THE FORTRESS

CHAPTER 8

HISTORIC WALKWAYS AND BITTER WELSH WARS

In around 1140, there was reported to have been a major fire within the city which destroyed many of the timber residences and business premises which were still commonly built at that time. The mainly stone built religious centers and those buildings belonging to the Crown probably fared better than most, but it seems that any lessons learned as a result of the conflagration were soon forgotten. Some forty years later the replacement dwellings and business properties which had been built after this first fire, were once again consumed by a major inferno which occurred in 1180.

The period seems to have marked a change in the practice of building commercial properties mainly of timber. Although building in stone was generally expensive and therefore relatively uncommon, it does seem that a start was made in certain areas of the city. On the western side of the Bridge Street area of Chester there is a stone façade, consisting of three Norman arches, thought to date from around 1200 and believed to be one of the oldest shop fronts in the country.

In the first few decades of the 13th Century the castle at Chester was substantially enlarged and refurbished, as its importance continued to grow and by the middle years of the century new Royal apartments were being built, to accommodate the King and his entourage while they were battling the two rebellious Welsh Princes, Owen Ap Gruffydd and his younger brother Llewellyn. Owen had been held at Shotwick Castle by the King from around 1246, but had then managed to escape his captors and rejoin his brother in their isolated Welsh homeland. The Princes continuing refusal to accept the Kings authority, as well as their regular raiding and pillaging of English villages and settlements would eventually and almost inevitably lead to continuous conflict between the two royal houses. In order to achieve some sort of settlement with the two renegade Princes, Henry was reported to have reached an agreement with Owain and Llewellyn which recognized their right to rule the Gwynedd region. The resulting Treaty of Woodstock which was signed in 1247, deprived the two brothers of much of their true inheritance, but nonetheless gave them a power base from which to operate and from where they could orchestrate future expansion of their lands.

During the next five years the brothers were said to have been busy building new political alliances and extending their influence well beyond the borders of their homeland. By around 1252 they were said to have built a large number of coalitions with many of their neighboring regions and their Welsh rulers. It was around this time that a third brother, Dafydd ap Gruffudd, was said to have reached his majority and immediately demanded parity with his two older siblings with respect to his land rights in Gwynedd. The older brother Owain was said to have been inclined to meet Dafydd’s demands, but his younger, more astute and ambitious sibling Llewellyn was thought to have refused Dafydd’s demands and in doing so set the brothers on the road to conflict with one another. The resulting Battle of Bryn Derwin in 1255 between Owain, Dafydd and Llewellyn saw the latter defeat and imprison his two siblings and later seize their lands and assets. From around 1256 onward, Llewellyn was recognized as the sole ruler of Gwynedd and was said to have continued the development and expansion of his North Wales kingdom.

In the same year he was thought to have begun a series of attacks on lands adjoining his own, many of which were controlled by English Marcher Lords and drove the English settlers out of Wales. He was also said to have ordered the construction of Ewloe Castle which was designed to protect the eastern part of his kingdom from any future English incursions. Within 12 months Llewellyn was reported to have recovered much of the territory that had been held by his late uncle Dafydd ap Llewellyn and had regained the loyalty and support of many of the native Welsh Lords that had previously been allied to the English monarch Henry III. Although Henry was thought to have launched at least two military campaigns in order to curb Llewellyn’s gains and ambitions, they were generally unsuccessful affairs given that the English monarch was facing serious problems within the rest of England.

In the latter years of his reign Henry III was in almost constant dispute with a large number of rebel English Barons, which finally resulted in the Battle of Lewes in 1264, where both he and his son Edward were taken prisoner by their enemies. As part of the agreement to secure their release, Prince Edward was required to surrender the Earldom of Chester to Simon de Montford, the Earl of Leicester, who was one of his captors. The Welsh ruler Llewellyn was said to have encouraged De montford to appropriate the Earldom of Chester from the English Crown, in order to guarantee and fully secure his eastern border from further English invasions.

12 months earlier William La Zouche, a Cheshire Baron had taken control of the city for Edward and had constructed a defensive ditch outside of the city’s northern wall which brought about the destruction of certain properties which were owned by the Abbey of St Werburgh and caused friction between the two parties. He was reported to have been involved in a major incident with the religious community, where he verbally assaulted the clergy, which resulted in the Abbey closing its precincts to the townspeople for an undisclosed period of time.

