to London, and on the south of the Thames caused a trench to be cast,
through the which his ships were towed into the west side of the bridge,
and then with a deep trench, and straight siege, he compassed the city
round about.
Also, in the year 1052, Earl Goodwin, with the like navy, taking
his course up the river of Thames, and finding none that offered to
resist on the bridge, he sailed up the south side of the said river.
Furthermore, about the year 1067, William the Conqueror, in his charter
to the church of St. Peter at Westminster, confirmed to the monks
serving God there, a gate in London, then called Buttolph’s gate, with a
wharf which was at the head of London bridge.
We read likewise, that in the year 1114, the 14th of Henry I., the river
of Thames was so dried up, and such want of water there, that between
the Tower of London and the bridge, and under the bridge, not only with
horse, but also a great number of men, women, and children, did wade
over on foot.[30]
In the year 1122, the 22nd of Henry I., Thomas Arden gave the monks of
Bermondsey the church of St. George, in Southward, and five shillings
rent by the year, out of the land pertaining to London bridge.
I also have seen a charter under seal to the effect following:--“Henry
king of England, to Ralfe B. of Chichester, and all the ministers
of Sussex, sendeth greeting, know ye, etc. I command by my kingly
authority, that the manor called Alcestone, which my father gave, with
other lands, to the abbey of Battle, be free and quiet from shires and
hundreds, and all other customs of earthly servitude, as my father held
the same, most freely and quietly, and namely, from the work of London
bridge, and the work of the castle at Pevensey: and this I command upon
my forfeiture. Witness, William de Pontlearche, at Byrry.” The which
charter, with the seal very fair, remaineth in the custody of Joseph
Holland, gentleman.
In the year 1136, the 1st of king Stephen,[31] a fire began in the
house of one Ailewarde, near unto London stone, which consumed east to
Aldgate, and west to St. Erkenwald’s shrine, in Powle’s church; the
bridge of timber over the river of Thames was also burnt, etc., but
afterwards again repaired. For Fitzstephen writes, that in the reign of
King Stephen and of Henry II., when pastimes were showed on the river of
Thames, men stood in great number on the bridge, wharfs, and houses, to
behold.
Now in the year 1163, the same bridge was not only repaired, but newly
made of timber as before, by Peter of Cole church, priest and chaplain.
Thus much for the old timber bridge, maintained partly by the proper
lands thereof, partly by the liberality of divers persons, and partly
by taxations in divers shires, have I proved for the space of 215 years
before the bridge of stone was built.
Now touching the foundation of the stone bridge, it followeth:--About
the year 1176, the stone bridge over the river of Thames, at London,
was begun to be founded by the aforesaid Peter of Cole church, near
unto the bridge of timber, but somewhat more towards the west, for I
read, that Buttolfe wharf was, in the Conqueror’s time, at the head of
London bridge.[32] The king assisted this work: a cardinal then being
legate here; and Richard, archbishop of Canterbury, gave one thousand
marks towards the foundation; the course of the river, for the time,
was turned another way about, by a trench cast for that purpose,
beginning, as is supposed, east about Radriffe, and ending in the west
about Patricksey, now termed Batersey. This work; to wit, the arches,
chapel and stone bridge, over the river of Thames at London, having been
thirty-three years in building, was in the year 1209 finished by the
worthy merchants of London, Serle Mercer, William Almaine, and Benedict
Botewrite, principal masters of that work, for Peter of Cole church
deceased four years before, and was buried in the chapel on the bridge,
in the year 1205.[33]
King John gave certain void places in London to build upon the profits
thereof to remain towards the charges of building and repairing the
same bridge: a mason being master workman of the bridge, builded from
the foundation the large chapel on that bridge of his own charges,
which chapel was then endowed for two priests, four clerks, etc.,
besides chantries since founded for John Hatfield and other.[34] After
the finishing of this chapel, which was the first building upon those
arches, sundry houses at times were erected, and many charitable men
gave lands, tenements, or sums of money, towards maintenance thereof,
all which was sometimes noted and in a table fair written for posterity
remaining in the chapel, until the same chapel was turned into a
dwelling-house, and then removed to the bridge house, the effect of
which table I was willing to have published in this book, if I could
have obtained the sight thereof. But making the shorter work, I find by
the account of William Mariner and Christopher Eliot, wardens of London
bridge from Michaelmas, in the 22nd of Henry VII., unto Michaelmas
next ensuing, by one whole year, that all the payments and allowances
came to £815 17_s._ 2-1/4_d._, as there is shown by particulars, by
which account then made, may be partly guessed the great charges and
discharges of that bridge at this day, when things be stretched to so
great a price. And now to actions on this bridge.
