The traffic along Bishopsgate Street, which led into the Roman Fort, and to the Bridge from the north and eastern parts of the island, caused a settlement and a street to be established here long before the wall was built. For the same reason, when the City began to fill up after its long period of desolation, the line was one of the first to be settled again, while on either side there were vacant spaces, orchards, fields, and gardens. Houses and shops sprang up both within and without the wall; the latter only when the Norman power had removed the fear of another siege. It is impossible to say with any certainty when the street was actually recognised as such. Thus, to quote such facts as are accessible in Riley’s _Memorials_, in the _Calendar of Wills_, etc., we find that in 1259, 1272, 1285, and 1288 there are mentioned “houses near, or within, Bishopsgate,” and in 1309 and 1311 there are “houses without” Bishopsgate. In 1329 we find a brew-house in Bishopsgate Street. Again, in 1314 the shops of one Roger Poyntel are in danger by reason of an overhanging elm-tree, thanks to which we learn that there were at that time residents close by the gate; in 1305 a tourelle in the wall near the gate is given to William Coeur de Lyon, chaplain, on condition that he keeps it in repair; in 1314 another tourelle near the gate is given to John de Elyngham, chaplain in charity, on the same condition; in 1318 the upper chamber of the gate, together with a tourelle on the east, and a garden against the wall, is granted to John de Long, an Easterling, or member of the Hanseatic League, on the same condition. In 1324 he renounced his lease and, apparently, went home. (Here we have an instance of a Hanseatic merchant living outside the _Domus_, or _Aula Teutonicorum_, where they were all supposed to live. But no absolute rule about anything can be laid down in these centuries.) The Almaines or Easterlings who were responsible for the repair and maintenance of the gate, were exempt from toll. On the other hand (another illustration of the conflicting “rights” of the time), the Bishop of London claimed one stock out of every cart-load of wood that passed through the gate. Let the Bishop, then, keep the hinges in repair! The gate was built, it is said, by Bishop Erkenwald in 685. One supposes, since he did not rebuild on the Roman foundations, that a way had been made through the wall on the west side, and that traffic had, for convenience, chosen that way. The gate was considered, in some sense, to be under the special care of the Bishop. But the burden of its maintenance was laid upon the Hanseatic merchants. The case was tried and decided in 1282, when the merchants were ordered to keep the gate, and to find men and money if necessary in its defence for one-third of the cost. On the antiquities of the gate, hear also Stow: