Newsletter No 83 November 2016

Denise Silvester-Carr .................................... p.2

Notes and News ............................................ p.2

Anniversaries; Events; Exhibitions ................ p.2

The Great Fire .......................................... p.2

John Gibson ............................................ p.3

The London Society .................................. p.3

How many houses were destroyed in the

Great Fire of London? by Ian Doolittle .......... p.4

Changing London.......................................... p.5

Circumspice ............................................ p.5/15

The Park Villages and HS2

by Geoffrey Tyack.......................................... p.6

The Survey of London in Whitechapel

by Peter Guillery .......................................... p.7

Town Vignettes on early maps and charts

by Peter Barber ............................................ p.9

Mayors of London by Henry Summerson .... p.11

Prizefighting in London – a request for help

by Tony Gee ................................................ p.12

Layers of London; Institute of Historical

Research .................................................... p.12

Restoring Tallis by Peter Ross...................... p.14

Reviews ...................................................... p.16

Bookshop Corner ........................................ p.19

Newsletter

Number 83

November 2016

Contents

Notes and News

The115th AGM of the Society was held on 6 July in

the splendid setting of the Great Hall of St

Bartholomew’s Hospital. Minutes will be circulated

in the next Newsletter. Officers and Council

members elected are listed on the back of this

newsletter. A large audience heard a fascinating

talk by Dorian Gerhold on his searches in a variety

of archives for early plans of London buildings,

which resulted in the Society’s publication this year

of London Plotted, Plans of London buildings up to

1720. It was interesting to hear that his interest in

urban plans had been sparked by Ralph Treswell’s

Tudor and Jacobean surveys, the subject of the

Society’s publication No.135 in 1987.

The magnificent London Plotted is the first volume

to be edited by Sheila O’Connell, who has bravely

taken on the task following her retirement from the

Prints and Drawings Department of the British

Museum. Work is now in hand on next year’s

publication, jointly with the Bodleian Library, a

selection of London views from the collections of the

eighteenth century antiquary Richard Gough,

introduced by Bernard Nurse.

Browsing through the Treswell volume, where

over three-quarters of the plans are reproduced in

black and white, and comparing it with the

colourful London Plotted, makes one aware how

much one gains from the use of colour. And so we

have applied the same principle to our newsletter,

and hope the new look will meet with members’

approval. We are very grateful to Ludo Press for

their constructive assistance over this.

You should now be in possession of London

Plotted, a book in a dark blue dustjacket, weighing

about 2lb. If not, please contact the Treasurer,

preferably by email.

You might like to give a copy of the book as a

Christmas present. Send £30 (special offer for

Christmas, expires 20 December) to the Treasurer

who will post it off to your donee within the UK

with any message you like to supply.

Subscriptions are due on 1 January. £20 for UK

addresses, £30 abroad. With the ‘improved’ service

from our bank it is difficult to distinguish between

standing order payments and individual payments

made using the BACS bank transfer, so if there is

no invoice attached to your newsletter you may still

need to take action to renew your membership. If

you are not sure, ask the Treasurer, again

preferably by email. Your January 2016 bank

statement may tell you how you paid this year.

Our

volunteer

project

on

parish

maps,

masterminded by Simon Morris, is making good

progress. The increasing number of requests for

help from LTS members from other organisations

and individuals demonstrates the respect in which

our membership is held. In a previous issue the

British Film Institute asked for help in identifying

London film locations. Their report on the first year

of their project ‘London on Film’ acknowledges our

financial help in cataloguing and digitising nine

diverse archival films on London, which formed a

centrepiece of their summer programme at

BFIsouthbank. For more details see bfi.org.uk/

Britain-on-film.

In this issue you are invited to contribute

information on research projects which range from

medieval London mayors to eighteenth century

prizefighting locations, and to participate in the

Survey

of

London’s

interactive

research

on

Whitechapel. Those interested in geo-referencing and

website testing will be welcomed by the ‘Layers of

London’ project of the Institute of Historical Research.

Members may like to know that our retired editor

Ann Saunders has successfully achieved her long-

planned move. Ann and Bruce’s address is now The

Barn, Mimms Lane, Shenley, Herts WD7 9AP, tel.

01923 857359. Ann writes that ‘members who feel

curious can come out to see me, but telephone first.’

We wish Ann and Bruce well in their new home.

