road is popularly called the Street nearly all the way to Gloucester. To secure this passage over the rapid river Wye must have been a matter of much importance, and it does not appear at all probable that the Roman general neglected to defend it.

Those of our associates who have examined the castle this morning, will no doubt have observed rows of Roman bricks in the wall of that part commonly, although perhaps improperly, called the chapel. I cannot help thinking that the Anglo-Norman castle was built on the site of the old Roman fortification, of which, it may be, the wall in question is the only portion remaining. I am by no means disposed to place any great reliance upon ancient traditions, yet they are not altogether to be rejected in our inquiries, however absurd they may at first sight appear; that which attributes the erection of the castle to Julius Cæsar, which I have heard a hundred times repeated, may be only a mistake in the person of Julius Frontinus.

No Roman antiquities have ever been discovered at Chepstow that I am aware of, nor is there any reason to suppose that a town existed on this spot prior to the Norman conquest. Two grants to the bishop are recorded in the Liber Llandavensis, which include, according to the described boundaries, which are very well defined, the whole of the present town, which at that time-the sixth century-appears to have been open land, without even a house upon it. If any British town at all existed in the neighbourhood, it was probably at Hardwick, where there is a strongly fortified post upon the summit of a lofty cliff on the bank of the Wye, which bounds it on the east side. A deep ravine, running at right angles to the river, forms a natural defence on the south; a double rampart and ditches, in the form of a bow, complete the camp. Soon after the Norman conquest, William Fitz-Osbern was created earl of Hereford and governor of the Marches, and we learn from Domesday that he built the castle of Estrighoiel. This was probably little more than a small fort. He was killed in Flanders in 1070. His son Roger succeeded him; but in 1075, having been engaged in an insurrection, his estates were forfeited to the crown, and he was imprisoned for life.

It was next given to William de Owe, who was in pos

session at the time of the great survey; but he also forfeited his estates for rebellion against William Rufus in 1096, and Strogoil was given to Richard de Clare. All these early lords were related to the Conqueror. Richard de Clare died in 1114 and was succeeded by Gilbert Strongbow, called De Tonbridge, brother of Walter, the founder of Tintern abbey: he died in 1142: his son, Gilbert Strongbow, was created earl of Pembroke by king Stephen in 1139, and died 1148. He was buried at Tintern, and if the mutilated effigy there be intended for one of this family, he may be the person. He was the only Strongbow who is known to have been buried in the abbey. I would, however, beg to observe, that Strongbow was a family designation common to all the early Clares, and not, as is very commonly supposed, confined to Richard, the son of this earl, who succeeded him, went to Ireland, and died there in 1177, and was buried in Christchurch, Dublin. Another of the Strongbows was buried in the abbey of Gloucester. Isabella, the daughter and heiress of Richard Strongbow, was an infant at her father's death, and her wardship was granted to Patrick de Cadourcis, who held Chepstow as her guardian in 33rd Henry II and 6th of Richard I. She married William Marshal the elder, who was created earl of Pembroke, and died in 1219. He was succeeded by his five sons in succession, William, Richard, Gilbert, Walter, and Anselm, who all died without issue. The estates became divisible among their five sisters, and upon partition Chepstow was allotted to the eldest, Maud, widow of Hugh Bygod, earl of Norfolk. She died in 1248. Roger Bygod, her son, died without issue in 1269, upon which the estate passed to his nephew, Roger Bygod, son of his brother Hugh, as heir-at-law. In 1302 he surrendered all his lands, with the earldom of Norfolk and office of marshal, to king Edward I, and took a regrant to himself and Alice his wife for life, and their issue, with remainder in default of issue to the king. He died without issue in 1305, and the estates went to the king.

In 1307 John Cromwell had the custody of the castle of Strugoyl, with the chases and appurtenances to the same castle belonging, and the town of Chepstowe, to hold during pleasure. This is the earliest record in which I have

found the name of Chepstow. On 16th December, 1312, king Edward II gave the castle and estate to his brother Thomas de Brotherton, who in 1324 gave it to Hugh le Despenser for life, upon whose execution in November 1326 it reverted. In October 1326 William de Tracey, sheriff of Gloucestershire, was ordered to victual the castle of Strogoil for defence against the queen and Mortimer, which was done, and provisions to the value of £24: 15s. sent in and delivered to Roger Barnard, who was probably the governor. The king himself was there shortly after, and embarked on board a vessel, intending to go to Lundy Island. Many of his household went to Bristol and joined the

queen.

Upon the death of Thomas de Brotherton in 1338 his widow, Mary, countess of Norfolk, held the castle and manor, and died seized in 1362, upon which they reverted to the crown; but were immediately granted to sir Walter Manny and Margaret his wife, eldest daughter of Thomas de Brotherton by his first wife, and widow of lord Seagrave. It is singular that no memorial, traditional or otherwise, of this extraordinary character and famous warrior should have been preserved in Chepstow, which he held for ten years. He died in 1373.

