Chapter I: Part 1

[Picture: Book cover]

A HISTORY
OF
CHESTER CATHEDRAL:

WITH

BIOGRAPHICAL NOTICES OF THE BISHOPS
AND DEANS.

BY
A Member of the Chester Archæological Society.

* * * * *

“On entering a Cathedral, I am filled with devotion and with awe; I
am lost to the actualities that surround me, and my whole being
expands into the infinite; earth and air, nature and art, all swell
up into eternity, and the only sensible impression left is, _that I
am nothing_.”—COLERIDGE.

* * * * *

CHESTER:
GEORGE PRICHARD, BRIDGE STREET ROW,
AND SOLD BY ALL BOOKSELLERS.

* * * * *

TO THE

VERY REVEREND THE DEAN OF CHESTER,

THE FOLLOWING HISTORY OF THE

Cathedral Church

IS (BY HIS KIND PERMISSION) RESPECTFULLY DEDICATED,

BY

HIS MOST OBEDIENT SERVANT,

THE PUBLISHER.

A VISIT TO THE CATHEDRAL.

WHEN we reflect upon the momentous and happy results which have always followed the introduction of Christianity amongst a people;—how it has ever proved an up-lifting and progressive power; influencing man in the holiest affections and most inward laws of his moral being; extending its benign agency through all the relationships of social life, and acting in various methods as a living principle in the community;—we think that in ascribing to our religious history a deeper significance and importance than appertains to any other department of inquiry, we are only claiming for it a position which may be established by a wide induction of facts.

The condition of a nation, socially and politically, is to a great extent decided by the character of its religious teaching and worship. The history of our own country, and that of every other in the world, affords many striking illustrations of the fact. Many instances might be quoted where the connection is remarkably verified, and we venture to ascribe the proud position of England mainly to the operation of its Christian faith.

The churches of Britain were the outbirths of its religious life. They were reared by the earnest piety of our forefathers. Their history presents an inviting sphere of investigation, from the valuable aid they furnish, in tracing the successive incidents and onward development of Christianity; which soon after its first promulgation, diffused a welcome light over the Pagan darkness, which enveloped the primeval inhabitants of our country.

The subject of the first introduction of Christian truth into Britain, and who was the first herald employed by Providence in proclaiming it, is one of deep interest, and has long engaged the investigation of the learned. The theories which have been offered are conflicting, as to the time, and by whom, this great boon was conferred upon our country. But as all the varied traditions seem to point to the apostolic age, we may the more readily acquiesce, in not being able to fix upon the exact period and the actual instrument; especially when we remember, how many of the world’s benefactors have been unknown to those who are most indebted to them. There is an unwritten biography of the great and the good; though their names and heroic deeds are not recorded by the pen of the historian or the chisel of the sculptor, they have not the less nobly fulfilled their mission to their age and posterity. Their record, though not with men, is “on high.” And as there is a law surrounding us, which permits no disinterested deed or true thought to perish, but immortalizes them, in their effects on the minds of men and the developments of life;—so certainly as that law governs human experience, have we reaped the advantage of many a noble life’s devotion, albeit unchronicled and unknown. The results of their achievements are nevertheless with us still.

The foundation of the Church in Britain has been ascribed, by many eminent authorities, to St. Paul; and the learned Dr. Burgess, Bishop of St. David’s, goes so far as to say, that this interesting point is established by as much substantial evidence as any historical fact can require; and he proceeds to give the testimony of the first six centuries in support of the doctrine. The first and most important testimony is that of Clemens Romanus, “the intimate friend and fellow-labourer of St. Paul,” who says, that in preaching the gospel the apostles went _to the utmost bounds of the west_, which seems to have been the usual designation of Britain. Theoderet speaks of the inhabitants of Spain, Gaul, and _Britain_, as dwelling in the _utmost bounds of the west_. In the second century, Irenœus speaks of Christianity as propagated to the utmost bounds of the earth by the apostles and their disciples; and Tertullian, at the beginning of the third century, gives a kindred testimony. In the fourth century, (A.D. 270–340), Eusebius says, that some of the apostles passed over the ocean to the British Isles; and Jerome, in the same century, ascribes this province to St. Paul, and says, that after his imprisonment, having been in Spain, he went from ocean to ocean, and preached the gospel in the _western parts_. Theodoret, in the fifth century, and Venantius Fortunatus in the sixth, are also quoted as witnesses to the same effect.

The learned bishop has conducted the argument with consummate ability; and in the judgment of many has demonstrated the point.

Gildas, a Briton, called the wise, very positively ascribes the first mission to Britain to St. Joseph of Arimathea, who, according to his account, evangelized Gaul. This opinion is supported by Bede, William of Malmesbury, and many eminent divines of the Church.

Sammes, in his ‘Antiquities of Britain,’ inclines to the same idea, and gives an illustration of the first church supposed to be built by him; but it does not appear to be based upon sufficient evidence to entitle it to acceptance.

The conversion of Britain to the Christian faith has also been ascribed to St. Peter, St. James the Great, and to Simon Zelotes. Bishop Taylor and Dr. Cox are disposed to award the honour to the latter. Southey is of opinion that the Gospel was first introduced here by the family of Caractacus, who propagated it among the British tribes; and he is certainly upheld in this by many weighty considerations.

As there is existing such contrariety of belief among those master intellects, who have deeply studied the subject, we should certainly regard it as vain presumption, to record any dogmatic judgment.