De Montford having extorted the Earldom of the city from the Prince Edward then tried to make it his own. In the following  year his son Henry was said to have visited Chester for a 10 day period during which time he received the homage of both its citizens and civic authorities. Neither of the De Montford’s ever managed to return to Chester however, as they were later defeated by the king’s forces at the Battle of Evesham in 1265 during which Simon de Montford was killed. Chester then reverted back to Edward’s control and once again became a threat to Llewellyn’s eastern border and his continuing ambitions for Welsh expansion. Perhaps in order to pre-empt any hostile actions on the part of Henry or his son Edward, Llewellyn was thought to have ordered his troops to attack Hawarden Castle in September 1265 and the position was said to have fallen shortly afterwards. Despite this, the English monarchy was so busy trying to restore order throughout England that they had little time to deal with rebellions within the Welsh provinces and simply chose to negotiate a truce with Llewellyn.

This truce was formalized with the Treaty of Montgomery, which was signed by the two parties on the 25th September 1267 and was intended to settle all outstanding grievances between the two families once and for all. Under the terms of the Treaty, Llewellyn was permitted to retain many of the land gains that he had acquired in the previous years, but was required to surrender Hawarden Castle to English control. He was entitled to receive tribute from his subordinate Welsh Lords, but was required to pay an annual tribute to the English Crown of 25,000 marks as well as accepting Henry’s authority over him. Given the restrictions that were imposed by the Treaty regarding Llewellyn’s entitlement to raise the necessary revenue required to meet Henry’s extortionate levy which had been made against him, Llewellyn was always likely to breach the terms of the agreement which had been made by the two leaders. Records suggest that within three years the Welsh Prince was beginning to struggle to meet the annual charge which had been imposed on him and by 1270 was said to have been late in meeting his 25,000 mark obligation.

Around four years later and still struggling under a mountainous debt, Llewellyn was thought to have been made aware of a plot that was being mounted against him, supposedly involving his younger brother Dafydd. Llewellyn immediately ordered his brother to attend his court in order that he could be questioned about the matter, but before any action could be taken Dafydd was said to have fled across the border into England and sought the protection of the new king Edward I. Later investigation of the planned coup, suggested that Dafydd, along with another Marcher Lord had planned to murder Llewellyn and place his younger brother on the throne of Gwynedd. The plot itself, his younger brother’s complicity and Edward’s protection of the would-be assassins all contrived to fracture the tenuous relationship which had existed between Llewellyn and King Edward and inevitably led the two parties to outright conflict with one another.

King Edward I, who was also known as Edward “Longshanks”, had succeeded his father, Henry III, to the throne in 1272 and immediately began to make plans to recover the Welsh lands which were being held by the Welsh Prince Llewellyn. Apart from the planned assassination of the Welsh ruler in 1274, Llewellyn had absented himself from Edward’s Coronation in 1272 and generally made himself unavailable at the English Court, which Edward chose to regard as an act of rebellion. The final straw for the English monarch was Llewellyn’s decision to marry Eleanor de Montford, a sister of the family that had seized Edward and his father during the civil war of 1264/5. The king was reported to have arranged Eleanor’s abduction as she traveled to Wales to marry Llewellyn and openly declared that the Welsh leader was a rebel and should be treated as such. Edward was then said to have visited Chester in 1276 to formally receive tribute from Llewellyn, perhaps hoping that the Welshman might refuse him and giving him a reason to settle the issue by force of arms. Needless to say the Welsh Prince did not disappoint him

In the following year, 1277, Edward gathered a large military force at Chester which was thought to consist of over 1000 Knights and 15000 soldiers and marched into Wales to force Llewellyn’s to accept his sovereignty. He quickly captured Rhuddlan Castle and refortified its defenses in order to prevent any further Welsh raids into the area. Llewellyn and his forces were eventually forced back into the wilderness of Snowdonia and subsequently starved into submission by Edward’s enormous English army. The usual Welsh “bolt-holes” on the Isle of Anglesey had earlier been isolated from the mainland by a fleet of warships that Edward had dispatched for that specific purpose. With nowhere to go and with few other options open to him, the resulting “Treaty of Aberconwy”, signed in November 1277 was a public humiliation for the Welsh Prince, which left him virtually powerless within his own homelands. Not only was Llewellyn dispossessed of the many gains that he had made during his reign but he was refused permission to pass his remaining lands and titles on to his legitimate heirs. With that particular provision in place, Edward was then reported to have released his captive Eleanor de Montford, so that she could finally be married to Llewellyn, safe in the knowledge that any resulting offspring would no longer pose a threat to any future English rule of the principality.

