Reculver Towers

 

So as our adventuring in local places was such a pleasure the weekend before, we decided to go off on another Sunday trip with poor Yogi in tow. Our next stop was Reculver Towers and it just so happened that we had timed our visit with one of their open days so we were able to actually climb one of the towers!

It was a sweltering day, the sun was beating down on us and we would have given anything for an ice cream but we're on a little diet so had to refrain. We decided on a few nice cold drinks however, which made the hot trip bearable, but our excitement for our chosen places outweighed the potential heatstroke and lack of sugary cones.

The towers are actually a part of St Mary's Church, Reculver, but it is only the tower like structure which remain of the site, aside from the odd headstone that is. It was built on a Roman fort and underwent a lot of changes over the years before it became a remnant of it's former self.

The first church known to be here was in 669 when Bassa the Priest was given the land by King Ecgberht for the purpose of building a church. It is unsure if this was a minster or a monastery, and it is presumed that the king decided upon this as he didn't believe that the religious flagship site in Canterbury was 'English' enough, so he wanted an English influenced religious site to counterbalance this.

When the church was built it reused the fallen Roman stone which was inkeeping with the Anglo-saxon practice that churches were built reusing the Roman ruins at the site, waste not want not as they say. The site was however favoured by various Kentish kings and a lot of money had been thrown at it along the way with various building improvements and other sites having their royal tolls levied by Reculver. Eadberht II was buried here in the 760s while the site was at its wealthiest, but following this time Reculver was then merely referred to as property rather than the booming site it had been. This may have had something to do with Kent shifting to be controlled by various kings of Mercia beginning as of 757. 

Having Kent and its churches now controlled by the Midlands meant conflict and when King Coenwulf of Mercia secured a privilege from Pope Leo III to shutdown various monasteries at his will. The Archbishop of Canterbury Wulfred apposed this as Reculver and the nunnery at Minster in Thanet were then in his hands and threatened. This also meant that the king had full control of the Wantsam Channel which was a strategic ploy. The showdown between the king and the Archbishop continued until the latter was forced to submit and exchanged a great many things in order to secure the two religious sites. It was humiliating to say the least, but a king gets what a king wants especially back in those days.

In 825 the rein of Kent fell to kings of Wessex which was slightly more closer to home than that of Mercia, effectively now a Southern only span. The King granted the Archbishop of that time lay lord control over religious sites as he seemed more understanding, however Viking attacks had begun by this time and it was a mere 10 years later that the threat of Vikings pillaging these sites for treasure loomed due to a settlement on the Isle of Sheppey. By the 10th century Reculver was no longer important and was solely the responsibility of the king of Wessex. Owndership was then handed back to the Archbishop of Canterbury when the king of the English, Eadred, handed it over. It is interesting to see how this site managed to be passed between the shift in kings. Starting out with a king of the county, then divisions of England, up until a sole shift of country kings. 

The site must have been lost at some point however as William the Conqueror returned it again to the Archbishop of Canterbury in 1087, but since 1066 the church was merely a parish church especially due to the threat of  previous Viking invasion as the site was so exposed on the coast. 

Believe it or not, the ruining of the site didn't come about by any cruel agenda or tragic circumstance. It was due to a storm and the erosion of the land nearby that led to the churches demise. 1807 brought the storm that took with it a large chunk of the churchyard and the wall surrounding the site. Due to this, a meeting was held about the demolition of the site as it no longer posed an adequate place for the parish to bury their dead. What was the point when the graveyard was soon to be in the sea? 

So in 1809 destruction began by gunpowder. It was successful and only the towers remained as a landmark for ships and a reminder of the past it seems, especially as the demolition of the church wasnt that well received. 

Despite being the sole survivor of the church, and in constant threat of falling into the sea which doesn't seem close enough to wash away this history, the towers are in good nick. We must admit, we felt more fear of falling into the sea at St Mary's in Whitby due to erosion than we did here, but both sites have lost countless graves to the waters below over time. As you can see above, some graves do still remain here, we assume due to either being unclaimed, or because they didn't bother to move the graves to a safer site. Sadly we dont know. However we do wonder if the king who was buried here, Eadberht II, is lost or was safely interred elsewhere. It may be that his grave is still safe on land. Sadly, the weather has again made the memorials hard to read and no upkeep is given which we think is very sad. Upon visiting many grave sites we think it should be down to the local council to make sure the dead are remembered through their headstones. Having their names erased so they are forgotten once their family has died out is horrific in our eyes, even if this is by a natural occurrence. I'm sure some volunteers would happily recarve the letters in, doesnt have to be perfect.