Previous to the Roman conquests, the Britons were accustomed to celebrate the rites of Druidism; but as it was the custom of the Romans to carry into the lands they conquered, not only their civil polity but also their religion, the gods of their Pantheon became consequently the gods of our ancestors. Near the existing memorials of Druidical superstition, there arose the majestic fanes of a more polished mythology. At Bath there is said to have been a temple dedicated to Minerva, while on the site now occupied by the splendid cathedral of St. Paul there was a temple to Diana. It appears from a passage in _King’s Vale Royal_, there was a tradition generally accepted in his day, that on the present site of Chester Cathedral, was a temple dedicated to Apollo, during the period that the city was inhabited by the Legionaries.

“I have heard it,” he says, “from a scholar, residing in the city, when I was there, anno 1653, that there was a temple dedicated to Apollo in old time, in a place adjoining to the Cathedral Church, by the constant tradition of the learned.”

We are not aware that the supposition is capable of being verified by any existing record, but when we take into consideration the policy generally pursued by the Romans in subjugating a country, it seems to be countenanced by strong probability. With this form of Paganism, however, there came zealous men, of true apostolic stamp, whose earnest inculcation of vital principles, accelerated the progress of a better faith. So conspicuous had that progress become early in the third century, that Tertullian, in his work written against the Jews, A.D. 209, states that “even those places in Britain, hitherto inaccessible to the Roman arms, have been subdued by the gospel of Christ.”

Early in the fourth century, Christianity had become so extensively diffused throughout the land, that Maximius and Galerius, themselves bigoted Pagans, recommended to the Emperor Diocletian the enforcement of extreme measures, in order to crush the growing religion; and the ever-memorable persecution under his reign was the result, when Christians were indiscriminately slaughtered, and churches wantonly destroyed.

Under the empire of his successor, Constantine Chlorus, persecution was extinguished; churches were re-built, the offices of religion generally resumed, and the people enjoyed a long tranquillity.

The recall of the Romans to the defence of the integral parts of their empire, in conjunction with the laborious teaching of the early Christians, led to the speedy decline of their mythology in Britain, where indeed it appears never to have taken any deep root. The growing power of truth supplanted Pagan superstition, and the zeal of the Christian converts, speedily destroyed the statues and altars of its deities, which yet existed in this Island as memorials of its conquest by Roman arms. “Here had been within the bounds of Britain, saith our stories, before the time of King Lucius, whose reign began about the year 179, flamines and arch-flamines, who were governors over others, the priests of that religion, which the people in their Paganism did profess, as idolatry hath ever made a counterfeit show of the true service of God; and when Lucius was converted to the Christian faith, to enlarge the power of Christian knowledge and settle a government in the Church of Christ, abolishing those seats of heathenish idolators, he took advantage of the temples and other conveniences, wickedly used by them, to turn them to the true service of God and Christ; and therefore ordained in England three Archbishops and twenty-eight Bishops; one of which Archbishops he placed at London, to whom was subject Cornwall, &c., &c., and the third was the Archbishop Caerleon, that is Chester. Thus far I note only to show that when Lucius began the Christian religion, it may appear that both Chester had been a place for the Arch-flamines in the time of Paganism, and was also an Archbishop’s see at the first plantation of the truth.”

The ground on which the temple of Apollo once stood (if the tradition be trustworthy) was occupied early in the second century by a monastery dedicated to St. Peter and St. Paul, “which was the mother church and burial place to all Chester, and seven miles about Chester, and so continued for the space of 300 years and more.” To this monastery (according to Bradshaw the monk) the relics of St. Werburgh, daughter of Wulphere, King of Mercia, were removed from Hanbury in 875, for fear of an incursion of the Danes, and here re-buried with great pomp; a ceremony usually called “the translation of the body.” The same author informs us that the army of Griffin, King of Wales, was stricken with blindness for their sacrilegious boldness, in attempting to disturb these sainted remains. This and other reputed miracles of St. Werburgh appear to have induced the celebrated Ethelfleda, Countess of Mercia, to translate the monastery of St. Peter and St. Paul, to the centre of the city, and to erect on its site a convent or monastery of secular nuns, dedicated to St. Werburgh and St. Oswald. Earl Leofric was a great benefactor to this foundation, having repaired its decayed buildings at his own expense: and in 1093, when (says Rodolphus Glaber) “princes strove _a vie_ that cathedral churches and minsters should be erected in a more decent and seemly form, and when Christendom roused as it were herself, and, casting away her old habiliments, did put on every where the bright and white robe of the churches,” Hugh Lupus expelled the canons secular, and laid the foundation of a magnificent building, the remains of which are still existing; it was established by him as an Abbey of Benedictine Monks from Bec in Normandy, to pray (as the foundation charter expresses it) “for the soul of William their King, and those of King William his most noble father, his mother Queen Maud, his brothers and sisters, King Edward the Confessor, themselves the founders, and those of their fathers, mothers, antecessors, heirs, parents and barons, and of all christians as well living as deceased.” The confirmation charter by the second Ranulf (surnamed De Gernon or Gernons), Earl of Chester, in which the grant of Hugh Lupus is recapitulated, is in the possession of the Marquis of Westminster, by whose kindness, this most important and interesting instrument, has been lent for the use of the Archæological Association, and has just been published in the pages of their journal. It is most beautifully written in columns or pages, for the facility of reading. The charter occupies nine, and commences with the copy of the original grant of “Hugone Cestreasi comite, anno ab incarnatione Domini milesimo nonugesimo” to the Abbey of St. Werburgh, which was witnessed by Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury, followed by the grants of several of the other witnesses, and it concludes by the confirmation of them all by the second Ranulf: (“Ego secundus Ranulfus comes Cæstrie concedo et confirmo hos omnibus donationes quos mei antecessores vel barones eor’m dederunt,”) with additional grants from himself. Anselm, Abbot of Bec, afterward Archbishop of Canterbury, regulated the new foundation and appointed Richard his chaplain the first abbot.