Having subjugated and humiliated the most important and influential Welsh leader of his time, Edward then set about initiating a round of land seizures and the submission of other potentially dangerous Welsh Lords, all of which were designed to strengthen English control and dominance within Wales.

Much of Edward’s martial success seems to have been founded on his more disciplined approach to and strategic planning of military warfare, than had been previously adopted by other commanders. Unlike his predecessors, Edward’s army was known to have been comprised of a large number of professional soldiers who would stay in place until the job was done, or for as long as they were paid. Parts of Edwards forces were said to have included men from the town of Macclesfield in Cheshire, who were the predecessors of the famous Cheshire Archers, possibly the finest fighting men of their age. Also in his vanguard, the King was known to have employed a large number of mercenaries from Gascony who were famed for their use of the crossbow.

By ensuring that his lines of communication and supply were both protected and remained effective, Edward was able to guarantee the smooth movement of men and materials throughout the region, both of which were vital to his continued military control of Wales. Enormous numbers of woodcutters, masons and other craftsmen were employed to construct a road network that gave the English King easier and much speedier access to the hinterland of Wales. The Welsh rebels, who at one time could have easily disappeared into the wild and rugged countryside, now found their hideaways easily accessed by the pursuing English forces. The later construction of the English held castles at Conway, Beaumaris, Caernarvon and Harlech further ensured Welsh compliance with his rule and this was added to by the enforced “colonization” of North Wales by large numbers of Englishman who owed their true allegiance to the English Crown.

Perhaps because of the terms contained within the Treaty of Aberconwy both Edward and Llewellyn knew that such an unfair and enforced peace could not last. Some four years later, in 1281 Edward had to return to Chester once again to suppress a second Welsh rebellion, which had been sparked by Llewellyn’s brother, Dafydd ap Gruffydd. He ruled in eastern Gwynedd and was said to have launched an unexpected attack on the English held castle at Hawarden, killing its garrison and its commander Roger Giffard. Within days a large number of native Welsh rulers were said to have rallied to his cause and many English holdings within the province, including Oswestry, were said to have been raided and ransacked. Llewellyn had been reluctant to challenge the English king a second time, but was forced to support his cousin’s rebellion all the same. In the first few weeks of the uprising the Welsh forces saw nothing but success and held control of the province, from the Bristol Channel in the south, to the very gates of Chester in the north. By the middle of the year Llewellyn had become central to this new uprising, despite the fact that his wife Eleanor was reported to have died whilst giving birth to a baby girl who was named Gwenllian.

Once again, Edward mustered a large military force and marched into Wales, intent this time on dealing a crushing defeat to the rebellious Princes once and for all. Events elsewhere however, forced the king to change his plans unexpectedly. One of Edward’s leading supporters, Luke de Thaney, who had been charged by the King with occupying the Isle of Anglesey, chose instead to attempt an unsupported pre-emptive strike against Llewellyn’s forces, involving having to cross the treacherous Menai Straits, which resulted in this English force being decimated by their Welsh opponents.

Having forced the rebel forces back into North Wales, Edward had counted on De Thaney and his forces joining his own to finally crush the Welsh rebel army. Having heard of the debacle caused by his trusted Lieutenant’s rashness, Edward was then forced to re-organize his troops and his strategy, finally having to settle for starving his opponents into submission once again. William de Beauchamp, the Earl of Warwick, was said to have commanded the forces of Edward I during his wars against the Welsh Princes and was thought to have been based at the Chester fortress during these disputes.

Although much of South Wales was under English control, the regions of North Wales and Mid Wales were far more difficult for Edward and it is thought that by October 1282 the king was seeking to reach a settlement with the two Welsh Princes, Llewellyn and Dafydd. However, the terms which were being offered by Edward were thought to be so unreasonable that the two brothers had little difficulty in refusing the kings offer. Edward was said to have demanded that Llewellyn and Dafydd leave Wales and to surrender any future claims to the throne of Gwynedd. Additionally, he required the children of the two Welsh Princes to be placed in his care and charge, as a guarantee against their father’s future good conduct. It was little wonder that Dafydd and Llewellyn refused such unwarranted demands and chose instead to continue their rebellion against the king.    

