mile, southwest. Here it formerly broadened

into a vast marsh or lagoon, quite shallow to east and west, in parts

only covered with water at high tide, and in parts rising above even the

highest tides. This great marsh covered all the land known later as St.

James’s Park, Tothill Fields, the Five Fields, Victoria, Earl’s Court,

and part of Chelsea: on the other bank the marsh extended from

Rotherhithe over Bermondsey, Southwark, Lambeth, Vauxhall, and part of

Battersea. The places which here and there rose above the reach of flood

were called islands; Bermond’s-ea--the Isle of Bermond; Chels-ea--the

Isle of Shingle (Chesil); Thorn-ea--the Isle of Bramble; Batters-ea--the

Isle of Peter. You may find little islands (eyots--aits) just like these

higher up the river, such as Monkey Island, Eelpie Island, and so many

others. No doubt, in very remote times, these little river islets were

secluded places indeed; if any people lived upon them, they lived like

the lake dwellers of Glastonbury, each family in its cottage planted

down in the sedge and mud of the foreshore, resting on piles, with its

floor of hard clay pressed down on timber, its walls of clay and wattle,

its roof of rushes, its boat floating before the door. They trapped elk

and deer and boar, they shot the wild fowl with their slings, they

caught the salmon that swarmed in the river. Thorney, then, the site of

the future abbey, the Isle of Bramble, was an islet entirely surrounded

by the waters of a broad and shallow river. It was so broad that the

backwater extended as far as the present site of Buckingham Palace. It

was so shallow that at low tide a man could wade across from the rising

ground of the west to the island, and from the island to the opposite

shore, where is now St. Thomas’s Hospital.

This is the evidence of the natural situation, and so far all would be

agreed.

2. _Evidence of Excavation._

[Illustration: SARCOPHAGUS OF VALERIUS AMANDINUS.]

The kindly earth covers up and preserves many precious

secrets,--“underground,” says Rabelais, “are all great treasures and

wonderful things,”--to be revealed at some fitting time, when men’s

minds shall be prepared to receive them. The earth preserves, for

instance, the history of the ancient world--witness the revelations in

our own time of the cuneiform tablets and the vast extension of the

historic age: the arts of the ancient world, and their houses, and their

manner of life--witness the revelations of Pompeii. Applied to Thorney,

excavation has shown--what we certainly never could have known

otherwise--that here, of all places in the world, in this little

secluded islet in the midst of marshes (the most unlikely spot, one

would think, in the whole of Britannia), there was a Roman station, and

one of considerable importance. The first hint of this fact was

suggested when there was dug up in the North Green of the Abbey, in the

year 1869, a fine Roman sarcophagus inscribed with the name of Valerius

Amandinus. The lid has a cross upon it, from which it has been

conjectured that the sarcophagus was used twice, its second occupant

having been a Christian. What reason, however, is there for supposing

that Valerius Amandinus himself was not a Christian?--for, at least a

century before the withdrawing of the Legions, Roman Britain was wholly

Christian. For more than two centuries Christians had been numerous.

During the fourth century the country was covered with monastic

foundations for monks and nuns. Christian or not, there stands the

sarcophagus of Valerius Amandinus, for all the world to see, at the

entrance of the Chapter-house; and why a Roman cemetery should be

established in Thorney no one could guess. But some ten years ago there

was a second discovery. In digging a grave under the pavement of the

nave, there was found a mosaic floor in very fair condition. This must

have belonged to a Roman villa. But, if one villa, why not more? The

question has been settled by the discovery, of late years, wherever the

ground on Thorney has been opened, of Roman bricks and fragments of

Roman buildings. It is now impossible to doubt the existence here of a

Roman station.

That is, so far, the (unfinished) evidence of excavation.

But why did the Romans place a station, an important station, on this

bit of a bramble-covered eyot, with a shallow river in front and a

marshy backwater behind? What strategic importance could be attached to

such a spot? The next branch of evidence will serve to answer the

question.