Hugh Lupus, following the example of most of his predecessors, lived a life of the wildest luxury and rapine. At length, falling sick from the consequence of his excesses, and age and disease coming on, the old hardened soldier was struck with remorse; and—an expiation common enough in those days—the great Hugh Lupus took the cowl, retired in the last state of disease into the monastery, and in three days was no more.

The Abbey was so richly endowed by the founder and his successors, that at the dissolution, its revenues amounted to no less a sum than £1,073 17s. 7d. per annum.

Peter of Lichfield appears to have been the first Bishop who fixed his seat at Chester, having removed hither from Lichfield in 1075. But his successor, Robert de Lindsey, removed the seat of the see to Coventry in 1095, from whence it was brought back to Lichfield in the reign of Henry 1st. From this latter period until the dissolution, the Bishops of this diocese took their titles from Coventry, Lichfield, or Chester, according as they fixed their residences, those cities being then all included in the same bishoprick. In the year 1540, in the reign of Henry 8th, monasteries were suppressed, and that of St. Werburgh shared the fate of the others. An impartial examination into this eventful period of our history, gives a painful exhibition of the precipitate haste and questionable motive with which these measures were carried into execution, while at the same time we are fully alive to all the important advantages in which they resulted. “It is painful to read, or to imagine, the ruthless violence and wanton waste with which the measures of the Reformation were carried into effect; and we must long mourn for what we lost on that occasion, while we rejoice in what we gained. Recognizing to the largest extent the blessings of the Reformation, believing that it was the source of civil as well as of religious liberty, and that the present proud position of England arises from the effort then made by men to burst the bonds in which it had been held;—admitting all this, it is impossible to deny that the work of reformation was often urged forward by motives of a baser kind than the love of truth; and it is impossible not to regret the unsparing zeal and brutal violence with which it was carried on.” Before proceeding to describe the important changes which transpired under the reign of Henry the 8th, it may not be unsuitable or without interest, to introduce a biographical list of the lordly abbots who presided over this ancient institution:—

_Richard_, 1st Abbot, had been monk of Bec, in Normandy, and chaplain
to Anselm. He died April 26, 1117, and was buried in the east angle
of the south cloister.

_William_, 2nd abbot, is stated in the charlutary to be elected abbot
in 1121, the government of the church having been perhaps
intermediately confided to Robert the prior, who died in 1120. He
died 11th non. Oct. 1140, and was buried at the head of his
predecessor.

_Ralph_, 3rd abbot, elected 11 cal. Feb. in the same year. He died
Nov. 16, 1157, and was buried at the head of abbot Richard, and at
the left side of abbot William.

_Robert Fitz-Nigel_, 4th abbot, supposed to be of the family of the
barons of Halton, elected 1157, received the bishop’s benediction at
Lichfield on the day of St. Nicholas. He died in 1174, and was
buried in the east cloister under a marble stone to the right hand of
the entrance to the chapter-house.

_Robert_, 5th abbot, elected on St. Werburgh’s day, 3 non. Feb. 1174,
received the benediction in the church of St. John, at Chester, on
the day of St. Agatha the Virgin. This abbot obtained a bull from
Pope Clement, confirming the possessions of the abbey, and granting
various privileges; and died 2 cal. Sep. 1184, on which the king took
the abbey into his hands, and committed the custody of it to Thomas
de Husseburne.

_Robert de Hastings_, 6th abbot, in 1186, was placed in this abbey by
Henry II. and Baldwin, archbishop of Canterbury. He received the
benediction at Canterbury, from the hands of Baldwin, whom he had the
honour of entertaining as legate, at Chester, in the next year, from
St. John’s-day to the following Sunday. This appointment was opposed
by earl Randal, and after much controversy before Hubert, archbishop
of Canterbury, Hastings was deposed, on the condition of Geoffry, who
was elected in his room, paying him an annual pension of xx. marks.
This abbot was buried at the head of his predecessors, William and
Ralph, in the south cloister.

_Geoffrey_ 7th abbot, was confirmed on the deposition of Hastings in
1194. The situation (from a document contained in the red book of
the abbey) appears not to have been particularly enviable at this
period. The greater part of the church was in ruins, and the
rebuilding had proceeded no further than the choir, from want of
money. The inroads of the Welsh had deprived the monks of a valuable
rectory and two manors, and the inundations of the sea had been
equally fatal in Wirral and Ince. Abbot Geoffry died May 7, 1208,
and was buried in the chapter-house, on the left hand of the
entrance, near the door.

_Hugh Grylle_, 8th abbot, was elected 1208. He occurs as a witness
to the marriage covenant of John, Earl of Chester, with Helen,
daughter of Llewelyn, Prince of Wales; and many grants to the
monastery were made in his time. The repairs of the church were
probably completed, and their affairs in a more prosperous state
generally, as Earl Randal grants to this abbot and his convent a
permission to extend their buildings in the direction of the
Northgate. Grylle died April 21, 1226, and was buried in the
Chapter-house, under the second arch from the door, on the left hand
side of the feet of Geoffry.

_William Marmion_, 9th Abbot, succeeded in 1226, and died in 1228.
His place of interment is stated to be in the cloister, close to
Robert Fitz-nigel, on the left hand side of him. The name of this
abbot occurs in a very curious document, relative to the office of
hereditary cook of the abbey.