From the King’s personal point of view, there was a highly unexpected silver lining to this particular cloud. Llewellyn, the Welsh Prince who had reportedly been reluctant to oppose Edward in the first place, was later reported to have been killed at the Battle of Orwen Bridge, when he and his men were ambushed by an English force commanded by John Gifford and Roger Mortimer. A large number of leading Welsh retainers were thought to have died with their Prince, whose severed head was said to have been displayed at the Tower of London. With Llewellyn dead, Welsh resistance was all but over and English rule of the Province was substantially restored.

For a short time following his older brothers death Dafydd ap Gruffudd was reported to have taken sole charge of the remaining Welsh forces that continued to oppose Edward’s invading English army. Unfortunately for Dafydd, as his military situation worsened and he was forced further and further back into the isolated areas of his homeland a number of his supporters, perhaps with more than an eye on their own future prospects, were reported to have deserted him and made their own peace with Edward. By 1283 the kings army was said to have penetrated deep into Snowdonia and Dafydd’s final defense, Castell Y Bere was reported to have fallen to Edward’s troops in April of the same year. Finally and perhaps not unexpectedly it was thought that Prince Dafydd was betrayed by one or more of his own retainers and delivered into the hands of his nemesis Edward I. He was taken in chains to the English border town of Shrewsbury where after a short trial he was found guilty of Treason. In October 1283 Dafydd ap Gruffudd, the last native Prince of Wales was duly executed by the English Crown, suffering the punishment of being hung, drawn and quartered and his severed head later being displayed at the Tower of London, sharing the same final humiliation as his older brother.

Following Dafydd’s execution the monarch was reported to have ordered the imprisonment of the Welsh Prince’s two young sons, who were said to have been held at Bristol Castle until their deaths. Llewellyn ap Gruffudd’s one and only daughter Gwenllian, who was less than a year old at the time of her fathers death was delivered to a convent located at Sempringham and was thought to have stayed there up until her death in 1337 aged 54 years old.           

Edward was said to have returned to Chester in 1284 and again in 1294 when he passed through on his way to suppress a Welsh rebellion led by a leader called Madoc, but by 1300 virtually all opposition to the English Crown in Wales had been crushed. John de Warenne, the Earl of Surrey, was said to have commanded elements of Edward’s forces during the Kings third campaign against the Welsh in 1294 and John Langton, the kings Chancellor was based at Chester in 1295.

In the city of Chester itself, the period was said to mark the first documented evidence for the elevated rows that would later become a world famous feature of the city, the record dating from around 1331. A number of suggestions have been made as to the actual reasons for their initial construction and for their historical development.

One suggested theory is that the amount of debris and standing remains that still existed from Roman times prevented any sort of extensive building program at or on street level. To overcome this problem, medieval builders were said to have been forced to create a new elevated ground level which was set above these earlier foundations. As well as the living accommodations and business premises which were built at this new first-floor level, walkways which linked these new accommodations together were necessary and these would later develop into the Rows that we see today. Many of the spaces or voids which lay below these new raised walkways, were themselves used by street vendors, eventually cleared of the rubble and debris and developing into the street level businesses that are evident today.

An alternative suggestion as to how and why the rows developed was that they offered the inhabitants of the city better security from potential invaders. The theory suggests that businesses and living accommodations were deliberately built at an elevated level, joined by a linked walkway and accessed by a number of stairways throughout their length. These staircases would then have been protected by shutters and gates, which prevented raiders and invaders gaining access to the upper levels of the city and therefore protecting the local population.

This second suggestion seems far less likely, but no doubt there is an element of truth to both. It is known that that the local historian Ranulph Higden writing at the end of the 14^th century noted, that Chester was: “filled with enormous foundation stones laid by the labor of the Romans”. This does seem to support the idea that even after a thousand years of continual habitation certain areas of the city were still largely uninhabitable because of the continuing presence of much earlier Roman building foundations, which had obviously defied all subsequent efforts to remove them. 

Higden was a 14^th Century monk and local historian at Chester’s medieval Abbey, who wrote his history of the world, the Polychronicon, which detailed the period from Creation through to his own time. His work is generally considered to be the only serious publication that was ever produced by members of the community in Chester. Higden recorded that;

“The city of the legions, Chester, which lies in the marshes of England towards Wales, lies between two arms of the sea, which are named the Mersey and the Dee. The city, in the time of the Britons was head and chief city of all Venedotia, which is North Wales. This city in British speech is called “Carthleon”, Chester in English, as well as the “City of the legions”.