Beside all that, when you actually get in the tower the views are amazing. It smells like musty old wood inside and general history! Cobwebs, dust, and the sea air. It is exactly what you'd expect a pretty much abandoned site to look like inside.

   

The spiral staircase within, unlikely to be the same as the original, was sturdy and scary due to the little steps. We took it in turns to visit the next two floors as Yogi would never have managed them even though he took the stone ones leading to the first floor like a champ. The inside was bare and the star of the show was the outside views for sure. Being able to see Whitstable in the distance, the blue green of the sea, and the ruins outside made it worth it. The inside access is usually off limits as well so we consider ourselves lucky to have been able to go in.

At the far end of the site is the remains of the roman wall which predated the church. No doubt the Anglo-Saxons would have had use for this as well, especially as enemies were not unheard of during their time. Even though this was a church, Reculver being on the coast would have always made it a target, especially as it was so wealthy during the early period of its existence.

Not too far away from here there was another site which took our interest. They seem to be old shower blocks, likely something to do with the MOD, but they are completely abandoned. The urban explorer in Jamie couldnt help but have a look and so he stepped over the remnants of the door and weaved in between abandoned mattresses. 

Many other visitors also went to have a look as these abandoned buildings are almost opposite Reculver Towers. A bit of an eyesore, but to the urban explorer it is one to relish. Jamie got a bad vibe when inside so there may be more than just no longer being in use at play here. He gets the feeling someone died in there, due to the evidence of drug taking and homelessness inside it does seem likely it was a recent and unhappy death if one at all.

It's such a shame that vandals are the ones to destroy abandoned buildings. Why they cant just leave them intact for explorers and a bit of respect is beyond us. But it is what it is. The contrast between nature trying to claim the block and the urban interference is an interesting site to behold.

Aside from the bad feelings we didn't see any ghosts in either site, but apparently the towers are haunted. Being built on a Roman fort there were bound to be stories of the supernatural. The site having many uses during its lifetime and tragically being erased always brings tales of ghostly figures wandering. Roman soldiers have been seen patrolling in the dead of night, as well as babies crying and hooded figures which might be related to evidence of rituals found on the site. Not to mention the child skeletons that were found in the 1960s under the barrack block drawing a feel of uneasiness. It was believed that these children were ritual sacrifices in order to protect the fort and appease a guardian and due to this the site inspires many a summoner of magic. You speak to people about this site and they tend to mention how it feels wrong, the sight of the property bringing an uneasiness but no one being able to put their finger on it. We appreciate this view point as when we laid eyes on the towers it strikes you, perhaps due to the unique shape and the fact the rest of it is missing. It might be to do with the fact the skeletal towers are the only blip in an otherwise picturesque landscape of the sea and surrounding area. It has a gothic feel to it none the less, but we understand why it has such a haunting feel.  

Reculver Towers as it is now solely referred to is certainly an interesting site and we'd be very much open to visiting again, especially for more of a ghostly investigation as in the last 50 years or so no one has really bothered exploring this avenue. Once again the towers have been abandoned, but considering the great air of loss the ex-church beholds, we think it would be a very interesting place to visit after dark and it is on our list for future exploration, external only of course.

Haunted: 7/10

Worth the visit: 8/10

Giftshop: n/a

Ghost count: 0

Dog friendly: Yes

DISCLAIMER: Now for the official bit. This blog does not receive any paid promotions from the places mentioned above. We have not been approached to promote or act as spokespersons for any attraction mentioned within this post and this is simply a post intended to act as a day in the life of a couple on a cute date. All photos included are taken by ourselves and as such the rights for these images our ours, no links, brands, or companies mentioned otherwise belong or are associated with Phantom Adventures UK. We are responsible only for this blog. Opinions are our own and not influenced by any third party source.. 

If you have any recommendations on places to visit or somewhere you would like to see on the blog, please feel free to drop us a message on instagram under @phantomadventuresuk or email us at phantomadventuresuk@gmail.com