The first action to be noted was lamentable; for within four[35] years
after the finishing thereof, to wit, in the year 1212, on the l0th of
July, at night,[36] the borough of Southwark, upon the south side the
river of Thames, as also the church of our Lady of the Canons there,
being on fire, and an exceeding great multitude of people passing the
bridge, either to extinguish and quench it, or else to gaze at and
behold it, suddenly the north part, by blowing of the south wind was
also set on fire, and the people which were even now passing the bridge,
perceiving the same, would have returned, but were stopped by fire; and
it came to pass, that as they stayed or protracted time, the other end
of the bridge also, namely, the south end, was fired, so that the people
thronging themselves between the two fires, did nothing else but expect
present death; then came there to aid them many ships and vessels, into
the which the multitude so unadvisedly rushed, that the ships being
drowned, they all perished.[37] It was said, that through the fire and
shipwreck there were destroyed about three thousand persons, whose
bodies were found in part, or half burnt, besides those that were wholly
burnt to ashes, and could not be found.
About the year 1282, through a great frost and deep snow, five arches of
London bridge were borne down and carried away.
In the year 1289, the bridge was so sore decayed for want of reparations
that men were afraid to pass thereon, and a subsidy was granted towards
the amendment thereof,[38] Sir John Britain being custos of London.
1381, a great collection or gathering was made of all archbishops,
bishops, and other ecclesiastical persons, for the reparations of London
bridge. 1381, Wat Tyler, and other rebels of Kent, by this bridge
entered the city, as ye may read in my _Summary_ and _Annals_.
In the year 1395, on St. George’s day, was a great justing on London
bridge, betwixt David Earl of Crawford of Scotland, and the Lord Wells
of England; in the which the Lord Wells was at the third course borne
out of the saddle: which history proveth, that at that time the bridge
being coped on either side, was not replenished with houses built
thereupon, as it hath since been, and now is. The next year, on the
13th of November, the young Queen Isabell, commonly called the little,
for she was but eight years old, was conveyed from Kenington besides
Lamhith, through Southwarke to the Tower of London, and such a multitude
of people went out to see her, that on London bridge nine persons were
crowded to death, of whom the prior of Tiptre, a place in Essex, was
one, and a matron on Cornhill was another.
The Tower on London bridge at the north end of the draw-bridge (for that
bridge was then readily to be drawn up, as well to give passage for
ships to Queenhithe, as for the resistance of any foreign force), was
begun to be built in the year 1426, John Rainwell being mayor.
Another tower there is on the said bridge over the gate at the south end
towards Southwarke, whereof in another place shall be spoken.
In the year 1450, Jack Cade, and other rebels of Kent, by this bridge
entered the city: he struck his sword on London Stone, and said himself
then to be lord of the city, but were by the citizens overcome on the
same bridge, and put to flight, as in my _Annals_.
In the year 1471, Thomas, the bastard Fawconbridge, besieged this
bridge, burnt the gate, and all the houses to the draw-bridge, that time
thirteen in number.
In the year 1481, a house called the common siege on London bridge fell
down into the Thames; through the fall whereof five men were drowned.
In the year 1553, the 3rd of February, Sir Thomas Wyat, and the Kentish
men, marched from Depeford towards London; after knowledge whereof,
forthwith the draw-bridge was cut down, and the bridge gates shut.
Wyat and his people entered Southwarke, where they lay till the 6th of
February, but could get no entry of the city by the bridge, the same
was then so well defended by the citizens, the Lord William Howard
assisting, wherefore he removed towards Kingstone, etc., as in my
_Annals_.
To conclude of this bridge over the said river of Thames, I affirm, as
in other my descriptions, that it is a work very rare, having with the
draw-bridge twenty arches made of squared stone, of height sixty feet,
and in breadth thirty feet, distant one from another twenty feet,
compact and joined together with vaults and cellars; upon both sides
be houses built, so that it seemeth rather a continual street than a
bridge; for the fortifying whereof against the incessant assaults of the
river, it hath overseers and officers, viz., wardens, as aforesaid, and
others.