3. _Evidence of Ancient Monuments._

There are here none of those shapeless mounds of ancient ruins which are

found elsewhere--as in Egypt. Nor are there any foundations above

ground, as at Silchester. Yet there is one fact of capital importance,

which not only serves to explain why the Romans established a station on

Thorney, but also illustrates, as we shall see, many other facts in the

history of the island. It is this:

The river from Thorney to the opposite shore, as we have seen, was

fordable at low tide. The marsh, from Thorney to the rising ground on

the west, was fordable probably at all tides--certainly at low tide.

This ford, the only one across the river for many miles up stream,

belonged from time immemorial to the highway, a road or beaten track

leading from the north of England to the south, and “tapping” the

midland country on the way. The road which the Saxons called Watling

Street, when it reached this neighborhood, ran straight down Park Lane,

or Tyburn Lane, as it was formerly called, to the edge of the marsh.

There it ended abruptly. If you will draw this line on any map, you will

find that it ended at the western extremity of St. James’s Park, just

about Buckingham Palace, where the marsh began. At this point the

traveler plunged into the shallow waters, and guided by stakes,

waded--at low tide there were, haply, stepping-stones--across the swamp

to Thorney. Here, if the tide served, he again trusted himself to the

guidance of stakes; and so, breast high, it may be, waded through the

river till he reached the opposite shore, where another high road,

“Dover Street,” which also broke off abruptly at this point, awaited

him. Later on, when London Bridge was built, Watling Street was diverted

at the spot where now stands the Marble Arch, was carried along the

present Oxford Street and Holborn, and passed through the City to the

Bridge. This alternative route probably took away a great deal of the

traffic: but for those who had business in the south or the southwest,

or for those who were bound for the port of Dover, the ford was still

preferred as the shorter way. A bridge was convenient, but the traveler

of the fourth century was accustomed to a ford. Those who had no

business in London were not likely to be turned out of their way by

another ford, after they had crossed so many.

The highroad between the north and south, the great highway into which

were poured streams from all the other ways, passed through this double

ford, and over the Isle of Bramble. This was not a highway passing

through a wild and savage country; on the contrary, Britain was a

country, in the two latter centuries of the Roman occupation, thickly

populated, covered with great cities and busy towns. No one who has

stood within the walls of Silchester, and has marked the foundations of

its great hall, larger than Westminster Abbey, the remains of its

corridors and courts and shops, the indications of wealth and luxury

furnished by its villas, the extent of its walls, can fail to understand

that the vanished civilization of Roman Britain was very far superior to

anything that followed for a good deal more than a thousand years. It

was more artistic, more luxurious, than the Saxon or the Norman life.

But it was essentially Roman. Civilized Rome could not be understood by

Western Europe until the fifteenth century. Roman Britain is only

beginning to

[Illustration]

be understood by ourselves. We have not as yet realized how much was

swept away and lost when, after two centuries of fighting, the Britons

were driven to their mountains, with the loss of the old arts and

learning. All over the country were the great houses, the stately

villas, of a rich, cultured, and artistic class; all over the country

were rich cities, filled with people who desired, and had, all the

things that made life tolerable in Rome herself. The condition of

Bordeaux in the fourth century, her schools, her professors, her poets,

her orators, her lawyers, may suggest the condition of London, and in a

less degree that of many smaller cities.

If we bear these things in mind, I think we shall understand that the

roads must have been everywhere crowded and thronged by the long

processions of packhorses and mules engaged in supplying the various

wants of this people, bringing food supplies to the cities, wines and

foreign luxuries to the unwarlike people who were doomed before long to

fall before the ruder and stronger folk of the Frisian speech. For our

purpose it is sufficient to note that it was a country where the wants

of the better sort created, by themselves, a vast trade; where, in

addition, the exports were large and valuable; and where the traffic of

the highways was very great and never-ending.