For there, lay a winter the legions that Julius Caesar sent forth to win Ireland. After that, Claudius Caesar sent legions out of the city to win the islands that he called “Orcades”.

The city has plenty of corn, flesh and specially Salmon. This city receives great merchandise and sends out as much. The Northumbrians destroyed this city sometime, but Ethelfleda, Lady of Mercia, rebuilt it and made it much more than it was.

In this city wonderfully built, three chambered works lay underground with old names therein. This is the city that Ethelfrith, king of Northumbria destroyed and slew there, two thousand monks from the monastery at Bangor. This is the city that King Edgar came to, sometime with seven kings that were subject to him.

Higden’s publication is thought to have been based on an earlier work written by a monk called Roger who was a member of the same Benedictine Abbey earlier in the 14^th century. Higden’s Latin history was later translated into English by a clergyman called Trevisa, who was the Chaplain to the Earl of Berkeley in 1887 and was published some time later by Caxton.

Higden has also been credited with authoring a great number of the Chester Mystery Plays, which during the medieval period were a major part of the city’s religious life. It was said; that Higden had to travel to Rome, in order to get permission from the Pope for the plays to be translated into and performed in the English language, as so few people that watched the plays spoke Latin. These “Plays” or “Interludes” had originated in the middle Ages and were performed to help mark the intervals between separate Church Services. These Plays were specifically written to help illustrate and convey important biblical messages to the local population in an easy to understand format.

Initially, the Church was known to have been actively involved in the performance of the plays, but as they became more popular they began to become more boisterous and noisy. Because of this, the Plays were moved out of the Abbey itself and relocated to a site just outside of the Church’s main doors. Local monks, who had in the past been involved in producing and performing the Plays were forbidden from further involvement and it was because of this, that the city’s local crafts became involved and associated with them.

Most, if not all of Chester’s Guilds actively participated in performing the city’s historic Mystery Plays and there was thought to have been a highly competitive atmosphere between the various city companies. The Drapers, Wrights, Tanners and Smiths all tried to outdo one another, in terms of their scenery, the costumes worn and levels of performance, to the extent that actors were often “poached” by one Guild from another. Each individual Company would take responsibility for performing one particular scene or story from the Bible, which was designed to reinforce the preaching of the Christian message. Eventually, these annual Plays became so well known and popular that they had to be performed over a period of consecutive days in the city. This later led to a number of separate stages being erected throughout Chester, so that the citizens and visitors had the opportunity to see each individual play performed. Eventually, the Guilds were said to have constructed mobile stages or floats which could be transported throughout the city, allowing each Play to be seen all over Chester.

Following Henry VIII’s suppression of Chester’s Norman Abbey around 1540, in later years there were deliberate moves to stop these annual Mystery Plays from being performed at all. In 1575 the city’s Mayor, Sir John Savage, was cited by the English Privy Council for allowing the round of Plays to be performed in the city. Following this intervention by the national authorities, Chester’s Council ordered their performances to be discontinued. Although it isn’t entirely clear if these performances were always called “Mystery” Plays, which today we regard as some sort of medieval whodunit. It has been suggested that Mystery is a corruption of the French word “Mystere”, or Guild, which would seem a far more likely derivation.     

Higden has also been attributed as the source for the local legend regarding King Harold’s return to Chester following his defeat at the Battle of Hastings and remaining there as a blind Hermit until his death. Although the tale is an unlikely one, there were many people during the later medieval period that accepted it to be true. Higden was thought to have died at the Abbey sometime around 1360 and his body was later interred within its precincts.

A noted contemporary of Higden’s was thought to be Henry Bradshaw, a monk at the Abbey in Chester who was a renowned local historian and writer. Sometime before 1500 he wrote a history on the life of St Werburgh whose dedication the Abbey carried during his lifetime. He has also been suggested as another possible writer of Chester’s Mystery Plays, as opposed to Higden, who was Bradshaw’s predecessor at the Abbey. His second celebrated work, “De Antiquitate Et Magnificentia Urbia Cestriae” was first published in around 1513 and it has often been speculated that Bradshaw was a local Chester man who had been educated at the Collegiate Church of St John’s in the city.