Fleete bridge in the west without Ludgate, a bridge of stone, fair coped
on either side with iron pikes; on the which, towards the south, be
also certain lanthorns of stone, for lights to be placed in the winter
evenings, for commodity of travellers. Under the bridge runneth a water,
sometimes called, as I have said, the river of the Wels, since Turnemill
brooke, now Fleete dike, because it runneth by the Fleete, and sometimes
about the Fleete, so under Fleete bridge into the river of Thames. This
bridge hath been far greater in times past, but lessened, as the water
course hath been narrowed. It seemeth this last bridge to be made or
repaired at the charges of John Wels, mayor, in the year 1431, for on
the coping is engraven Wels embraced by angels, like as on the standard
in Cheape, which he also built. Thus much of the bridge: for of the
water course, and decay thereof, I have spoken in another place.
Oldbourne bridge, over the said river of the Wels more towards the
north, was so called, of a bourn that sometimes ran down Oldbourne hill
into the said river. This bridge of stone, like as Fleet bridge from
Ludgate west, serveth for passengers with carriage or otherwise, from
Newgate toward the west and by north.
Cowbridge, more north, over the same water by Cowbridge street or
Cowlane: this bridge being lately decayed, another of timber is made
somewhat more north, by Chick lane, etc.
Bridges over the town ditch there are divers; to wit, without Aldgate,
without Bishopsgate, the postern called Moorgate, the postern of
Criplegate without Aldersgate, the postern of Christ’s hospital,
Newgate, and Ludgate; all these be over paved likewise, with stone level
with the streets. But one other there is of timber over the river of
Wels, or Fleet dike, between the precinct of the Black Friers, and the
house of Bridewell.
There have been of old time also, divers bridges in sundry places
over the course of Walbrooke, as before I have partly noted, besides
Horseshew bridge, by the church of St. John Baptist, now called St.
John’s upon Walbrooke. I read, that of old time every person having
lands on either side of the said brook, should cleanse[39] the same, and
repair the bridges so far as their lands extended. More, in the 11th of
Edward III. the inhabitants upon the course of this brook were forced to
pile and wall the sides thereof. Also, that in the 3rd of Henry V. this
water-course had many bridges, since vaulted over with bricks, and the
streets where through it passed so paved, that the same water-course is
now hardly discerned. For order was taken in the 2nd of Edward IV., that
such as had ground on either side of Walbrooke, should vault and pave it
over, so far as his ground extended. And thus much for bridges in this
city may suffice.
FOOTNOTES:
[29] Will. Malmsbury.
[30] Liber Bermon.
[31] Liber Trinitat
[32] Liber Waverley.
[33] “For Peter of Colechurch deceased foure years before this worke was
finished, and was buried in the chappell builded on the same bridge, in
the year 1205.”--_1st edition_, p. 21.
[34] “So that in the yeare 23 of Henrie the 6 there was 4 chaplens in
the said chappell.”--_1st edition_, p. 21.
[35] “Within 3 yeres.”--_1st edition._
[36] “A marvellous terrible chance happened for the citie of London,
upon the south side of the river of Thames.”--_Ibid._
[37] Liber Dunmow. Walter Covent. W. Packenton.
[38] Patent of Edward II.
[39] “Should vaulte, or bridge, and clense the same.”--_1st edition_, p.
24.
GATES IN THE WALL OF THIS CITY
Gates in the wall of this city of old time were four; to wit, Aeldgate
for the east, Aldersgate for the north, Ludgate for the west, and the
Bridgegate over the river of Thames for the south; but of later times,
for the ease of citizens and passengers, divers other gates and posterns
have been made, as shall be shown.
In the reign of Henry II. (saith Fitzstephen) there were seven double
gates in the wall of this city, but he nameth them not. It may therefore
be supposed, he meant for the first, the gate next the Tower of
London,[40] now commonly called the Postern, the next be Aeldgate, the
third Bishopsgate, the fourth Ealdersgate, the fifth Newgate, the sixth
Ludgate, the seventh Bridgegate. Since the which time hath been builded
the postern called Moorgate, a postern from Christ’s hospital towards
St. Bartholomew’s hospital in Smithfield, etc. Now of every of these
gates and posterns in the wall, and also of certain water-gates on the
river of Thames, severally somewhat may, and shall be noted, as I find
authority, or reasonable conjecture to warrant me.