John de Hastynges, earl of Pembroke and lord of Abergavenny, was the next lord, in right of his wife, Ann, daughter of sir Walter Manny, subject, however, to her mother's dower. The earl died without issue by this lady, who was his second wife. Margaret lady Manny died in 1399. Her grandson, Thomas Mowbray, son of her daughter Elizabeth by her first husband, lord Seagrave, was created earl of Nottingham, earl marshal, and afterwards duke of Norfolk by king Richard II, and held the castle manor till his death in 1400 at Venice, whither he had been banished for treason. His sons, Thomas and John, were both under age; the eldest died in his minority. John came of age in 1413, and in the 3rd Henry VI was restored to his title of duke of Norfolk. He died in 1432, and his son John, who succeeded him in the estates, died 1461.

John Mowbray, duke of Norfolk, etc., son of the last, in the 8th Edward IV, exchanged the castle and manor of Chepstow and the manor of Tidenham with sir William

VOL. X.

33

Herbert, the first earl of Pembroke of that family, for other manors in Surrey and Suffolk; and as this exchange was made at the request of the king, he granted to the duke the same extensive rights and privileges in the manors he received as those he had enjoyed at Chepstow.

The earl of Pembroke held the estate but a few months, being beheaded at Banbury in July 1469. His son William surrendered the earldom of Pembroke, and was created earl of Huntingdon. He died in 1491, leaving an only daughter, Elizabeth, who married sir Charles Somerset, the first earl of Worcester, who, however, did not immediately succeed to the estate, which was held by her uncle, sir Walter Herbert, of Caldicot, during his life. Upon his decease in 1507 the earl of Worcester held it in right of his wife, and from him it has descended to the present duke of Beaufort.

The earl of Worcester granted a new charter of incorporation to the burgesses of the town. The principal officers of the corporation were the steward of the lord, two bailiffs chosen by the burgesses, sergeants at mace, etc. This seems to have been acted upon down to the time of Charles II, when, owing to some dispute between the duke of Beaufort and the burgesses no bailiffs were chosen, and the corporation ceased to exist.

In this charter, which bears date 2nd Dec., 16 Hen. VIII, 1524, the earl recites that he had rebuilt the town gate, and gives it to the burgesses for a prison. This was the only gate of entrance into the town, which was defended by a strong wall from a very early period. Leland describes it as extending from the great bridge over the Wye, to the castle. This could not mean the bridge before noticed, above the castle, nor a bridge on the site of the present one, but of one lower down the river, where, when archdeacon Coxe visited the town, the remains of the foundations were visible at low water, at the end of the town, or, as popularly termed, the port walls. Roads led to this spot on both sides the river; that on the Gloucestershire side is marked in the ordnance maps "Roman road”, and led directly across the isthmus of Beachley to the Severn, where, no doubt, there was a passage. The walls are still perfect, except where broken through by the railway. They began, as Leland correctly states, at the great bridge

over the Wye, and are in length about half a mile, defended at irregular distances by ten semicircular bastion towers, besides the town gate, and terminating in a quadrangular tower opposite the upper or western entrance to the castle, to which it seems to have been connected by a slighter wall across the natural ravine, which answers the purpose of a moat. There are no traces of any fortifications on the river side, which was probably considered a sufficient defence. The area enclosed is ninety-two acres, exclusive of the castle, which stands upon two acres and a quarter. This is much larger than any other town in the country; but there are no reasons to suppose that one half of this large space was ever built upon. From the oldest documents in which the streets and lanes are mentioned, they appear to have been the same some centuries ago as they

are now.

At the breaking out of the civil wars, Chepstow castle was garrisoned by the marquis of Worcester, for the king. In 1643, major Throckmorton and a party from Monmouth took it by surprise; but, in a few hours, the major was surprised in his turn, and it was again in the hands of the royalists. In October 1645, it was surrendered to colonel Morgan, governor of Gloucester, after a siege, or rather blockade, of four days. In May 1648, sir Nicholas Kemeys and some other gentlemen of the county, having entered into correspondence with an officer in the garrison, were admitted in the night, and after a slight opposition got possession of the place. On the 10th May 1648, Cromwell marched hither from Monmouth, obtained possession of the town without difficulty, and summoned the castle to surrender; which was refused by sir Nicholas Kemeys, the governor. Cromwell being unprovided with artillery, continued his march into South Wales, leaving colonel Ewer in command of a detachment of troops before the castle. On the 25th May, having procured two cannons from Gloucester, and two more from on board a ship, he, in the course of a few hours, breached the wall, or, as the colonel writes," made a hole in it so low that a man might walk into it". The garrison, it seems, wished to surrender, but the governor absolutely refused. Colonel Ewer appears to have acted with great forbearance on the occasion, and ceased firing. Sir Nicholas, however, continued obstinate,