In other words, this wild and desolate spot, chosen, we are told, as a

fitting site for a monastery because of its remoteness and its

seclusion, was, long before a monastery was built here, the scene of a

continual procession of those who journeyed south and those who

journeyed north. It was a halting-and resting-place for a stream of

travelers who never stopped all the year around. By way of Thorney

passed the merchants, with their hides bestowed upon their packhorses,

going to embark them at Dover: London had not yet gathered in all the

trade of the country. By way of Thorney they drove the long strings of

slaves to be sold in Gaul. By way of Thorney passed the legions on their

way north; craftsmen, traders, mimes, actors, musicians, dancers,

jugglers, on their way to the towns of Glevum, Corinium, Eboracum, and

the rest. Always, day after day, even night after night, there was the

clamor of those who came and those who went: such a clamor as used to

belong, for instance, to the courtyard of an old-fashioned inn, in and

out of which there lumbered the loaded wagon, grinding heavily over the

stones; the stage-coach, the post-chaise, the merchant’s rider on his

nag--all with noise. The Isle of Bramble was like that courtyard:

outside the Abbey it was a great inn, a halting-place, a bustling,

noisy, frequented place; the center, before London, the mart of

Britannia; no “Thebaid” at all; no quiet, secluded, desolate place, but

the center of the traffic of the whole island. And it remained a busy

place long after London Bridge was built, long after the Port of London

had swallowed up all the other ports in the country. When the river, by

means of embankments, was forced into narrower and deeper channels, the

ford disappeared.

By this time the backwater and the marsh had been dried, and the

traveler could walk dry-shod from the end of Watling Street to the Isle

of Bramble. Perhaps, it may be objected, solitude descended upon the

island, and the silence of desertion, with the deepening of the channel.

Not so; for now another highway had been created--the highway up the

river. The growth of London created the necessity for this

[Illustration: SHIELD OF CELTIC WORK, FOUND IN THE THAMES, 1857.]

highway. From the western country all the exports came down the river to

the Port of London: from the Port of London all the import trade went up

the river to the west of England. At the flow of the tide the deeply

laden barges, like our own, but narrower, went up the river; at the ebb

they went down. Going up, the barges carried spices, wines, silks,

glass, candles, lamps, hangings, pictures, statuary, books, church

furniture, and all the foreign luxuries that were now necessary in the

British city; going down they were laden with pelts and wool. The

slaves, which formed so large a part of British export, not only at this

period, but later, under the Saxons, were marched along the highway.

There were also the barges laden with fruit, vegetables, grain, poultry,

wild birds, carcasses, for that wide London mouth which continually

devoured and daily called for more. And there were the fishermen casting

their nets for the salmon in the season, and for the other fish with

which the river, its waters clean and wholesome, teemed all the year

round. Full and various was the life upon the river. Always there was

traffic, always movement, always activity, and always noise--much noise.

A great noise: where boatmen are there is always noise; they exchange

the joke Fescennine, they laugh, they quarrel, they fight, they sing. To

the Benedictine monks the river presented the spectacle of a procession

as noisy and as animated as that which in the old days had made a

stepping-stone of the island from one ford to the other. In short, there

was never any time, from the beginning of the Roman occupation to the

present day, when the Isle of Bramble was a quiet, secluded, desolate

spot. Always crowded, bustling, and noisy. Why should not a Benedictine

monastery be planted in the midst of the people? The Rule of Benedict

was not the Rule of Robert of Citeaux. Two hundred years later, when the

Priory of the Holy Trinity was founded, did they place the monastery in

the wilds of Sheppey, or in the marshes of the Isle of Dogs, or on

lonely Canvey? Not at all: they placed it within London Wall--at

Aldgate, the busiest place in the City. And the Franciscans, were they

exiled to some remote quarter? Not at all: they were established within

the walls. So were Austin Friars and the Crutched Friars; while White

Friars and Black Friars were close to the City wall. And even the

austere Carthusians were within hearing of the horse fairs, the races,

the tournaments, and the sports of the citizens upon the field called

Smooth. Nor does it ever appear that the monks were dissatisfied with

their position, and craved for solitude; they preferred the din and roar

of the noisiest city in the habitable world.

[Illustration: A ROMAN ROAD.]

So that, by the evidence of natural situation, by the evidence of

excavation, and by the evidence of ancient monuments, we understand that

the Isle of Bramble was a Roman station, the point where the highway of

the north met the highway of the south--the very heart of Britannia, the

center of all internal communication, the place by which, until London

gathered all into her lap, the whole traffic of the island must pass.

