the wealth of the
abbey. He was afterwards made a bishop in France, but owing to his
utter recklessness of conduct and morality, he was sent back to England
four days after: was again admitted abbot of the monastery of
_Peterburgh_, where he died in 1098, after an odious government of
twenty-eight years.

During the reign of Henry I., the son of the Conqueror, Ernulphus
became Abbot of _Peterburgh_. This event took place in the year 1107,
and he made several important improvements in the monastery; built a
new dormitory and refectory, and completed the chapter-house, which
had been left in an unfinished state for several years. He likewise
enriched the convent by making an arrangement with all who held in rent
the abbey lands to pay tithes to him, and, when they died, that they
should give the third part of their estates to be buried in the church.
Thus it was that the monastery continued to grow in wealth, and when
Ernulphus was made Bishop of Rochester, which happened in 1114, the
abbey was entitled to a tithe of 40,800 acres of land.

During the rule of his successor, John de Sais, the monastery was
burned down. The fire is said to have occurred accidentally, and such
was the violence of the flames, that they reached the village and
consumed most of the cottagers' houses. The additions which Ernulphus
had made to the abbey, however, are said to have escaped the general
ruin.

[1] The most probable etymology of this word is that which is
given by Britton in his History of Peterborough Cathedral,
viz.--"_Mede_ or _Mead_, a meadow; _ham_, a sheltered habitation;
and _sted, stead_, or _stad_, a bank, station, or place of rest."

[2] In cleaning out the river, a little below the bridge, in
June, 1820, a dagger was found, which is supposed to have
belonged to these Danes. It is in the possession of the present
Bishop.

[3] At a meeting of the Archaeological Society at Peterborough, in
1861, Mr. Bloxam read a paper in which he denied the authenticity
of this monument, which had previously been regarded as one of
the oldest monumental stones extant. Mr. Bloxam regards it as a
Norman, and not a Saxon work, and some centuries later in date
than the massacre of the monks. He considers that the figures are
not martyred monks with their abbot, but Christ and his eleven
disciples. It has been further conjectured by Canon Westco