_Walter Pincebech_, 10th abbot, received the benediction in London,
on Michaelmas-day, 1228. This abbot is witness to the contract
between Randal Blundeville and Roger de Maresey, respecting the lands
between Ribble and Mersey, anno 1232. He continued to hold the abbey
till 1240, when he was interred in the Chapter-house, at the head of
Hugh Grylle. A short time before his death, he appropriated the
rectory of Church Shotwick to support the increase of the kitchen
expenses of the convent, occasioned by adding six monks to the
previous number.

_Robert Frind_, 11th Abbot, was consecrated at Coventry, by Hugh de
Pateshul, bishop of that see, on St. Matthew’s day, 1240. He died
1249, and was buried in the Chapter-house, under the second arch, on
the right hand of the door. This abbot added the appropriation of
the chapel of Wervin to the funds of the kitchen, in consequence of
having increased the number of his monks to forty.

_Thomas Capenhurst_, 12th abbot, succeeded in 1249. He was of the
family of the mesne lords of Capenhurst, and had to struggle with a
series of powerful enemies of the convent. The first was Roger de
Montalt, justiciary of Chester, who endeavoured by means of the
additional power which he enjoyed by his office, to wrest from the
abbey restitution of the manors of Lawton, and Goosetrey, and the
churches of Bruera, Neston, and Coddington, which had been given by
his ancestors to the abbey. A portion of these possessions was
occupied by an armed force, and the business was only compromised by
severe sacrifices on the part of the monks. The resignation of
Bretton manor is the only one noticed in the chronicle of the abbey,
but the chartulary mentions several other losses, to which may
certainly be added, that of Lea, in Broxton hundred, of which the
Montalts had afterwards possession. The chronicle does not fail to
notice the judgments of heaven on Roger de Montalt, that his eldest
son died within fifteen days after the compromise, and that Roger
himself died of want, his burial place remaining unknown unto the
common people. A similar attempt to recover Astbury, was made by
Roger Venables in 1259, and according to the Chronicle, was attended
with an equal interposition of Providence, the Baron of Kinderton
dying the year after. In 1263, another contest arose between the
abbot and William la Zuche, justiciary, who occupied the abbey with
an armed force, and proceeded to extremities of insult, which
occasioned all the churches in Chester to be laid under an interdict.
In the next year the gardens and buildings of the abbey in “Baggelon”
were destroyed to facilitate the strengthening of Chester against a
siege, which was apprehended from the barons and the Welshmen.
Capenhurst survived this last grievance only one year, and dying 4
cal. May, 1265, was buried at the head of his predecessor, on the
right hand of the entrance into the chapter-house. It is observable
that however violent the measures were, to which the laity resorted
at this period, for the purpose of wresting back from the church the
possessions which the liberality of their ancestors had bestowed on
it, the regular clergy themselves were little more scrupulous;
witness the circumstances noticed in the contest between the abbots
of Basingwerk and Chester, for the rectory of West Kirby, in which
Ralph de Montalt, presented by this abbot, is positively stated to
have been put into possession of his rectory in war time, by absolute
force of arms.

_Simon de Albo Monasterio_, or _Whitchurch_, who had previously been
a monk of this abbey, succeeded as 13th abbot, and if we may judge
from the frequent occurrence of his name in the abbey chartulary, was
one of the most active heads this monastery ever enjoyed. He was
regularly elected by the entire convent xv. cal. May, 1265, in the
45th year of his age, and the 22nd after assuming the cowl, Simon de
Montford being then usurper of the Earldom of Chester. His admission
was opposed by Lucas de Taney, Justiciary of Chester, who kept the
abbey open for three weeks, and taking the revenues into his hands,
wasted them by the most scandalous profligacy. Simon de Montfort,
however, much to his honour, on hearing the circumstances, admitted
the abbot, and directed Lucas de Taney to make ample compensation to
the abbey, after which Roger de Menland, then bishop of Coventry and
Lichfield, confirmed his election at Tachebrook, on Whit-Monday, and
Simon de Montford having invested him with the temporalities at
Hereford the Monday following, the new abbot received the benediction
from his before-mentioned diocesan at Tachebrooke, on Trinity Sunday.
On this same day the partizans of Prince Edward laid siege to Chester
Castle, and a reverse of fortune speedily taking place, the election
of the abbot was declared void by the lawful earl, as having been
unratified by himself. The abbot, however, made his peace with
Prince Edward at Beeston, and compensation was made him at the
instance of James de Audley, Justiciary, even to the replacing from
the stores in the Castle, two casks of wine, which had been consumed
by the Prince’s attendants, during his deposition. The struggles
between the laity and the clergy, which are particularly observable
in the documents of Vale Royal and this monastery, about this period,
and had so peculiarly disquieted the abbacy of Thomas de Capenhurst,
were continued in that of his successor. Philip Burnel, and his wife
Isabella, baroness of Malpas, attempted to recover the manors of
Saighton, Huntington, Cheveley, and Boughton, a domain as desirable
to the abbey, from its richness as its contiguity to Chester. After
a protracted contest, the claimants released their right to abbot
Simon in the king’s court at Westminster, in 1281, in the royal
presence, but the monks purchased the compliance by a bond for the
payment of £200 sterling. The chartulary states that the influence
of Robert Burnel, bishop of Bath and Wells, and uncle to the
claimant, was corruptly used in obtaining this bond: payment was,
however, never made, for the abbot had shortly afterwards the address
to procure a release, on stipulating for the maintenance of two
chaplains to pray for the soul of the said Philip Burnel for ever.
Among the following donations by the family of Burnel, was the grant
of a fountain at Christleton, which was doubtless of high importance.
A cistern twenty feet square was made at Christleton, and another
formed within the cloisters, and a communication established by
pipes, which a patent from Edward I. enabled the monks to carry
through all intervening lands, permitting even the city walls to be
taken down for the purpose. It is observable that a forester of
Delamere, Randle de Mereton, whose estate was trespassed on in
consequence of this order, ventured on cutting off the pipes which
the abbots had laid, for which he was ordered to make reparation by a
royal mandate, 13 Edward I. This abbot departed this life April 24,
1289, aged 69, and was interred in the chapter house, on the south
side, under a marble stone, within an arch supported by six marble
pillars. During this abbacy, the monastery, or a considerable
portion thereof, was re-built, as appears by precepts directed to
Reginald de Grey, 12 Edward I. to allow venison from the forests of
Delamere and Wirral for the support of the monks then occupied “on
the great work of the building of the church.” Abbot Simon also
appropriated a large share of the revenues of the abbey to the
several uses of the infirmary, the kitchen, the refectory, and the
distribution of alms, as specified in the chartulary. After the
death of Simon de Whitchurch, the king retained the abbey in his
hands for two years.