Before London existed, Thorney had become a place of the greatest

importance; long after London had become a rich and busy port, Thorney,

the stepping-stone in the middle of the ford, continued its old

importance and its activity. Never a place of trade, but always a place

of passing traffic, its population was great, but as ephemeral as the

May-fly: its people came, rested a night, a day, an hour, and were gone

again.

4. We have next the _Evidence of Tradition_.

According to this authority we learn that the first Christian king was

one Lucius, who in the year 178 addressed a letter to the then Pope,

Eleutherius, begging for missionaries to instruct his people and himself

in the Christian faith. The Pope sent two priests named Ffagan and

Dyfan, who converted the whole island. Bede tells this story; the old

Welsh chroniclers also tell it, giving the British name of the king,

Lleurwg ap Coel ap Cyllin. He it was who erected a church on the Isle of

Bramble, in place of a temple of Apollo formerly standing there. We

remember also that St. Paul’s was said to have been built on the site of

a temple of Diana.

This church continued in prosperity until the arrival, two hundred and

fifty years later, of the murderous Saxons. First, news came up the

river that the invader was on the Isle of Rum, which we call Thanet;

next, that he held the river; that he had overrun Essex; that he had

overrun Kent. And then the procession of merchandise stopped suddenly.

The ports of Kent were in the hands of the enemy. There was no more

traffic on Watling Street. The travelers grew fewer daily; till one day

a troop of wild Saxons came across the ford, surprised the priests and

the fisher-folk who remained, and left the island as desolate and silent

as could be desired for the meditation of holy men. This done, the

Saxons went on their way. They overran the midland country; they drove

the Britons back--still farther back, till they reached the mountains.

No more news came to Thorney, for, though the ford continued, the

island, like so many of the Roman stations, remained a waste Chester.

In fullness of time the Saxon king himself settled down, became a man of

peace, obeyed the order of

[Illustration: BRITISH HELMET, FOUND IN THE THAMES, 1868.]

the convert king to be baptised and to enter the Christian faith; and

when King Sebert had been persuaded to build a church to St. Paul on the

highest ground of London, he was further convinced that it was his duty

to restore the ruined church of St. Peter on the Isle of Thorney beside

the ford. Scandal indeed would it be, were the throng that daily passed

through the ford and over the island to see, in a Christian country, the

neglected ruins of this Christian church. Accordingly the builders soon

set to work, and before long the church rose tall and stately. The

Miracle of the Hallowing, often told, may be repeated here. On the eve

of the day fixed by the Bishop of London for the hallowing and

dedication of the new St. Peter’s, one Edric, a fisherman, who lived in

Thorney, was awakened by a loud voice calling him by name. It was

midnight. He rose and went forth. The voice called him again, from the

opposite side of the river, which is now Lambeth, bidding him put out

his boat to ferry a man across the river. He obeyed. He found on the

shore a venerable person whose face and habilaments he knew not. The

stranger bore in his hands certain vessels which Edric knew could only

be intended for church purposes. However, he said nothing, but received

this mysterious visitor into his boat and rowed him across the river.

Arrived in Thorney, the stranger directed his steps to the church, and

entered the portal. Straightway--lo! a marvel!--the church was lit up as

by a thousand wax tapers, and voices arose chanting psalms--sweet voices

such as no man, save this rude fisherman, had ever heard before. He

stood and listened. The voices, he perceived, could be none other than

those of angels come down from heaven itself to sing the first service

in the new church. Then the voices fell, and he heard one voice, loud

and solemn; and then the heavenly choir uplifted their voices again.

Presently all was still; the service was over, the lights went out as

suddenly as they had appeared, and the stranger came forth.

“Know, O Edric,” he said, while the fisherman’s heart glowed within him,

“know that I am Peter. I have hallowed the church myself. To-morrow I

charge thee that thou tell these things to the Bishop, who will find a

sign and token in the church of my hallowing. And for another token, put

forth again, upon the river, cast thy nets, and thou shalt receive so

great a draught of fishes that there will be no doubt left in thy mind.

But give one-tenth to this, my holy church.”

So he vanished; and the fisherman was left alone upon the river bank.

But he put forth as directed, cast his net, and presently brought ashore

a draught miraculous.

