MEN OF KENT AND KENTISH MEN.
(Vol. v., p. 321.)
In 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 London 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. R. Corner.
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 immemorial in our county, cannot be disputed, and I think it has an undoubted and unquestionable historic 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 metropolis,
[Canterbury], 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 him by King Ethelbert on his conversion (who thereupon retired to his royal fortress, or Castrum, of Regulbium, Reculver). 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 dioceses: the eastern, or diocese of Canterbury; 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 continued 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 tributary until King Egbert reduced all the kingdoms of the Octarchy under his dominion, at the commencement of the ninth century,—and thus became 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 charter (Kemble, Cod. Dipl. ii. 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 provinciæ Orientalis Cantiæ') 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
all the 'West Kentish men' they ruined and plundered."
A.D. 1009. "Then came the vast hostile army (Danes) to Sandwich, and they soon went their way to Canterbury; and all the people of 'East Kent' made peace with the army, and gave them 3000 pounds."
"Thus, I trust, I have satisfactorily shown from our ancient annals, that the distinction between 'Kentish Men' and 'Men of Kent,' existed at a period long anterior to the Norman Conquest, and is distinctly recognised in the foregoing historical passages. And its origin may, I think, be attributed to the ancient division of the Jutish kingdom of Kent into the two dioceses of Canterbury and Rochester.
"Our Gavelkind Tenure and free Kentish customs, of which I have attempted a history in my recently published Consuetudines Kanciæ, gave rise to our well-known old provincial song of 'The Man of Kent,' its burthen being:
"Of Briton's race—if one surpass,
'A Man of Kent' is He."
Charles Sandys, F.S.A.
Canterbury.