_Thomas de Byrche-Hylles_, a chaplain of his predecessor, succeeded
as 14th abbot, Jan. 30, 1291. He died 1323, and was buried on the
south side of the choir, above the bishop’s throne, nearly in the
line of the pillars. On his gravestone was a brass plate with his
effigies, and in this spot his body was found in almost complete
preservation, on opening a grave for the remains of dean Smith, in
1787.

_William de Bebington_, 15th abbot, previously prior of the
monastery, was elected abbot Feb. 5, 1324. In 1345, he obtained the
mitre for himself and his successors, and in the year following, an
exemption from the visitation. He died Nov. 20, 1349, and was buried
on the right side of his predecessor.

_Richard Seynesbury_, 16th abbot, was elected 1349. In 1359, he
stated the privileges of his abbey in plea to a writ of quo warranto.
In 1362, about the feast of the Annunciation, the abbot of St.
Alban’s, provincial president of the Benedictines, the prior of
Coventry, and the superior of St. Alban’s, visited Chester Abbey as
commissioners, deputed by the abbot of Evesham. In consequence of
this visitation, Richard de Seynesbury, who (according to the
chronicle) was fearful of a scrutiny into his offences and excessive
dilapidations, resigned his abbey into the hands of the pope, as the
abbey, being an exempt, was under the papal protection. An inquiry
into his conduct was instituted at Rome; and in the following year
pope Urban admitted the abbot’s resignation, and conferred the office
on his successor. This abbot died in Lombardy.

_Thomas de Newport_, 17th abbot, received the benediction in the
papal court on the feast of the Annunciation, and was installed at
Chester on the day of St. Remigius following. This abbot died at his
manor house of Little Sutton, in Wirral, June 1, 1385, and was buried
in the chapter-house, within the inner door, with his effigy in brass
upon the stone.

_William de Mershton_, 18th abbot, formerly a monk of this convent,
was elected abbot July 30, 1385. He died on the 13th of January
following, and was buried without the choir, on the right of William
de Bebington, in the south aisle.

_Henry de Sutton_, 19th abbot. He occurs as abbot in 1410, which was
the 24th year of his presiding over this monastery, as appears by the
pleas of the abbey, holden over the monastery gate, before Nicholas
Fare, the abbot’s seneschal. This abbot was for a time justice of
Chester, and in 1399 had license to fortify his three manor-houses at
Little Sutton, Saighton, and Ince. He was buried in the broad aisle,
close to the north side of the south pillar, next to the entrance
into the choir, before a painting formerly called the piety of St.
Mary.

_Thomas Yerdesley_, 20th abbot, occurs as abbot in several portmote
pleadings 7 Henry V. and is mentioned also several times in the reign
of Henry VI. He was one of the justices in commission to hold
assizes for the county, and dying 1434, was buried under a marble
stone on the north side of the choir, above the shrine of St.
Werburgh.

_John Salghall_, 21st abbot, suffered excommunication in 1440, for
not appearing in convocation after being personally cited; but
afterwards appearing and pleading exemption, he was absolved. This
abbot died in 1450, and was buried in St. Mary’s chapel, between two
pillars on the south side, under an alabaster stone, which had his
effigy in brass fixed upon it. The site of his interment was
formerly called the chapel of St. Erasmus.

_Richard Oldham_, 22nd abbot, 1452; about twenty years afterwards he
was promoted to the bishopric of the Isle of Man, and dying Oct. 13,
1485, was buried at Chester abbey; a short time before which he was
indicted in the portmote court, for removing the city boundaries
about the Northgate, and at the same time (21 Edw. iv,) ‘divers
wymen’ were indicted, who were the paramours ‘of the monks of
Chester.’

_Simon Ripley_, 23rd abbot, rebuilt the nave, tower, and south
transept of the abbey, and probably commenced the great plan of
alterations and improvements which were interrupted by the
reformation. This abbot also rebuilt or considerably improved the
great manor-house at Saighton, the embattled tower of which is still
remaining. He died at Warwick, August 30, 1492, and was buried in
the collegiate church there. On the north side of the north-east
large pillar, supporting the central tower, was formerly painted the
history of the transfiguration, in which was introduced a figure of
this abbot under a canopy, with a book in one hand, the other lifted
up in the act of blessing, and the ring upon the fourth finger.

