Part 13 (1/2)
In the years 1884 to 1891 excavations were conducted on the site of the old ”Angel Inn,” when it was discovered that it had been a Roman burial-place. Amongst the debris were found several funeral urns. Under St. Peter's at Gowts was brought to light a Roman altar, and remains of a Roman villa were unearthed at Greetwell. In the same year, that is to say 1884, the Blue Coat School was closed, its endowments were given to the Middle School, and the buildings were sold to the Church Inst.i.tute.
Within the last few years two memorable events occurred. In the year 1884 the See of Lincoln was deprived of the county of Nottingham, which was transferred from that see to the See of Southwell. This was followed shortly afterwards by the great lawsuit called ”The Lincoln Judgment.”
Great controversy arose and came to a climax. In the year 1888 Dr. King, the Bishop of Lincoln, was cited before his metropolitan, Dr. Benson, the Archbishop of Canterbury, to answer charges of various ritual offences alleged to have been committed by himself at the administration of the Holy Communion.
The action was brought by certain gentlemen of Lincoln interested in the doings of their prelate. Their religious scruples had been outraged, it appears, on two separate occasions; namely, in the Church of St. Peter's at Gowts on December 4, 1887, and in the Cathedral on December 10 of the same year. An appeal had been made to the Archbishop to restrain these illegal practices. The celebrated ecclesiastical lawsuit was heard in 1888. The judgment was confined to the declarations of the law, which were summarised. No monition or sentence was p.r.o.nounced against the Bishop of Lincoln for having committed breaches of the ecclesiastical law. The dissension has happily ended. The Bishop of Lincoln has conformed his practice to the Archbishop's judgment from the date of its delivery, and still retains his bishopric. Thus has ended the conflict between the Primate and the Suffragan, which agitated, for a brief s.p.a.ce of time, the opponents of offences of ritualism, and brought about the famous Lincoln Judgment.
Bath
Baden-ceaster.
(”Doomsday Book.”)
On the banks of the river Avon, in the County of Somersets.h.i.+re, is situated the beautiful and ancient city of Bath. Its ecclesiastical history is closely bound up with that of Wells, and at one time with that of Glas...o...b..ry, when it figures in the disputes concerning the See.
This unseemly quarrelling amongst prelates is now happily laid at rest.
Though lacking in all authority, Bath is the joint partner of Wells in the bishopric t.i.tle.
The origin of the city of Bath takes us far back. Perhaps the strongest link with the Roman days, besides the Roman roads, lies in the present-day existence of the Roman baths, built about 55 B.C.
These baths were probably erected to confine the hot springs, and to enjoy more thoroughly the benefit derived from the medicinal properties of these waters, which are chalybeate and saline.
Though we are told that in all probability it is a mere myth that the British king, Bladud, first founded this city of Bath, yet we are inclined to think that the presence of these springs would influence a settlement of even the nomadic British, prior to the Roman invasion.
When we remember what primitive ideas the early Britons had, we cannot wonder at the non-existence of any vestiges of their occupation. In these days of materialism one loves to respect old traditions, however uncertain they may be in substance. We would therefore give the benefit of the doubt to an early British settlement.
With the arrival of the Romans the approximate date and origin of Bath can be readily ascertained. From excavations on the place since the year 1875, it has been proved that the Romans founded here a city, which they named Aquae Solis, in the reign of Claudius. In 55 B.C. the baths had been constructed for certain. In addition to this they erected a temple to Minerva, with votive offerings, and many other buildings, and carried a line of fortifications and walls around the city. The remains of their marvellous architecture still bear testimony, though they have suffered ill-treatment and undergone restoration, to their former magnificence and grandeur.
On the retirement of the Romans Aquae Solis pa.s.sed into the hands of the Britons, under the name of Cr Palladen (the city of the waters of Pallas). During their possession of a century, two attacks made by the Saxon chieftains, lla and Cerdic, were repulsed by King Arthur.
The Saxons, by the year 577, having practically subverted the rest of the kingdom, turned their attention to the West. They seized and ravaged Bath. The Roman structures were reduced to ruins. After a while they rebuilt the walls and fortifications upon the original foundations, employing the old materials. The baths also were soon restored. By this time the Saxons had renamed the city, ”Hat Bathur” (Hot baths), and ”Ace-mannes-ceaster” (City of invalids). The ”ceaster” tacked on to the Saxon word is the first evidence we get of the Saxon recognition of the former existence of the Roman occupation of this city.
With the spreading influence of Christianity travelling from the east to the west of England in the seventh century, a nunnery was erected here, in 676, by King Osric. This was destroyed during the wars of the Heptarchy, and on its site a college of secular canons was founded, in 775, by Offa, King of Mercia. This monarch had taken Bath from the King of Wess.e.x, and had annexed it to his own kingdom. Possibly in recognition of this victory he built an abbey in 775.
After this the city evidently increased in prosperity, for it was important enough to witness the coronation of Edgar in 973, as King of England, by Dunstan, Archbishop of Canterbury. At the same time Edgar converted the college of secular canons into a Benedictine monastery.
This, with the church, was again demolished by the Danes.
This city of Bath, like all other cities of that time, came under the Norman Survey, and was entered in Doomsday Book as Baden-ceaster.
William Rufus had scarce been crowned king when Bath was seized and burnt, the most part by Geoffry, Bishop of Coutances, and Robert de Mowbray. They had jointly risen in support of the claim laid to the throne of England by Robert Duke of Normandy. But under the abbacy of John de Villula it soon recovered prosperity. This abbot, on promotion to the See of Wells, about 1090, purchased the city from Henry I. He built a new church, and removed the See from Wells to this place. Here it remained till 1193, when Bishop Savaricus handed it over to Richard I., in exchange for Glas...o...b..ry Abbey.
[Ill.u.s.tration: BATH
PULTENEY BRIDGE]
About this time Bath received its first charter as a free borough from this monarch, and was represented in Parliament in 1297. In 1330 the manufacture of woollen cloth was established by the monks. By reason of this the shuttle was incorporated in the arms of the monastery. In 1447, and in 1590, Henry VI. and Elizabeth respectively granted charters, which materially increased the prospects of the city.
This present cruciform Abbey Church dates from 1499. It is dedicated to St. Peter and St. Paul, and forms one of the best specimens of the later style of English architecture. It rests upon the site of the conventual church of the monastery founded by Osric. After a course of eight hundred years it became dilapidated, and was rebuilt from the old materials in 1495, by Bishop Oliver King. He is said to have been admonished in a dream. He did not live to see the completion of the building.