More information : Primary Sources:
Saturday 23 March, 1666 (Old Style), 1667 (New Style):
'At the office all the morning, where Sir W. Pen come, being returned from Chatham, from considering the means of fortifying the river Medway, by a chain at the stakes, and ships laid there with guns to keep the enemy from coming up to burn our ships; all our care now being to fortify ourselves against their invading us.' (4)
April 27. Chatham. Commissioner Peter Pett to the Navy Commissioners.
' . . . The chain ships are fixed at Gillingham, and the claws for fastening and heaving up the chain, which Mr. Ruffhead has promised in a few days; it had been sooner done could he have received money.' [Adm. Paper.] (5)
May 1. Chatham. Commissioner Peter Pett to the Navy Commissioners.
' . . . The chain is almost finished and will be suddenly placed.' (6)
May 10. Chatham. Commissioner Peter Pett to the Navy Commissioners.
' . . . The chain is promised to be dispatched to-morrow, and all things are ready for fixing it.' [Adm. Paper.] (7)
May 18. Chatham. Commissioner Peter Pett to the Navy Commissioners.
'The chain at Gillingham is almost fixed, being near hove over from side to side this afternoon.' (8)
[May.] A survey of several provisions in the stores at Chatham for which the storekeeper is to balance an account, begun 29 April and ended 31 May, with the weight of the chain at Gillingham, which was 14 tons, 6 cwt., 2 quarters, 25 lbs. (9)
June 10. Chatham.Commissioner Peter Pett to the Navy Commissioners.
'At the Buoy of the Nore are now appearing twenty Hollanders more, one of which seems a very great ship. I fear they will get within Sheerness this evening, there being little to interrupt them. I believe the whole stress of the business will lie at the chain a little beyond Gillingham, where we have moored to interrupt them as much as we can from coming to the chain four great stages.' (10)
June 12. The Duke of Albemarle writes for money to pay Chatham Yard, commending much their labour at this time of exigence . . .
They have sunk three ships near the Mussel Bank, made a boom without the chain to keep off the force of any ships that shall run against it, and raised two batteries on shore besides what is on the ships for defence of the chain, so he seems very confident they can do nothing there and, having sent for 1,000 men more, he now sends to forbid them. I do not hear the enemy has attempted anything since they possessed Sheerness. If they would attempt the chain this fresh easterly gale seems favourable to them. (11)
June 14. Chatham.Lord Brouncker and Commissioner Peter Pett to the Navy Commissioners.
'. . . I came here on Monday about 4 p.m. and then went with Commissioner Pett about the sinking of more ships in the Long Reach to hinder the enemy's passage, but it was presently evident by their passage that it was labour lost. In the night therefore more ships were brought to the chain and some sunk.' (12)
Wednesday 12 June.
' . . . and there in his letter find that the Dutch had made no motion since their taking Sheernesse; and the Duke of Albemarle writes that all is safe as to the great ships against any assault, the boom and chaine being so fortified; which put my heart into great joy. When I come to Sir W: Coventry’s chamber, I find him abroad; but his clerk, Powell, do tell me that ill newes is come to Court of the Dutch breaking the Chaine at Chatham . . . and so home, where all our hearts do now ake; for the newes is true, that the Dutch have broke the chaine and burned our ships, and particularly “The Royal Charles,†other particulars I know not, but most sad to be sure.' (13)
Friday 14 June.
' . . . as here the easterly gale and spring-tides for coming up both rivers, and enabling them to break the chaine . . . ' (14)
June 14, Chatham. John Conny, surgeon, to Williamson.
'On the 9th, the enemy stood up towards the Hope; the 10th, in the morning, fired several houses on Candia, Canvey Island, Essex, stole a few ships, and the wind being easterly, turned towards Sheerness, which they assaulted and mastered in two hours. Endeavours were made to block up the river by sinking ships in the narrowest part, but all was ineffectual; for the outward guard, being worsted at Sheerness, and unable to resist their force, could keep no place good till they came to the chain. On the 12th the Dutch, having got a considerable number of fireships over the sunken vessels, assaulted the chain, and though the guards resisted as manfully as could be, yet they were overpowered and destroyed, and the chain broken by the number of ships pressing at it; they then took the ROYAL CHARLES, which is now going for Holland.' (15)
June 15. London. — — to Viscount Conway.