_John Birchenshaw_ was appointed 24th abbot by the Pope, Oct. 4,
1493. He is supposed by Willis to have been a native of Wales, from
his name appearing in an inscription on the great bell of Conway
church. His attention, like that of his predecessor, was turned to
restoring the magnificence of the buildings of the abbey. The
beautiful western entrance is his work, and he doubtless intended to
have added two western towers to this great entrance, of one of which
he laid the foundations in 1508. The half of Ince manor-house is
apparently in the style of this abbot’s time; and for the further
improvement of Saighton manor-house, which had already been
sumptuously restored by his predecessor, he obtained, 6 Henry VIII.
the royal licence to impark 1000 acres in Huntington, Cheveley, and
Saighton. At the same time he had charter of free warren granted in
all his lands in Cheshire, not being parcel of the king’s forests.
In the year 1511, in the mayoralty of Thomas Smith, violent
dissensions had arisen between the city and this abbot. Thomas
Hyphile, and Thomas Marshall, were successively appointed, and acted
as abbots in his room. After a contest, however, which lasted many
years, Birchenshaw was restored about 1530, and is supposed to have
enjoyed his abbacy to the time of his death, which happened about
seven years afterwards. In 1516, a commission was issued at Rome to
Thomas, Cardinal of York, to hear and make award between Geoffry,
Bishop of Lichfield, and this abbot, respecting the use of the mitre,
crosier, and other pontificals, and the giving the blessing.

_John Clarke_, 25th and last abbot (omitting Hyphile and Marshall),
was elected about the year 1537. He had the good fortune to comply
with the wishes of his sovereign at the dissolution, and accordingly
was suffered to retain the government of the dissolved abbey of St.
Werburgh, under the character of dean of the new cathedral, which
King Henry established within its walls. At the dissolution, the
clear yearly value of the abbey was £889 18s. {21} The monks had
also the patronage of several rich unappropriated rectories. Their
lands extended over various parts of Cheshire and other counties, but
in Wirral created an overwhelming influence, and extended in almost
an unbroken ring round the city of Chester. Many considerable
families held lands by the tenure of various offices in the abbey.
The manorial lord of Burwardsley was their champion; and a valuable
rectory (Ince) was appropriated to the uses of the almoner. The Earl
of Derby was seneschal at the time of the dissolution. By a charter
of one of the earls of the name of Randal, the abbots were directed
at any period to have their mansion-houses fitted up in a state fit
to receive the abbot’s retinue and to be the seats of the courts; and
by licence from the bishops of Lichfield, oratories were also
established in these manor-houses. Irby, Bromborough, Sutton, and
Saighton, appear to have been the principal ones at an early period.
The three first were the original seats of the courts held for the
Wirral manor, and Saighton occurs in a licence for fortifying by
Edward I. noticed in the chartulary. By a subsequent licence for
fortifying, 19 Richard II. it appears that Sutton, Saighton, and
Ince, had then become the principal manorial residences, and these
continued such to the dissolution.

On the general dissolution of the monasteries, Chester was erected into an independent bishoprick, and St. Werburgh’s was converted into a Cathedral Church, which it has ever since remained. It was dedicated to Christ and the Blessed Virgin Mary; and a dean and six prebendaries installed in it, Thomas Clarke, the last abbot, being appointed the first dean.

By charter of endowment, dated 5th August, 1541, Henry VIII. granted to the Bishop of Chester and his successors the Archdeaconries of Chester and Richmond, with all their appurtenances, rights, &c.; the Manors of Abbots Cotton in the county of Chester; lands in the parishes of St. Mary, St. Martin, St. Michael, St. Werburgh, and Trinity in the city of Chester; city lands in Mancot, Harden, Christleton, Nantwich, Northwich, Middlewich, Over, Wollaston, Neston, Heswell, Bidston, Sandbach, Thornton, Eccleston, Rosthern and Davenham; parcel of the late Monastery of St. Werburgh; the advowson of Over Rectory; pensions issuing out of Handley Rectory, Budworth Chapel, and Bidston Rectory; parcel of Birkenhead Abbey; the advowsons of Tattenhall and Waverton; rectories of Clapham, Esingwold, Thornton, Stuart, Bolton-in-Lonsdale, Bolton-le-Moors, and prebend of Bolton-le-Moors in Lichfield Cathedral; and the Manor of Weston in the county of Derby.

But the See of Chester did not long remain in possession of these rich endowments, for in 1546 the arbitrary and avaricious Henry despoiled the Bishopric of the manors and real estates narrated in the above charter of endowment, and in lieu thereof compelled the Bishop to accept of the rectories and advowsons of Cottingham in Yorkshire, Kirby, Ravensworth, Pabrick, Brompton, Wirklington, Ribchester, Chipping Mottram, and Bradley in Staffordshire, Castleton in Derbyshire, and Wallasey, Weverham, Backford, and Boden in Cheshire, paying as a chief rent £15 19s. 9d.

