June 26. 1852.] 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



^i^ 



)»rcndera tant' animo, che usando molte ribalderie, si 

 fermera contra la volonta sua ; e di qiieste due Specie di 

 Jiestii [which J. R. will be pleased to note^, la peggior 

 « quelia che n'asee da vilt^, e da poca forza." — Folio 92, 

 yerso. 



Thus much for the equestrian part of the sub- 

 ject. Witli regard to the use of the word restive by 

 the autlior of the Eclipse of Faith, that is purely 

 a matter of taste, which it is unnecessary here to 

 discuss ; hut I hope that the foregoing opinion of 

 one who in his day passed for the most accom- 

 plished horseman of Europe, will suffice to show 

 that, in tlie passage quoted, the term is not so 

 eutirely misapplied as J. R. supposes. F. S. Q. 



MEN OP KENT AND KENTISH UES. 

 (VoL v., pi 321.) 



Tn your answers to Minor Queries (Vol. v., 

 p. 321.) I find it stated, that the inhabitants of the 

 part of Kent lying between Rochester and Lon- 

 don being invicti, have ever since (the Norman 

 Conquest) been designated as Men of Kent ; while 

 those to the eastward, through whose district the 

 Conqueror marched unopposed, are only " Kentish 

 Men." 



As I have always understood that the contrary 

 Is the case, and that the inhabitants of East Kent 

 are called "Men of Kent," and those in West 

 Kent, "Kentish Men" — because in East Kent the 

 people are less intermixed with strangers than in 

 West Kent, from its proximity to the metropolis — 

 I was desirous of correcting what appeared to me 

 to be a manifest error : but not finding any direct 

 authority on the point, I consulted my friend 

 Charles Sandys, Esq., of Canterbury, as a Kentish 

 antiquary, on the subject. And I now send you 

 a letter from that gentleman, which you are at 

 liberty to print. Geo. S,. Coeneb. 



Eltham. 



" ' MEN OF KENT,' AND ' KENTISH MEN.' 



" I am not aware that any professed treatise has 

 been written or published upon our provincial 

 distinction of ' Men of Kent' and ' Kentish Men.' 

 That some such traditionary distinction, however, 

 (whatever it may be) has existed from time imme- 

 morial in our county, cannot be disputed ; and I 

 think it has an undoubted and unquestionable his- 

 toric origin, which I will endeavour briefly to 

 illustrate. 



"The West Kent Men, according to the tradition, 

 are styled 'Kentish Men;* whilst those of East 

 Kent are more emphatically denominated 'Men 

 of Kent.' 



" And now for my historical authorities : — 



" That the East Kent people were denominated 

 from ancient time 'Men of Kent,' may, I think, be 

 inferred from the ancient Saxon name of its me- 



tropolis, Danc-papa-bnnh {^Canterburyl, literally; 

 'The City of the Men of Kent;' the royal city 

 and seat of government of King Ethelbert at the 

 time of the arrival of St. Augustine (a.d. 597) to 

 convert our idolatrous Saxon ancestors from the 

 worship of Woden and his kindred deities to that 

 of the Saviour of the world. 



" St. Augustine, having succeeded in his holy 

 mission, and having been consecrated Archbishop' 

 of the Saxons and Angles in Britain, fixed his 

 metropolitical see in the royal city of Canterbury, 

 which had been granted to hira by King Ethelbert 

 on his conversion (who thereupon retired to his 

 royal fortress, orCastrum, ofRegulbium, jRecMZ«er). 

 And in that city it has ever since continued for a 

 period of more than twelve centuries. 



" The conversion of the Pagan inhabitants of 

 Kent proceeded so rapidly, that St. Augustine, 

 with the assistance of King Ethelbert, soon 

 founded another episcopal see at Rochester, and 

 thus divided the Kentish kingdom into two dio- 

 ceses : the eastern, or diocese of Canteibury ; the 

 western, or diocese of Rochester. And thus, I 

 conceive, originated the divisions of East and 

 West Kent : the men of the former retaining 

 their ancient name of 'Men of Kent;' whilst 

 those of the latter adopted that of ' Kentish Men.' 



" The Saxon (or Jutish) kingdom of Kent con- 

 tinued a separate and independent kingdom of the 

 Octarchy from the time of Hengist (a.d. 455)- 

 until its subjugation by Offa, King of Mercia, in. 

 the eighth century, to which it continued tribu-- 

 tary until King Egbert reduced all the kingdoms 

 of the Octarchy under his dominion, at the com- 

 mencement of the ninth century, — and thus be- 

 came the first King of all England. 



" That Kent was separated at an early period, 

 into the two divisions of East and West Kent, 

 may be inferred from a charier (Kemble, Cod. 

 Dipt. il. 19.) relating to some property withheld, 

 from the church of Canterbury, and which is 

 specially described as having been that " of Oswulf, 

 duke and prince of the province of East Kent" 

 (' dux atque princeps provinciaj Orientalis Cantia'') 

 c. A.D. 844. 



"The Saxon Chronicle also confirms this view 

 of the matter, thus : 



A.D. 853. " Ealhere with the ' Men of Kent' 

 fought in Thanet against the heathen army 

 (Danes)." — Thanet is in East Kent. 



A.D. 865. "The heathen army sate down in, 

 Thanet, and made peace with the ' Men of Kent.' 

 And the ' Men of Kent' promised them money for 

 the peace." 



A.D. 902. • • • "Battle at the Holmes, between" 

 the ' Kentish Men' and the ' Danish Men.' — ^This, 

 I take it, occurred in West Kent. 



A.D.999. "The army (Danes) went up along 

 the Medway to Rochester, and then the ' Kentish 

 forces' stoutly joined battle .... and full nigh 



