It should not be assumed that this site is publicly accessible and it may be on private property. Do not trespass.

Monument details

HER Number:	TQ 76 NW 484
Type of record:	Listed Building
Name:	ROCHESTER CITY WALLS

Summary

Rochester's city walls at mainly of 13th and 14th century date but are built upon earlier Roman foundations. In places the Roman walls can still be seen as can later patching and repairing. The most impressive section is to the north-east of the town where a two-storey bastion is incorporated.

Grid Reference:	TQ 7431 6849
Map Sheet:	TQ76NW
Parish:	ROCHESTER & CHATHAM, MEDWAY, KENT

Monument Types

SITE (Roman to Medieval - 43 AD to 1399 AD)

Protected Status:	Listed Building (I) 1086506: ROCHESTER CITY WALLS; Scheduled Monument 1003361: Rochester city wall

Full description

If you do not understand anything on this page please contact us.

The following text is from the original listed building designation:
ROCHESTER TQ 7468 NW TQ 7468 SW 7/2A and 9/2B,C,D Rochester City Walls (formerly listed as The Town Walls) 24.10.50 GV I City walls. Mainly C13 and C14, incorporating Roman remains, with later patching and partial rebuilding. The 4 surviving stretches are distinguished on the map as 7/2A (off The Common), 9/2B (off Free School Lane), 9/2C (enclosing City Ditch) and 9/2D (off St Margaret's Street. None have post office addresses. 7/2A runs N/S for about 30 metres and is in a fragmentary state with little facing stone surviving, some parts underpinning later structures. 9/2B is the most impressive and upstanding section incorporating the NE circular bastion (of 2 storeys with 3 lancets to upper stage). The upper courses of the wall attached are largely rebuilt; a short stretch retains coped merlons. 9/2C, rebuilt when the city walls were pushed further out in the Mid C14 retains the SE bastion, much reduced. 9/2D is short and much renewed. Scheduled Ancient Monument.
Listing NGR: TQ7427568816

A study of the North-East Corner Tower rasies the question as to the Roman walls defensive function. The windows in the second stage of the tower appear to be original but are not defensive in width, even the slit windows would not provide full covering. This implies a decorative function of the tower rather than defensive. (2, 5)

<1> Canterbury Archaeological Trust, 1997, An Archaeological Survey of the Eagle Court Wall, Rochester (Unpublished document). SKE15875.

<2> Canterbury Archaeological Trust, 1993, Rochester City Wall: Photographic And Drawn Survey (Unpublished document). SKE17238.

<3> Canterbury Archaeological Trust, 1997, Archaeological Survey of the Breach Wall, Rochester (Unpublished document). SKE15876.

<4> Alan Ward, 2009, An archaeological watching brief at King's School, Rochester, Kent (Unpublished document). SKE15909.

<5> Keevill Heritage Consultancy, 2013, The city wall on the common, Rochester, medway, report on an archaeological watching brief during masonry conservation 2013 (Unpublished document). SKE31155.

Sources and further reading

Cross-ref.	Source description
<1>	Unpublished document: Canterbury Archaeological Trust. 1997. An Archaeological Survey of the Eagle Court Wall, Rochester.
<2>	Unpublished document: Canterbury Archaeological Trust. 1993. Rochester City Wall: Photographic And Drawn Survey.
<3>	Unpublished document: Canterbury Archaeological Trust. 1997. Archaeological Survey of the Breach Wall, Rochester.
<4>	Unpublished document: Alan Ward. 2009. An archaeological watching brief at King's School, Rochester, Kent.
<5>	Unpublished document: Keevill Heritage Consultancy. 2013. The city wall on the common, Rochester, medway, report on an archaeological watching brief during masonry conservation 2013.

Related records

TQ 76 NW 823

Part of: Rochester (Durobrivae) Roman town wall (Monument)