It has been recorded that the city’s rows were once far more extensive than those we can see today and are known to have extended well into both the Northgate Street and Lower Bridge Street areas of the city. Many of the open walkways that were once present on the western side of Lower Bridge Street were said to have been later acquired by the wealthier families who lived alongside them and who later incorporated these elevated thoroughfares into their private residences, causing them to be lost forever. It was reported that the first people in Chester to seek official permission to fully enclose these public walkways into their private accommodation were the Grosvenor family, who lived at the Falcon Inn at the corner of Lower Bridge Street.

A building in one form or another is known to have stood on the site of the modern day Falcon since around the beginning of the 13^th Century. These earlier buildings were said to have been much more extensive than their modern day counterparts and to have extended further south into what is now Lower Bridge Street. Reported to have included a Great Hall which ran parallel to the main street, the house was substantially modified shortly after its initial construction, with an elevated gallery added to its frontage. As is typical with many of Chester’s medieval buildings the Falcon’s structure includes a stone undercroft, which in earlier times might have been used as workshops, warehouses or even living accommodations. Much of the existing building fabric is thought to date from around the late 16^th and early 17^th Centuries, but timbers dating from around 1200 have been clearly identified by archaeologists and bear witness to the great age of the property.

Purchased in 1602 by the Grosvenor family from Sir George Hope, the property was known to have been used as a town house by the family during the English Civil War, in which Sir Richard Grosvenor was a leading Royalist supporter within the city. It was said to be around this time that the house was substantially altered in order to enlarge the actual living space and as a result the historic elevated gallery or Row was fully enclosed and lost forever as a feature of the city.    

Throughout the length of the city’s existing streets and their elevated rows, its tradesmen tended to cluster their businesses and trades together. Bakers and Cooks were primarily located in Eastgate Street, as were the metalworkers, such as the Gold and Silversmiths. Ironmongers were to be found in Northgate Street, Fishmongers in Watergate Street and the Glovers in Foregate Street.

Generally, the craftsmen and merchants of the city were members of the Chester Guilds, bodies which regulated and controlled the particular trades and industries in the city and which had formally existed since the beginning of the 13^th Century. Most Guildsmen were also Freemen of the city, a position that could be afforded them in one of four ways. They could earn it through a formal apprenticeship, or by being born as the son of a Freeman of the city. Alternatively, membership might be bought, or finally, they could receive it as a gift of Chester’s Assembly.

On the north side of Eastgate Street, at Row level, the Boot Inn was a commercial center for the city’s visiting livestock traders. The modern premises are said to still contain the historic “Horse Traders” seat, which was reported to have been used for agreeing terms during the various medieval markets and fairs. Not far away from the Boot Inn is Godstall Lane, which is said to be named after a Saxon hermit called Godescal who lived at the Hermitage on the outskirts of the city. The passageway itself is said to have originated centuries before and was thought to have been used and possibly built by the fortresses earlier Roman inhabitants.

The High Cross, as it does today, marked the junction between the four main thoroughfares within the city. As well as the markets held at Midsummer and Michaelmas, it was also said to be the site of the city’s stocks, where wrongdoers were punished for their misdeeds and offered as entertainment to the passing crowds. It was also thought to be the site where bear or bull-baiting occurred as a piece of public amusement, with local traders dogs tested against the tethered beast. Behind the High Cross was the Pentice building which housed the early Assizes and the offices of the city officials, including the Mayor, who it was said would watch the public spectacle of the Bear and Bull-bait from their balcony high above the event. The modern Linenhall Place in Chester was reported to have once been called Bearward Lane, prior to its later title and reflected the historic route by which the bull or bear was led in and out of the city’s centre. 

It was also during the 13^th and 14^th Centuries, that a number of new churches and religious houses were founded within the city. Holy Trinity Church was erected on or near the western gate of the original Roman fortress, which perhaps suggests that this was in longer in place and had perhaps been demolished prior to that particular date. In the south western area of the city, St Martin’s Church was built and Richard (the Engineer) Lenginour was thought to have built the shrine to St Werburgh in the city’s Abbey church.

Another associated building of the time, that was said to have been newly constructed was the “Anchorite” cell or “Hermitage” close to St John the Baptist’s church in the south east quarter of the city. Legend has it, that King Harold actually survived the battle at Hastings and after recovering from his wounds made his way to Chester and lived in this building as a blind hermit. Given the time difference of a few hundred years between the two historic events, the idea that the defeated monarch might have lived there is highly implausible. The building was almost certainly built simply to provide solitude and as a place of quiet contemplation for those people that wished to devote themselves entirely to God. The building in later years was known to have been used as a meeting place for the company of Weavers in the city. John Spicer was reported to have established a Hermitage close to the Old Dee Bridge in 1358 and an individual called John Benet was recorded as the occupant of St James’ Hermitage in Handbridge during the 15^th Century who was accused of running a brothel.