' . . . The Dutch, after easily beating off Sir Edw. Spragg from Sheerness Fort, which was not in a posture of defence (for which Sir Edward is much blamed), forced the chain, which some say was fastened with cable yarn, and came up.' (16)
'Whitehall, June 16. The Dutch Fleet having the tenth Instant in the evening made themselves masters of Sheerness, on the eleventh they advanced up the River of Medway, and though with much difficulty, passed by several Vessels which had been sunk about Musclebank, which was the narrowest part of it, the better to put some stop to them in their passing; and with 22 Sail came up towards the Chain, where the Lord General was in person with a considerable Force to opose them; but the Enemy taking the advantage of an Easterly Wind and the Tide, which both served them, pressed on; and though their first Ship stuck upon the Chain, the second broke through it; and notwithstanding a stout resistance, in which our Men showed infinite courage, with considerable loss to the Enemy, yet they clapt their Fireships aboard the MATTHIAS and the UNITY, that lay at anchor as a Guard to the Chain, and then upon the CHARLES THE FIFTH . . . ' (3)
June [20.] Whitehall.100. Hen. Muddiman to Sir George Cooke, at Wheatley, Doncaster. News-letter.
' . . . The issue of the treaty of Breda seems to depend on the success of the Dutch fleet; on the 6th it appeared off Harwich and the neighbourhood, only frightening a few fishermen, landing on the coasts, and driving off some cattle. On the 10th it came within shot of Sheerness, and after some hours took the guns, and on the 11th, by degrees got 20 or 22 ships over the narrow part of the river at Chatham, where ships had been sunk; after 2½ hours' fighting, one guard ship after another was fired and blown up, and the enemy master of the chain. . . Nothing was now left to oppose them but works hastily thrown up, yet the courage of the English was such that they only dared on the 12th instant to fire three ships that lay close to them. Being fired on by guns from the platform and from Upnor Castle, and having suffered great loss, as confessed by the prisoners taken, they fired three of their own ships that were manned, left two stranded, and went.' (17)
Sunday 30 June.
'So to the chaine, and there saw it fast at the end on Upnor side of the River; very fast, and borne up upon the several stages across the River; and where it is broke nobody can tell me. I went on shore on Upnor side to look upon the end of the chaine; and caused the link to be measured, and it was six inches and one-fourth in circumference. They have burned the Crane House that was to hawl it taught. . . I met with no satisfaction whereabouts the chaine was broke, but do confess I met with nobody that I could well expect to have satisfaction [from], it being Sunday . . . ' (18)
Sept. 2. Chatham Dock. William Rand and John Brooke to the Navy Commissioners.
'Ask leave to take up the cable lying across the river, with the chain and the masts to which it was moored.' (19)
Sept. 10. Chatham Dock.John Brooke and Wm. Rand to the Navy Commissioners.
'Particulars of . . . clearing away the moorings of the chain.' (20)
Pictorial Sources:
John Evelyn, the diarist, sent a sketch of the disposition of the defences of the Medway to Samuel Pepys, now Rawlinson MS A.195, f.78, Bodleian Library, Oxford, and repr. in (2) as Plate IV.
Although clearly a sketch, and thus not to scale (21), a key is provided. Hoo Island is clearly recognisable and what, by comparison with (22) may be a representation of its eastern part as a distinct 'island' (where Hoo Fort now lies today, and which is connected by a 'neck' to the principal part of the island), or a distinct island on Hoo Flats now in the inter-tidal zone.
Nor Marsh on the Gillingham side is also depicted and recognisable, although greater in extent than today (22). If correctly interpreted, he shows:
1: The 3 Dutch Ships w[hi]ch brake ye chayne [east of the chain];
2: The sunk ships without ye chayne; [i.e. east of the chain]
3: The UNITY;
4: The chayne;
5,6: Two very slight Batteries at both ends of the chayne;
7: CHARLES V; [depicted west of the chain on the Upnor bank]
8: The MATTHIAS [depicted east of the chain on the Gillingham bank] (2)
A contemporary topographical print, also with a key, also fairly accurately depicts the river from the Rochester vantage point to the west, looking towards Sheerness to the north-east.
Rochester and St. Mary's Island are shown, St. Mary's Island apparently bifurcated, which may represent the extent of this bank of the river in the 1660s, or may be a depiction of Hoo Island to the east. Between the 'bifurcations' Chatham Arsenal is seen at No.21.
Beyond, and to the east, lies:
11: "The iron chain across the river";
12: Two batteries overlooking the chain";
13: "Two great English ships sunk at the chain", referring to the MARMADUKE and NORWAY MERCHANT;
14: "Captain Brakel sails over the chain and captures the JONATHAN of 44 guns";
15: "The fireship PRO PATRIA sails against the chain, breaking it in two, and sets the MATTHIAS of 52 guns on fire" (23)
Secondary Sources:
A chain was stretched across the river below (i.e. east of) the castle with timber work on each bank, when war with Spain was declared in 1585. This was a result of a survey by the master gunner, William Bourne, at Upnor in 1579-80, who had argued for a chain to support the guns at the castle, which, he felt, were insufficient to repel invading ships.