In the morning the Bishop with his clergy, and the King with his

following, came up from London in their ships to hallow the church. They

were received by Edric, who told them this strange story. And within the

church the Bishop found the lingering fragrance of incense far more

precious than any that he could offer; on the altar were the drippings

of wax candles (long preserved as holy relics, being none other than the

wax candles of heaven), and written in the dust certain words in Greek

character. He doubted no longer. He proclaimed the joyous news; he held

a service of thanksgiving instead of a hallowing. Who would not hold a

service of praise and humble gratitude for such a mark of heavenly

favor? And after service they returned to London and held a banquet,

with Edric’s finest salmon lying on a lordly dish in the midst.

How it was that Peter, who came from heaven direct, could not cross the

river except in a boat, was never explained or asked. Perhaps we have

here a little confusion between Rome and heaven. Dover Street, we know,

broke off at the edge of the marsh, and Dover Street led to Dover, and

Dover to Rome.

5. We are now prepared for the _Evidence of History_, which is not

perhaps so interesting as that of tradition. Clio, it must be confessed,

is sometimes dull. One misses the imagination and the daring flights of

her sister, the tenth Muse--the Muse of Fiction. The earliest document

which refers to the Abbey is a conveyance by Offa, King of Mercia, of a

manor called Aldenham, to “St. Peter and the people of the Lord dwelling

in Thorney, that ‘terrible’--_i. e._, sacred--place which is called at

Westminster.” The date of this ancient document is A.D. 785; but Bede,

who died in 736, does not mention the foundation. Either, therefore,

Bede passed it over purposely, or it was not thought of importance

enough to be mentioned. He does relate the building of St. Paul’s; but,

on the other hand, he does not mention the hundreds of churches which

sprang up all over the country. So that we need not attach any

importance to the omission. My own opinion is that the church--a rude

country church, perhaps a building like that of Greenstead, Essex, the

walls of split trees and the roof of rushes--was restored early in the

seventh century, and that it did succeed an earlier church still. The

traditional connection of King Sebert with the church is as ancient as

anything we know about it, and the legend of Lucius and his church is at

least supported by the recent discoveries of Roman remains, and the

certainty that the place was always of the greatest importance.

There is another argument--or an illustration--in favor of the antiquity

of some church, rude or not, upon this place. I advance it as an

illustration, though to myself it appears to be an argument: I mean the

long list of relics possessed by the Abbey at the Dedication of the year

1065. We are not concerned with the question whether the relics were

genuine or not, but merely with the fact that they were preserved by the

monks as having been the gifts of various benefactors--Sebert, Offa,

Athelstan, Edgar, Ethelred, Cnut, Queen Emma, and Edward himself. A

church of small importance and of recent building would not dare to

parade such pretensions. It takes time even for forgeries to gain

credence and for legends to grow. The relics ascribed to Sebert and Offa

could easily have been carried away on occasion

[Illustration: TOMB OF KING SEBERT, WESTMINSTER ABBEY.]

of attack. As for the nature of these sacred fragments, it is pleasant

to read of sand and earth brought from Mounts Sinai and Olivet, of the

beam which supported the holy manger, of a piece of the holy manger, of

frankincense presented by the Magi, of the seat on which our Lord was

presented at the Temple, of portions of the holy cross presented by four

kings at different times, of bones and vestments belonging to apostles

and martyrs and the Virgin Mary and saints without number, whose very

names are now forgotten. In the cathedral of Aix you may see just such a

collection as that which the monks of St. Peter displayed before the

reverent eyes of the Confessor. We may remember that in the ninth and

tenth centuries the rage for pilgrimizing extended over the whole of

Western Europe: pilgrims crowded every road; they marched in armies, and

they returned laden with treasures--water from the Jordan, sand from

Sinai, clods of earth from Gethsemane, and bones and bits of sacred wood

without number. When Peter the Hermit arose to preach it was but putting

a match to a pile ready to be fired. But for such a list as that

preserved by history, there was need of time as well as credulity.