Richard Lenginour has been attributed with the title of “Engineer”, when in reality he was a Master Mason who was said to have been employed by Edward I to help construct his castles at Flint and Rhuddlan around 1277 and was granted the rights to the city’s Dee Mills. He was thought to have held the office of Mayor in 1305 and was said to have died in 1315. At the time of his death, Richard had acquired substantial holdings at both Pulford and Eccleston and his lands at Eaton were said to have been settled on his daughter when she married. Richard’s family were reported to have left Chester by 1321 and later relocated to Belgrave. 

Lenginour was also said to have built a mansion on the site of the chapel belonging to the ancient St Olave’s church which lies just off Lower Bridge Street in Chester. This building later became known as Pares or Paris Hall in memory of its later owner. Robert Pares (Paris).

In the hundred years marking the period between the 12^th and 13^th Centuries there was a large rise in the numbers of religious devotees living within the city, either drawn by the existing communities or helping to establish new Christian orders. The first of these new communities to arrive was the Benedictine Convent of St Mary’s which was said to have been established in 1150, with the permission of the 4^th Earl, Ranulph II, who granted them lands in the western part of the city, close to the developing Norman castle. A devotee called Helenwise was reported to have been the Prioress of St Mary’s Benedictine Nunnery in Chester during the 1350’s, and was thought to be a member of one of Chester’s leading families.

Around 1235, the Dominican Monks or the Black Friars arrived in Chester to establish their own community. They were followed some 8 or 9 years later by the Franciscans or the Grey Friars and finally, there was the Carmelite’s, the White Friars who arrived in 1290. All 3 of these orders were granted lands in the western sector of the city and were aided by individual bequests from the Earls of Chester as well as other wealthy patrons within the city.

It has been suggested that the arrival of these particular Religious orders in Chester, might in part account for the disappearance of some of the former Roman buildings and defenses in the western part of the city, which may have been “robbed out” to provide building materials for these new spiritual centers. By the end of the 13^th Century, these 4 communities were known to have held lands which extended through the full length of the city’s western flank, from the river to the northern defenses. In the modern day city, this would include all of the land to the west of the present day Nicholas and Princess Streets and stretching from the later Police Headquarters northward to the city walls and the canal basin.

Despite the arrival of these new Christian communities in Chester, the most important religious house in the city remained the Norman Abbey of St Werburgh. Roger Frend, was recorded as holding the office of Abbot from 1240 to 1249 and was thought to have been responsible for the completion of the Chapter House and the cloisters, which had been started by his predecessors. Roger was said to have died on 23^rd September 1249 and was later interred in the Chapter House of the Abbey.

Frend’s successor, Simon de Whitchurch was recorded as being the Abbot of St Werburgh’s from 1265 to 1291 and was thought to be responsible for the building of St Nicholas’s Chapel in around 1280. The chapel was initially built to replace the church of St Oswald which was said to have stood on the site of the Abbey’s south transept. Unfortunately, the new chapel was not easily accepted by the local parishioners and the building later became a court, then later still, a theatre which hosted the likes of Charles Dickens when he visited the city. It was during Abbot Simon’s tenure that the construction of the Monastery was finally completed and the next project he initiated was the rebuilding of the Abbey church, which included a separate Lady Chapel. Upon his death on 22^nd February 1291, Abbot Simon was reported to have been buried in the Abbey’s Chapter House, beneath a marble stone. 

Thomas de Burchelle was the Abbot of St Werburgh’s Norman Abbey from 1291 to 1323 and was said to have continued the various building projects which had been started by his predecessor, Simon De Whitchurch. Around 1310, Richard “the Engineer” Lenginour, was said to have demolished the Abbey’s Presbytery to make way for additional piers within the building. A shrine dedicated to St Werburgh was also built between the High Altar and the Lady Chapel around 1310, but this was later severely damaged during the reformation.

