PREFACE.

THE materials at the disposal of a writer on Dover are fairly abundant. The British Museum possesses a quantity of very valuable documents, the town accounts exist from the year 1365, and the minutes of the Common Assemblies from 1506. In addition to these important records numerous other manuscripts, many of them of the greatest value, have been consulted personally, and Professor Burrows very kindly placed his notes of others at my disposal.

The Castle records have, with very few exceptions, been lost or destroyed, and, although a certain amount of information has been collected, I feel that the account given of it is very inadequate.

Two subjects caused me much anxiety, the Church of St. Mary-in-the-Castle, and the list of Constables. So much has been written on the former subject, and so many different opinions have been expressed by really competent authorities, that I felt the greatest diffidence in expressing my own on the vexed point of the age of the building. It appeared to me, however, that by grouping together all the

facts which could be gathered concerning the fabric, and omitting mere matters of opinion, a mass of evidence might be collected upon which to base deductions within certain limits at once definite and trustworthy. This I have done, and the conclusion that a very early date must be assigned to this interesting church will, I hope, be found to be incontrovertible. Mr. Micklethwaite's argument "that a church planned from the beginning to have a central tower can not have been built before church towers

came into use" is no doubt perfectly valid. The evidence available, however, shows that it is wholly inapplicable to the case. The tower was originally built with four solid walls and not as a church tower at all. A church planned from the beginning to include and modify, by piercing arches in it, a central tower built for other purposes at an earlier period, obviously lies outside Mr. Micklethwaite's category. The date he assigns to the church itself is open to serious question, but with regard to the tower, the statements of his clerk of the works, published by Sir Gilbert Scott, and the corroborative statements published by Canon Puckle, all of whom enjoyed facilities for forming their opinions which have not been since available, seem on the whole more trustworthy than the somewhat hasty inferences of an architect, however distinguished, who has not enjoyed the same advantages.

The list of Constables given in Chapter xiv.

differs considerably from any yet published, and I venture to believe will be found approximately correct, although further research may probably make other alterations necessary.

It will be noticed that no account is given of the Cinque Ports generally, or of any of their special privileges. To have entered on this province would not only have necessitated travelling over the ground so ably covered by Professor Montagu Burrows in his Cinque Ports, but would also have doubled the size of this book. Considerable advantage has been taken of Professor Burrows' work, and I desire to express my indebtedness to him for the sympathy and assistance I have received at his hands.

My sincere thanks are also due to the Rev. T. Shipdem Frampton for the use of his library, and the additions made to my lists of the Clergy of St. Mary-in-the-Castle, and the Masters of the Maison Dieu, as well as for several interesting extracts from the exchequer accounts preserved in the P.R.O.

The Town Clerk of Dover, Colonel E. Wollaston Knocker, C.B., rendered me much valuable assistance, and I am indebted to him for the use of the original Seal of the Registrar of Dover Castle, a copy of which appears on the cover.

My thanks are also due to W. Minet, Esq., for the illustrations of the "New Buildings," and the Seal of the Barons of Dover; to H. Stilgoe, Esq., for the