Then the same thing happened to the Saxon church which had been done by

Saxon arms to the British church. It was destroyed, or at least

plundered, by the Danes. The priests, who perhaps took refuge in London,

saved their relics. After a hundred years of fighting, the Dane, too,

came into the Christian fold. As soon as circumstances permitted, King

Edgar, stimulated by Dunstan, rebuilt or restored the church, and

brought twelve monks from Glastonbury. He also erected the monastic

buildings after the Benedictine Rule; and, as Stanley has pointed out,

since in the monastery the church or chapel is built for the monks, the

monastic buildings would be finished before the church.

[Illustration: THE FUNERAL PROCESSION OF KING EDWARD THE CONFESSOR]

Next, Edgar gave the monks a charter in which these lands are described

and the boundaries laid down. You shall see what a goodly foundation--on

paper--was this Abbey of St. Peter when it left the King’s hands. Take

the map of London: run a line from Marble Arch along Oxford Street and

Holborn--the line of the new Watling Street--till you reach the church

of St. Andrew’s, Holborn; then follow the Fleet river to its mouth--you

have the north and east boundaries. The Thames is a third boundary. For

the fourth, draw a line from the spot where the Tyburn falls into the

Thames, to Victoria Station;

[Illustration: TO WESTMINSTER ABBEY. FROM THE BAYEUX TAPESTRY.]

thence to Buckingham Palace; thence north to Marble Arch. The whole of

the land included belonged to the Abbey. A little later the Abbey

acquired the greater part of Chelsea, the manor of Paddington, the manor

of Kilburn, including Hampstead and Battersea,--in fact, what is now the

wealthier half of modern London formerly belonged to the Benedictines of

Westminster. At the time of Edgar’s charter, however, they had the area

marked out above. More than half of it was marsh land. In Doomsday Book

there are but twenty-five houses on the whole estate. Waste land lying

in shallow ponds, sometimes flooded by high tides, only the rising

ground between what is now St. James’s Park and Oxford Street could then

be farmed. The ground was reclaimed and settled very slowly; still more

slowly was it built upon. Almost within the memory of man snipe were

shot over South Kensington; a hundred years ago the whole of that

thickly populated district west and southwest of Mayfair was a land of

open fields.

So that, notwithstanding the great extent of their possessions, the

monks were by no means rich, nor were Edgar’s buildings, one imagines,

very stately. Yet the later buildings replaced the older on the same

sites. A plan of the Abbey of Edgar and Dunstan would show the

Chapter-house and the Church where they are now; the common dormitory

over the common hall, as it was afterward; the refectory where it was

afterward; the cloisters, without which no Benedictine monastery was

complete, also where are those of Henry III. But the buildings were

insignificant compared with what followed.

Roman Britain, we have said, was Christian for at least a hundred and

fifty years; the country was also covered with monasteries and

nunneries. Therefore it would be nothing out of the way or unusual to

find monastic buildings on Thorney in the fourth century. There was as

yet no Benedictine Rule. St. Martin of Tours introduced the Egyptian

Rule into Gaul--whence it was taken over to England and to Ireland. It

was a simple Rule, resembling that of the Essenes. No one had any

property; all things were in common; the only art allowed to be

practiced was that of writing; the older monks devoted their whole time

to prayer; they took their meals together,--bread and herbs, with

salt,--and, except for common prayer and common meals, they rarely left

their cells: these were at first simple huts constructed of clay and

bunches of reeds; their churches were of wood; they shaved their heads

to the line of the ears; they wore leather jerkins, probably because

these lasted longer than cloth of any kind; many of them wore hair

shirts. The wooden church became a stone church; the huts became cells

built about a cloister; the cells themselves were abolished, and a

common dormitory was substituted. Then came the Saxons, and the monks

were dispersed or fled into Wales, where they formed immense

monasteries, as that of Bangor, with its three thousand monks. All had

to be done over again, from the beginning. But monasticism, once

introduced, flourished exceedingly among the Saxons, until the long war

with the Danes destroyed the safety of the convent and demanded the

service of every man able to carry a sword, and there were no more monks

left in the land. All of which is necessary to explain why Dunstan had

to people his Abbey with monks brought from Glastonbury. For Glastonbury

and Abingdon, into which the Benedictine Rule had been introduced, were

then the only monasteries surviving the long Danish troubles.

These are the beginnings of the Abbey and the Church, and of life upon

the Island of Bramble. This the foundation of the history that follows.