During Abbot Thomas’ tenure, Edward I was said to have given permission for the monks to construct a Postern Gate in the city’s historic defensive wall, providing them with access to the monastery’s cabbage patch which lay outside of the precincts. In order to fully maintain the fortresses security, it was necessary for the monks to build a drawbridge to span the city’s defensive ditch and they were held responsible for ensuring that the gate was secured every evening. This “Kale Yard” gate still exists today and permits access from Chester’s Cathedral through to the Frodsham Street area of the city. Sadly, the vegetable garden of the monks no longer exists and is today covered by one of the city’s many municipal car parks. The construction of the “Kale Yard” gate ultimately proved to be a matter of some dispute between the Abbot and the city authorities, which was only finally resolved during the reign of Edward II, when the drawbridge was finally constructed. Abbot Thomas died on 23^rd December 1323 and was said to have been interred in the main body of the church, on the south side of the choir. 

William de Bebington was recorded as being the Abbot of the Norman Abbey from 1324 to 1349 and was thought to have been responsible for the construction of a number of chapels and altars within the Abbey’s precincts. In 1349 the “Black Death” reached Chester and Abbot William was thought to have been one of its more notable victims, succumbing to the disease on 20^th September 1349 and later interred on the south side of the choir.

Bebington’s successor, Richard De Seynesbury (Sainsbury) was said to have been the Abbot at Chester between 1349 and 1363 and was thought to have overseen the reconstruction of the South Transept of the Abbey. The south bay and southern wall of the Western Aisle were also reported to have been built during the same period, bringing about the demolition of the south transept.

Sainsbury was also reported to have been attacked by members of his own community, at a time when there was a highly troublesome and violent faction present within the Abbey community and a number of the monks found themselves facing the courts on charges of Robbery, Arson and Assault. So worrying were these troubles, that in 1362, the Prince Edward ordered the Abbot of St Alban’s to visit Chester and resolve the disciplinary problems that were affecting the Abbey. As a result, Sainsbury was forced to resign his post and a number of the monks were removed to St Alban’s to receive corrective training. 

Thomas Erdeley who was the Abbot of St Werburgh’s from 1413 to 1434, had earlier been accused of breaking into Abbot Henry de Sutton’s pay chest and stealing 20 marks and 3 gold rings. He was also thought to have stolen a chest and 5 marks belonging to Robert de Legh. It was during his tenure, that a number of the Abbey’s monks were brought before the court for offences, ranging from Robbery to Rape

John Saughall was the Abbot of St Werburgh’s Abbey from 1435 to 1455 and was thought to have derived his name from the outlying area of Chester, Saughall, which was formerly called Salhare. He was said to have been a clerk at the Chester Abbey, who along with a fellow monk, Thomas Erdeley, displayed a level of violence and dishonesty that might easily have ended their religious careers, yet both men somehow went on to achieve the highest possible office within their community, that of Abbot.

In 1349 the “Black Death” was said to have reached Chester and killed a large number of people within the city, including its most notable victim, the Abbot of St Werburgh’s, William de Bebington. The city had also began to see the effects of silting within the river, which in later centuries would completely suffocate Chester’s international shipping trade and its commercial centers. The north western Water Tower, which had been designed to guard the medieval harbor was rebuilt as an extension to the much earlier Bonewaldesthorne Tower in 1322, as the river began to recede further to the north and west. John de Helpeston was reported to have been a stonemason in the city who was responsible for the construction of the Tower and charged £100 for its building, a high price for the time, when most workmen were only paid 1 penny a day for their labour. A few years earlier Pemberton’s Parlor was said to have been built and was said to have been named after a local rope-maker, who was reported to have kept watch on his men from the tower while they worked below.

Further along the River, the Old Dee Bridge that continues to stand today was said to have first been built during the middle years of the 14^th Century. References to its earlier predecessors have been found in a number of records including the much mentioned Domesday Book of 1086. Stone guard towers which had originally stood at either end of the bridge were said to have been finally demolished in 1780 and the crossing itself was known to have been widened in 1826 as part of the city’s modernization program. These earlier guard towers were said to have stood as a defense against Welsh raiders who regularly attacked the city from the southern side of the river. The township of Handbridge, which stands on the opposite bank of the river to Chester, was commonly known as “Treboeth” or “Burnt Town” because it was so often destroyed by the raiders as they were attacking the city.

(Next Chapter)
 

DOES YOUR LAND OR PROPERTY CONTAIN HIDDEN, LOST OR UNDISCOVERED TREASURES? CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION

Produced and maintained by Phillip E Jones @ Mobile 07756 693258 Text: 07914 189032

Mail Contact: 3 Riverside Park, Sealand, Deeside, Flintshire, CH5 2JR