For the first, now called the postern by the Tower of London, it showeth
by that part which yet remaineth, to have been a fair and strong arched
gate, partly built of hard stone of Kent, and partly of stone brought
from Caen in Normandy, since the Conquest, and foundation of the high
tower, and served for passengers on foot out of the east, from thence
through the city to Ludgate in the west. The ruin and overthrow of this
gate and postern began in the year 1190, the 2nd of Richard I., when
William Longshampe, bishop of Ely, chancellor of England, caused a part
of the city wall, to wit, from the said gate towards the river of Thames
to the white tower, to be broken down, for the enlarging of the said
tower, which he then compassed far wide about with a wall embattled,
and is now the outer wall. He also caused a broad and deep ditch to
be made without the same wall, intending to have derived the river of
Thames with her tides to have flowed about it, which would not be. But
the southside of this gate, being then by undermining at the foundation
loosened, and greatly weakened; at length, to wit, after two hundred
years and odd, the same fell down in the year 1440, the 18th of Henry
VI., and was never since by the citizens re-edified.[41] Such was their
negligence then, and hath bred some trouble to their successors, since
they suffered a weak and wooden building to be there made, inhabited by
persons of lewd life, oft times by inquest of Portsoken ward presented,
but not reformed; whereas of former times the said postern was accounted
of as other gates of the city, and was appointed to men of good credit.
Amongst other, I have read, that in the 49th of Edward III., John Cobbe
was admitted custos of the said postern, and all the habitation thereof,
for term of his life, by William Walworth, then mayor of London, etc.
More, that John Credy, Esq., in the 21st of Richard II., was admitted
custos of the said postern and appurtenances by Richard Whittington,
mayor, the aldermen, and commonalty, etc.
AELDGATE
The next gate in the east is called Aeldgate, of the antiquity or age
thereof. This is one and the first of the four principal gates, and also
one of the seven double gates, mentioned by Fitzstephen. It hath had two
pair of gates, though now but one; the hooks remaineth yet. Also there
hath been two portcloses; the one of them remaineth, the other wanteth,
but the place of letting down is manifest. For antiquity of the gate: it
appeareth by a charter of King Edgar to the knights of Knighten Guild,
that in his days the said port was called Aeldgate, as ye may read in
the ward of Portsoken. Also Matilda the queen, wife to Henry I., having
founded the priory of the Holy Trinity within Aeldgate, gave unto the
same church, to Norman the first prior, and the canons that devoutly
serve God therein,[42] the port of Aeldgate, and the soke or franchises
thereunto belonging, with all customs as free as she held the same; in
the which charter she nameth the house Christ’s church, and reporteth
Aeldgate to be of his domain.
More, I read[43] in the year 1215, that in the civil wars between King
John and his barons, the Londoners assisting the barons’ faction, who
then besieged Northampton, and after came to Bedford castle, where they
were well received by William Beauchampe, and captain of the same;
having then also secret intelligence that they might enter the city of
London if they would, they removed their camp to Ware, from thence in
the night coming to London, they entered Aeldgate, and placing guardians
or keepers of the gates, they disposed of all things in the city at
their pleasure. They spoiled the friars’ houses, and searched their
coffers;[44] which being done, Robert Fitzwalter, Geffry Magnavile
Earl of Essex, and the Earl of Glocester, chief leaders of the army,
applied all diligence to repair the gates and walls of this city with
the stones taken from the Jews’ broken houses, namely, Aeldgate being
then most ruinous (which had given them an easy entry), they repaired,
or rather newly built, after the manner of the Normans, strongly arched
with bulwarks of stone from Caen in Normandy, and small brick, called
Flanders tile, was brought from thence, such as hath been here used
since the Conquest, and not before.