In 1588, the year of the Armada, the chain was recorded as costing £80 to maintain.
The chain across the Medway in 1667 stretched from Hoo Ness to Gillingham, with two batteries hastily constructed by the Duke of Albemarle on either side of the chain. The ships in the vanguard of the attack bore down on the chain. It is uncertain whether it broke or was cast loose by a landing party, but either way it was ineffective. (1)
There was a chain across the river at Upnor in 1585, later replaced by a boom defence of floating timber, but by Charles I's reign it was no longer present.
During the latter's reign Sir William Monson wrote a tract entitled "A Project for the Safety of his Majesty's Navy; and the convenience and Inconvenience in keeping it at Chatham or Portsmouth". He referred to the 'defence of the river, by booming, and making sconces upon it', repr. from M Oppenheim (ed.), The Naval Tracts of Sir William Monson, Navy Records Society, Vol.V, pp12-14.
During the Interregnum, in 1658, there were plans to reinstate a boom across the river, but if this was ever executed, there is no surviving record.
Early in 1667 it was decided to reinstate a chain across the river, and there is discussion of Pepys' diary entries and the entries in the Calendar of State Papers Domestic. There is discussion of the position of the chain: 'it must have stretched across the Medway from a point a little down-river from Gillingham to an opposite point on Hoo Salt Marsh. In the seventeenth century the Medway was narrower in this part of Gillingham Reach than it is today, and the saltings lying off-shore were much more extensive, so that the end of the chain on the Gillingham side of the river may have been fixed on one of these saltings.'
It is noted that the width of the river 'today' at low water in Gillingham Reach was 500 yards, that is, at the time of writing in 1967. It was therefore of a considerable span.
There is discussion of what Pepys meant by the links of the chain being 6.25 inches in circumference. Had this referred to the overall length of the links, this would indicate quite small links, 2.5 inches long by 1.5 inches wide, and insufficient to pose an obstacle to invading ships. It is therefore interpreted as the 'thickness' of each link and thus more likely to be consistent with the weight of the chain as recorded in May 1667, 14.5 tons.
As it was so heavy, and thus ran the danger of sinking too deep underwater, it was supported in the water by 'four large landing stages evenly spaced across the Medway'. This did not entirely prevent the sinking of the chain, in places to a depth of 9 feet. There were windlasses at either end to haul it tight.
It was not considered strong enough by itself to resist a sustained attack, and so was strengthened with cables taken from the MONMOUTH. Masts were driven into the river bed and cables slung between them as further reinforcement.
In March 1667 the Duke of York gave orders for the CHARLES V and the MATTHIAS to be placed within the chain, anticipating the need for another layer of reinforcements.
During the Raid on the Medway the VREDE was in the vanguard of the attack on 12 June. 'The SUSANNA sailed up to the chain, but failed to break it, and soon afterwards caught fire. The second fireship, the PRO PATRIA, followed close behind the SUSANNA, rode hard at the chain, and broke it. She then positioned herself alongside the MATTHIAS, lying just above the chain near the Gillingham shore, and set her afire.'
The CHARLES V, on the Hoo side, was similarly set ablaze by the DELFT and another fireship. (2)
Interpretation of location of chain and potential archaeological remains:
Given that Evelyn's sketch map, as reproduced in (2), shows the profile of the riverbanks and islands as slightly different from today's depiction (22), it is difficult to be wholly clear as to its precise location. So far as can be judged, it would seem to have been located somewhere about the middle or 'neck' of Hoo Island, communicating with the Gilingham bank. The Dutch topographical view (23) is also broadly consistent with this location.
Strategically this is today (22) the narrowest part of the river and, although the topography has altered, this would seem to be borne out by (23), thus lying east of Chatham and Upnor.
It seems clear that any archaeological remains of this chain or its supporting works may be in association with the wrecks of the MARMADUKE (1386880) and NORWAY MERCHANT (1433221) 'without' or east of the chain; those of the SUSANNA (1433219) and PRO PATRIA (1179911) which broke the chain, the SUSANNA being burnt, the PRO PATRIA attacking the MATTHIAS (1033763) 'inside' or west of the chain, towards the southern bank or Gillingham side. The DELFT (1433220) and SCHIEDAM (1584691) then attacked the CHARLES V (1433179) towards the northern or Hoo/Upnor bank. (21)
|