The endowments made by Henry VIII. to the Deanery of Chester, consisted of manors and lands to the yearly value of £563 3s. 8d., besides spiritualities to the value of £358 10s. 2d. But these splendid gifts were not destined to remain long in possession of the Dean and Chapter. In 1550 Sir Robert Cotton, Comptroller of the Household to Edward VI., having procured the imprisonment of the Dean and two Prebendaries, obtained from them a deed of surrender of the Deanery estates in his own favour. The estates so obtained were disposed of by Cotton in fee farm to certain gentlemen in Cheshire at very low prices. But the Chapter having discovered some years afterwards that the original grant of Henry VIII. was null through the omission of the word “_Cestriæ_” in the description of the grantees, they petitioned the Queen to re-grant to them the estates illegally obtained by Cotton as before mentioned; and their petition was twice argued in the Court of Exchequer. But the gentlemen to whom Cotton had sold the lands, apprehensive of the issue, bestowed a bribe of six years’ rent upon Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester, the then all-powerful favourite of Queen Elizabeth, who, thus stimulated, prevailed with the Queen to put a stop to the proceedings in the Exchequer, and _grant a commission to him_ and certain other Privy Councillors to hear and determine the matters at issue between the parties. The result was, that in 1580 the charter of Henry VIII. was recalled, and the estates confirmed to the fee farmers, on payment of certain rents, with which, and a few impropriations, the Queen by advice of the Earl and his coadjutors, re-endowed the Chapter.

The following is a list of the Bishops, with the date of their consecration, from the foundation of the see in 1541, to the present time, for which we are mainly indebted to the valuable foot notes appended to Gastrell’s Notitia.

John Bird, D.D. descended from an ancient family in Cheshire, educated as a Carmelite Friar at Oxford, and distinguished there by his learning and zeal. In 1516 he became provincial of the order of Carmelites throughout England, which office Godwin erroneously states he held at the dissolution of the monasteries. Bird did not advocate the king’s supremacy, until he found that the pope’s power was waning, when Henry 8th appointed him one of his chaplains, and thus confirmed his hitherto wavering opinions. He was soon after consecrated Bishop of Ossery, from which he was translated in 1539 to Bangor, and thence to Chester in 1541. On Queen Mary’s accession, he accommodated himself to the changes which were introduced, but could not preserve his see, of which he was deprived in 1553, in consequence of his being married. Wood states that the Bishop, after his deprivation, lived in obscurity at Chester, and, dying there in 1556, was buried in the Cathedral. Bishop Bird was a learned man, and published several short discourses in Latin and English. Posterity, however, would have thought more favourably of him, had he not alienated some of the revenues of his see, and made leases injurious to his successors.

George Coates was B.A. in 1522, when he was elected Probationer Fellow of Balliol College, Oxford. He afterwards became a Fellow of Magdalene College in the same university; M.A. 1526, Proctor 1531, and elected Master of Balliol in 1539. He was also Rector of Cotgrove, near Nottingham, and became Prebendary of Chester in 1544; and on the 1st of April, 1554, was consecrated Bishop of Chester. He did not long survive his last appointment, as he died at Chester in the year 1555, very shortly after he had condemned George Marsh to the fires of martyrdom at Boughton. This intrepid martyr regarded his faith as being too precious to be sacrificed, even to save his life. He held his principles with unflinching steadfastness; they were the ripened convictions of his judgment—the pabulum of his inward life—and he nobly maintained them, even to the death.

The following account is given by Foxe of the life and persecutions of this faithful and holy man:—

George Marsh was born in the parish of Dean, in the county of
Lancaster, and, having received a good education, his parents brought
him up in the habits of trade and industry. About the 25th year of
his age, he married a young woman of the country; with whom he
continued living upon a farm, having several children. His wife
dying, he having formed a proper establishment for his children, went
into the university of Cambridge, where he studied, and much
increased in learning, and was a minister of God’s holy word and
sacraments, and was for awhile curate to the Rev. Laurence Saunders.
In this situation he continued for a time, earnestly setting forth
the true religion, to the weakening of false doctrine, by his godly
readings and sermons, as well there and in the parish of Dean, as
elsewhere in Lancashire. But such a zealous protestant could hardly
be safe. At length he was apprehended, and kept close prisoner in
Chester, by the bishop of that see, about the space of four months,
not being permitted to have the relief and comfort of his friends;
but charge being given unto the porter, to mark who they were that
asked for him, and to signify their names to the bishop.

He was afterwards sent to Lancaster castle; and being brought with
other prisoners to the sessions, he was made to hold up his hand with
the malefactors; when the Earl of Derby had the following
conversation with him, which is given to us partly in his own
expressive and unaffected language.

“I told his lordship, that I had not dwelt in the country these three
or four years past, and came home but lately to visit my mother,
children, and other friends, and that I meant to have departed out of
the country before Easter, and to have gone out of the realm.
Wherefore I trusted, seeing nothing could be laid against me, wherein
I had offended against the laws, that his lordship would not with
captious questions examine me, to bring my body into danger of death,
to the great discomfort of my mother. On the earl asking me into
what land I would have gone? I answered, I would have gone either
into Germany, or else into Denmark. He said to his council, that in
Denmark they used such heresy as they have done in England: but as
for Germany the emperor had destroyed it.

“I then said that I trusted, as his lordship had been of the
honourable council of the late king Edward, consenting and agreeing
to acts concerning faith towards God and religion, under great pain,
would not so soon after consent to put poor men to shameful deaths
for believing what he had then professed. To this he answered that
he, with the lord Windsor, lord Dacres, and others, did not consent
to those acts, and that their refusal would be seen as long as the
parliament-house stood. He then rehearsed the misfortune of the
dukes of Northumberland and Suffolk, with others, because they
favoured not the true religion; and again the prosperity of the
queen’s highness, because she favoured the true religion; thereby
gathering the one to be good, and of God, and the other to be wicked,
and of the devil; and said that the duke of Northumberland confessed
so plainly.”

And thus have you heard the whole trouble which George Marsh
sustained both at Latham and also at Lancaster. While at Latham it
was falsely reported that he had consented, and agreed in all things
with the earl and his council; and while at Lancaster, many came to
talk with him, giving him such counsel as Peter gave Christ: but he
answered that he could not follow their counsel, but that by God’s
grace he would live and die with a pure conscience, and as hitherto
he had believed and professed.