In the year 1471,[45] the 11th of Edward IV., Thomas, the bastard
Fawconbridge, having assembled a riotous company of shipmen and other in
Essex and Kent, came to London with a great navy of ships, near to the
Tower; whereupon the mayor and aldermen, by consent of a common council,
fortified all along the Thames side, from Baynard’s castle to the Tower,
with armed men, guns, and other instruments of war, to resist the
invasion of the mariners, whereby the Thames side was safely preserved
and kept by the aldermen and other citizens that assembled thither in
great numbers. Whereupon the rebels, being denied passage through the
city that way, set upon Aeldgate, Bishopsgate, Cripplegate, Aeldersgate,
London bridge, and along the river of Thames, shooting arrows and guns
into the city, fired the suburbs, and burnt more than threescore
houses. And further, on Sunday the eleventh of May, five thousand of
them assaulting Aeldgate, won the bulwarks, and entered the city; but
the portclose being let down, such as had entered were slain, and Robert
Basset, alderman of Aeldgate ward, with the recorder, commanded in the
name of God to draw up the portclose; which being done, they issued out,
and with sharp shot, and fierce fight, put their enemies back so far as
St. Bottolph’s church, by which time the Earl Rivers, and lieutenant
of the Tower, was come with a fresh company, which joining together,
discomfited the rebels, and put them to flight, whom the said Robert
Basset, with the other citizens, chased to the Mile’s End, and from
thence, some to Popular, some to Stratford, slew many, and took many of
them prisoners. In which space the Bastard having assayed other places
upon the water side, and little prevailed, fled toward his ships. Thus
much for Aeldgate.
BISHOPSGATE
The third, and next toward the north, is called Bishopsgate, for that,
as it may be supposed, the same was first built by some Bishop of
London, though now unknown when, or by whom; but true it is, that the
first gate was first built for ease of passengers toward the east, and
by north, as into Norfolk, Suffolk, Cambridgeshire, etc.; the travellers
into which parts, before the building of this gate, were forced, passing
out at Aeldgate, to go east till they came to the Mile’s end, and then
turning on the left hand to Blethenhall green[46] to Cambridge heath,
and so north, or east, and by north, as their journey lay. If they took
not this way, by the east out at Aeldgate, they must take their way by
the north out at Aeldersgate, through Aeldersgate street and Goswel
street towards Iseldon, and by a cross of stone on their right hand, set
up for a mark by the north end of Golding lane, to turn eastward through
a long street, until this day called Alder street, to another cross
standing, where now a smith’s forge is placed by Sewer’s-ditch church,
and then to turn again north towards Totenham, Endfield, Waltham, Ware,
etc. The eldest note that I read of this Bishopsgate, is that William
Blund, one of the sheriffs of London,[47] in the year 1210, sold to
Serle Mercer, and William Almaine, procurators or wardens of London
bridge, all his land, with the garden, in the parish of St. Buttolph
without Bishopsgate, between the land of Richard Casiarin, towards the
north, and the land of Robert Crispie towards the south, and the highway
called Berewards lane on the east, etc.
Next I read in a charter, dated the year 1235, that Walter Brune,
citizen of London, and Rosia his wife, having founded the priory or new
hospital of our blessed Lady, since called St. Mary Spittle without
Bishopsgate, confirmed the same to the honour of God and our blessed
Lady, for canons regular.
Also in the year 1247, Simon Fitzmarie, one of the sheriffs of London,
the 29th of Henry III., founded the hospital of St. Mary, called Bethlem
without Bishopsgate. Thus much for the antiquity of this gate.[48]
And now for repairing the same, I find that Henry III. confirmed to
the merchants of the Haunce, that had a house in the city called
Guildhalla Theutonicorum, certain liberties and privileges. Edward I.
also confirmed the same; in the tenth year of whose reign it was found
that the said merchants ought of right to repair the said gate called
Bishopsgate; whereupon Gerard Marbod, alderman of the Haunce and other,
then remaining in the city of London, for themselves, and all other
merchants of the said Haunce, granted two hundred and ten marks sterling
to the mayor and citizens; and covenanted that they and their successors
should from time to time repair the same gate. This gate was again
beautifully built in the year 1479, in the reign of Edward IV., by the
said Haunce merchants.
Moreover, about the year 1551, these Haunce merchants, having prepared
stone for that purpose, caused a new gate to be framed, there to have
been set up, but then their liberties, through suit of our English
merchants, were seized into the king’s hand; and so that work was
stayed, and the old gate yet remaineth.
POSTERN OF MOREGATE