Its Walls and Rows (especially the latter) give to the city of Chester
a character all its own. They are not only the pride of the inhabitants
of the city and county, but they also afford an unfailing source of
attraction to a constant stream of tourists and visitors. In no other
town in the kingdom is it possible to make a complete circuit of the
Walls, which involves a walk of nearly a couple of miles. That walk
is a favourite promenade, and offers a pleasing and varying prospect
not only of the different features of interest in the city, but also
of the surrounding country, and of the distant Welsh hills. The Walls
too furnish a never-ending subject for discussion as to their origin
and history; upon which fresh light is continually being thrown by
discoveries that are made. The main point in dispute has been as to
whether they can claim any connection with Roman builders; and the
question seems by some to have been settled in the affirmative on
various grounds. Whilst Roman stones have been found in portions of the
north wall when under repair, on the eastern side some masonry is to
be seen which from its character may safely be ascribed to that early
date; and quite recently some excavations, which were necessary for
building operations, unearthed at that particular spot the foundations
of the Roman wall just a few feet in front of the present one. The
plinth thus discovered indicates that the place is the south-eastern
angle of the Roman Wall, and proves what had been tentatively
suggested, that originally and in Roman times the compass of the Walls
was considerably less than it is now. It has been suggested that at a
later date the Romans enlarged the boundaries of the town, which at
first was a camp or fortress, and that subsequently Ethelfleda, in
907, when she repaired the city, which had lain waste, still further
enlarged its borders on the south side. On the west there are undoubted
traces of Roman work, and here the Walls (or more correctly the Quay)
in early days must have been washed by the tidal waters of the Dee,
and vessels must have been able to come up close to them and moor at
their side. The Roman stones discovered in the north wall when it
was under repair, were many of them inscribed and sepulchral: and so
some authorities concluded that they could not have been placed there
by Roman builders. It was shown, however, that a similar use of a
sepulchral monument occurred in a bastion of the Roman wall of London,
and that none of these stones were found in the upper part of the
wall, but in the lower unmortared base, which was evidently Roman. The
conclusion arrived at was that the Romans had extended their wall at
an early period, and, in doing so, had enclosed or made use of their
cemetery. In confirmation of this theory, it may be stated that the
surrounding masonry is of Roman character, and that a similar use of
tombstones has been found elsewhere, as in a Roman edifice on the Roman
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account