Within a few days after, the said Marsh was removed from Lancaster;
and coming to Chester, was sent for by Dr. Cotes, then bishop, to
appear before him in his hall, nobody being present but they twain.
Then he asked him certain questions concerning the sacrament, and
Marsh made such answers as seemed to content the bishop, saving that
he utterly denied transubstantiation, and allowed not the abuse of
the mass, nor that the lay people should receive under one kind only,
contrary to Christ’s institution: in which points the bishop went
about to persuade him, howbeit, (God be thanked,) all in vain. Much
other talk he had with him, to move him to submit himself to the
universal church of Rome; and when he could not prevail he sent him
to prison again. And after, being there, came to him divers times,
one Massie, a fatherly old man, one Wrench the schoolmaster, one
Hensham the bishop’s chaplain, and the archdeacon, with many more;
who, with much philosophy, worldly wisdom, and deceitful vanity,
after the tradition of men, but not after Christ, endeavoured to
persuade him to submit himself to the church of Rome, to acknowledge
the pope as its head, and to interpret the Scripture no otherwise
than that church did.

To these Mr. Marsh answered, that he did acknowledge and believe one
only catholic and apostolic church, without which there is no
salvation; and that this church is but one, because it ever hath
confessed and shall confess and believe one only God, and one only
Messiah, and in him only trust for salvation: which church also is
ruled and led by one Spirit, one word, and one faith; and that this
church is universal and catholic, because it ever hath been since the
world’s beginning, is, and shall endure to the world’s end, and
comprehending within it all nations, kindreds, and languages,
degrees, states, and conditions of men: and that this church is built
only upon the foundations of the prophets and apostles, Jesus Christ
himself being the chief corner stone, and not upon the Romish laws
and decrees, whose head the bishop of Rome was. And where they said
the church did stand in ordinary succession of bishops, being ruled
by general councils, holy fathers, and the laws of the holy church,
and so had continued for the space of fifteen hundred years and more;
he replied that the holy church, which is the body of Christ, and
therefore most worthy to be called holy, was before any succession of
bishops, general councils, or Romish decrees: neither was it bound to
any time or place, ordinary succession, or traditions of fathers; nor
had it any supremacy over empires and kingdoms; but it was a poor
simple flock, dispersed abroad, as sheep without a shepherd in the
midst of wolves; or as a family of orphans and fatherless children:
and that this church was led and ruled by the word of Christ, he
being the supreme head of this church, and assisting, succouring, and
defending it from all assaults, errors and persecutions, wherewith it
is ever encompassed about.

After the bishop of Chester had taken pleasure in punishing his
prisoner, and often reviling him, giving taunts and odious names of
heretic, &c., he caused him to be brought forth into a chapel in the
cathedral church, called Our Lady Chapel, before him the said bishop,
at two o’clock in the afternoon; when were also present the mayor of
the city, Dr. Wall and other priests assisting him, George Wensloe,
chancellor, and one John Chetham, registrar. Then they caused George
Marsh to take an oath to answer truly unto such articles as should be
objected against him. Upon which oath taken, the chancellor laid
unto his charge, that he had preached and openly published most
heretically and blasphemously, within the parishes of Dean, Eccles,
Bolton, Bury, and many other parishes within the bishop’s diocese, in
the months of January and February last preceding, directly against
the pope’s authority, and catholic church of Rome, the blessed mass,
the sacrament of the altar, and many other articles. Unto all which
in sum he answered, that he neither heretically nor blasphemously
preached or spake against any of the said articles; but simply and
truly, as occasion served, and as it were thereunto forced in
conscience, maintained the truth respecting the same articles, as he
said all now present did likewise acknowledge in the time of King
Edward VI.

Then they examined him severally of every article, and bade him
answer Yes, or No, without equivocation; for they were come to
examine, and not to dispute at that present. He accordingly answered
them every article very modestly, agreeably to the doctrine by public
authority received and taught in this realm at the death of King
Edward; which answers were every one written by the registrar, to the
uttermost that could make against him. This ended, he was returned
to his prison again.

Within three weeks after this, in the said chapel, and in like sort
as before, the bishop and others before named, there being assembled,
he was again brought before them. Then the chancellor, by way of an
oration, declared unto the people present, that the bishop had done
what he could in showing his charitable disposition towards Marsh,
but that all that he could do would not help; so that he was now
determined, if Marsh would not relent and abjure, to pronounce
sentence definitive against him. Wherefore he bade George Marsh to
be now well advised what he would do, for it stood upon his life; and
if he would not at that present forsake his heretical opinions, it
would, (after the sentence given) be too late, though he might never
so gladly desire it.

Then the chancellor read all his answers that he made at his former
examination; and at every one he asked, whether he would stick to the
same, or no? To which he answered again, “Yea, yea.” Here also
others took occasion to ask him (for that he denied the bishop of
Rome’s authority in England) whether Linus, Anacletus, and Clement,
that were bishops of Rome, were not good men, and he answered, “Yes,
and divers others. But,” said he, “they claimed no more authority in
England than the bishop of Canterbury doth at Rome; and I strive not
with the place, neither speak I against the person or the bishop, but
against his doctrine; which in most points is repugnant to the
doctrine of Christ.” “Thou art an arrogant fellow indeed, then,”
said the bishop. “In what article is the doctrine of the church of
Rome repugnant to the doctrine of Christ?”