A busy place before London Bridge was built; a place of throng and

turmoil far back in the centuries before the coming of the Roman; a

church built in the midst of the throng; monks in leather jerkins living

beside the church; a ruined church lying in ruins for two hundred years,

while the Saxon infidel daily passed beside it across the double ford;

then a rebuilding--why not by Sebert? Another destruction, and another

rebuilding.

This view is often taken by Loftie in his “Westminster Abbey.” He does

not, however, defend it and insist upon it so strongly. He says, to

quote his exact words: “The hillock on which we stand is called

Thorn-Ey. There are some Roman remains on it, and there may have been

the ruins of a little monastery and chapel, of which floating traditions

were afterward gathered and exaggerated. The paved causeway to the

westward is the Watling Street. On both sides of it runs the Tyburn, of

which Thorn-Ey is a kind of delta. The road rises to Tot Hill, which is

a conspicuous landmark here, and goes straight on over the ‘Bulunga Fen’

till it reaches another, the ‘road to Reading,’ which has just crossed

the Tyburn at Cowford, where Brick Street is now in Piccadilly. From

Thorney, then, looking northward and westward, we see what remains of

the great Middlesex forest, if the Danes have not burnt it all, and the

paved Watling Street running straight on toward the distant Chester,

keeping to the left of the lofty hill which is now crowned by the town

of Hampstead. It is interesting to trace this ancient road through the

modern streets, the more so as its existence determined the site and

early importance of Westminster. When it emerged from the wild woods of

Northern Middlesex and came down toward the ford of the Thames, it

followed what we call the Edgeware Road, Edgeware being the name of the

first stopping-place on the road, near the edge of the forest. Passing

down the Edgeware Road in a straight line, it is interrupted at the

Marble Arch by a corner of the Park, which crosses the direct road

toward Westminster. We know, however, that this corner is a

comparatively recent addition to the Park, and the Watling Street soon

resumes its course in Park Lane, which, keeping well on the high ground

above the brook, nevertheless derived the name it was known by for many

centuries from the Tyburn. Tyburn Lane reached the road to Reading at

what we call Hyde Park Corner, and then ran straight through what was

once called ‘Brookshott,’--a little wood, where now is the Green Park

and the gardens of Buckingham Palace,--and on, right through the site of

the palace itself, where the brook approached it very closely. So it

descended to Tothill, the name of which has been plausibly explained to

mean a place where the traveler ‘touted’ for a guide or a boat, as the

case might be, for the dangerous ford of the Thames below. This is

rather conjectural, but is not to be rejected until a better explanation

has been offered. One thing more had to be stated about this ancient

highway--the Watling Street. How is it that we find the same name in the

City? To answer this question we must look back to a period so remote

that we cannot accurately date it, yet so definite, in one way, that

there can be no mistake about it. This is the time at which London

Bridge was built. When that great event took place Watling Street was

diverted from Tyburn Lane, and instead of going to Westminster in order

to ford the Thames, it turned to the left, along the modern Oxford

Street and Holborn, and, entering the City at Newgate, went on to the

bridge. Only a small part of the road still bears the ancient name, but

that any of it does so is a most interesting and significant fact.

“We may conclude, therefore, if we wish to do so, that in a sense

Westminster is older than London itself. What name it was called by we

know not; but the Romans certainly had a station here, as I have said,

and the importance of the place before the making of London Bridge may

have been considerable.”

In course of time the river was embanked, and ran in a deeper channel;

then the ford, as has been stated above, vanished, and the marshes were

partly reclaimed, only pools remaining on both sides of the river--the

Southwark pools remained till the beginning of this century. But

Thorney, after the drying of the marsh, continued to be an island. On

the north, the west, and the south sides it was bounded by streams; on

the east by the Thames. If you will take the map, and draw a line

through Gardener’s Lane across King Street to the river, you will be

tracing the exact course of the rivulet which ran into the Thames and

formed the northern boundary of the island; another line, down Great

College Street, marks the course of a second stream; while a third line,

down De la Hay and Prince’s Streets, joining the other two, marks the

lie of a connecting canal called Long Ditch. It is interesting to walk

along the narrow Gardener’s Lane, one of the few remaining old streets

of Westminster, and to mark how the road presents a certain unmistakable

look of having been the bed of a stream; it bends and curves exactly

like a stream. The same thing may be imagined--by a person of

imagination--concerning Great College Street.

The island thus formed covered an area of four hundred and seventy yards

long from north to south, and three hundred and seventy yards broad from

east to west. At some time or other--after the disappearance of the

ford--the Abbey precinct was surrounded by a wall. In the same way St.

Paul’s, in the midst of the City, was surrounded by a wall with

embattled gates. A portion of this wall is perhaps still standing. The

wall was pierced by four gates. One of these was in King Street, where

the rivulet crossed; one was at the east end of Tothill Street; a third

was in Great College Street, and its modern successor still stands on

the spot with no ancient work in it; the last was in New Palace Yard. In

front of the riverside wall lived the population of Thorney,--the town

of Westminster, such as it was,--decayed indeed since the deepening of

the river: fisher-folk mostly, who plied their trade on the river. But

of town or village, in the time of Edward the Confessor, there was

little or none.

When the old Palace of Westminster was founded, another wall was erected

round its buildings. Then the island was completely surrounded by a

fortification; the fisher-folk removed northward and settled somewhere

lower down the river, where afterward arose the New Palace and

Whitehall; not higher up, where the ground continued to be a marsh for

many centuries to come. We have seen the beginnings of the Church and of

the Abbey. What were the beginnings of the Palace? When did a king begin

to live on Thorney Island? And why?

Since neither tradition nor history speaks to the contrary, we may

suppose that Cnut was the first to build some kind of palace or

residence in this place. His buildings are said to have been burned in

the time of Edward; therefore he must have built something. His

residence on Thorney was neither continuous nor at any time of long

duration. The court of the kings for many generations to come was a

Court Itinerant. King Cnut traveled perpetually from place to place,

followed by his regiment of house carles, though one knows not how many

accompanied him. He stayed at Thorney because he loved the conversation

of the Abbot Wolfstan. It was at Thorney that, according to the

familiar story, he rebuked the courtiers in the matter of the rising

tide; and it was in the concluding years of his reign, when that

marvelous change, graphically described by Freeman, fell upon him, and

he became exactly the opposite of what he had before shown himself; when

he founded and endowed and augmented churches and monasteries. His heart

was changed: the stately services of the minster, the rolling of the

organ, the chanting of the monks, the splendor of the altar, the story

of the Gospel, the legends and the acts of the Saints, the pilgrimage to

Rome,--these things pleased him more than the clash of steel on shield,

the war cry, and the glorious madness of the fight. The beginner of the

old Palace was the great King Cnut the Dane.

We write under the shadow of the Abbey: the bells peal out over our

heads; the organ swells and dies; within the walls are the coffins and

the bones of dead kings and princes and nobles. The air is ecclesiastic:

we may talk of changed hearts and repentant age. The age of civil wars,

intestine wars,--the worst wars of all, the wars of those who speak the

same language,--lasted for five hundred years after the death of King

Cnut. We who belong to a generation which has learned some self-control,

cannot realize the intensity, the strength of the passions which

devoured and maddened the kings of old. The things which make history

dreadful: the murders, the cry to arms at the least provocation; the

cruel disregard of innocent suffering; the wasting, pillaging,

destroying of lands and fields and villages and towns, in blind revenge;

the blinding and torturing and maiming of which every page is full,

these things mean the rage of kings, the revenge of kings upon their

enemies. Cnut in his last years had no enemies; he had killed them all.

Then there were no more rages; he suffered his head to dwell upon nobler

things--in modern language, he “got religion.” And so, at the end of

this Prologue to the Westminster Play, we see the King taking off his

blood-stained ermine, laying down the sword which has set free so many

unwilling souls, and walking in meditation and godly discourse under the

quiet cloisters of the Abbey. Outside, the noisy court and camp; within,

the calm and peace of the religious life. The picture strikes a note of

what is to follow when we pass into the period of history written from

day to day, and draw up the curtain for the Pageant, Mystery, or Play of

Westminster.

Westminster(#58672) · 第 1 / 10 章