Next year’s AGM will take place on Wednesday 5

July at Queen Mary College, Mile End Road. Details

will be in the May Newsletter.

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

Anniversaries; Events; Exhibitions

The autumn anniversary which has achieved much

publicity was 4 September, 350 years since the

Great Fire of London. Our illustration on p.1 is

from

the

Museum

of

London

which

is

commemorating 1666 with an ambitious interactive

display and a series of activities both on the ground

and

online.

For

details

see

Museumof

London.org.uk/fire . The handsome accompanying

book by Hazel Forsyth, senior curator at the

Museum,

Butcher,

Baker,

Candlestickmaker:

surviving the Great Fire will be reviewed in our next

page 2

London during the Great Fire, seen from across the Thames, from

B. Lambert, History and Survey of London and its Environs, 1806

Denise Silvester-Carr

We are sad to announce the death on 6

September of Denise Silvester-Carr, author and

journalist. Denise was a longstanding Council

member of the LTS and a former editor of the

Newsletter. There will be an obituary in the

next issue of the London Topographical Record.

issue. There have been related events elsewhere. A

week of imaginative spectacles, organised by the

arts group Artichoke, included giant dominoes

falling along the paths of the Fire, fiery light

projections on to St Paul’s and poetry readings

from the top of the Monument. The finale, managed

by Artichoke with the American burn artist David

Best, was the burning of ‘an artistic impression of

the seventeenth-century City’ on two 50ft barges on

the Thames. Its development involved numerous

projects in local schools, with the practical work of

creating the rather beautiful timber evocation of old

London being carried out by young unemployed

Londoners. If you missed this you can watch a

video with commentary on the Artichoke website.

For more on what really happened in the Great Fire

see Ian Doolittle’s article on p.4.

John Gibson. A British Sculptor in Rome, in

the private rooms of the Royal Academy, is where to

go if you are looking for a quiet corner in

Burlington House. This is a small exhibition of

sculpture and drawings recognising an almost

forgotten figure, a once eminent neo-classical

sculptor of the early ninteenth century who died

150 years ago. It is accompanied by an attractive

booklet with essays by Anna Frasca-Rath and

Annette Wickham (Royal Academy, £9.95). Gibson

was born in North Wales in 1790 and trained as a

cabinet-maker. Thanks to the patronage of the

banker William Roscoe and his circle, he travelled

to Rome, studied with Canova and set up his studio

there, which became a well-known attraction for

British grand tourists. He exhibited at the Great

Exhibition of 1851; Prince Albert was among his

admirers and it was due to him that Gibson created

the idealised sculpture of Queen Victoria with

figures of Justice and Clemency in the Palace of

Westminster. When Gibson died in 1866 he left the

contents of his Rome studio to the Royal Academy.

But Albert was dead and taste had changed.

Gibson’s plaster casts were damaged in transit and

badly repaired; the rather feeble ‘Gibson gallery’

which eventually opened in 1876 in Burlington

House was never popular, and was dismantled in

the 1960s. The exhibition brings together his

delicate drawings and some of the sculpture,

providing a context for his rather forlorn works

surviving outside the Sackler rooms on the top

floor. www Gibson-trail.uk has a map and details of

his other works in London.

Robert Adam’s London is the subject of an

exhibition at Sir John Soane’s Museum, 13

Lincoln’s Inn Fields, from 30 November to 11 March.

London Parks and Garden Trust has a winter

lecture season with much to interest London

topographers. Lectures take place on Monday

evenings at 70-77 Cowcross Street EC1M 6EL; 7pm.

14 November: Brompton Cemetery by Sally

Prothero; 12 December: Capability Brown in London

by Steffie Shields; 9 January: New Jerusalem, the

Good City and the Good Society by Ken Worpole; 13

February, Post-war Sculpture by Roger Bowdler; 13

March: the London Skyline campaign by Barbara

Weiss. For season tickets see lectureseasonticket.

eventbrite.co.uk and for more about the LPGT see

their excellent website Londongardenstrust.org

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

A special offer from the London Society

Save 20% off membership and get a free copy of the

London Society Journal.

Founded in 1912, the London Society exists to

help promote the debate on the sort of city we want

to live and work in.

It arranges events and visits for its members to a

variety of places, buildings and institutions, some

not generally open to the public; holds debates and

lectures, including the annual Sir Banister Fletcher

Lecture, addressed by distinguished speakers, and

twice a year, the Society’s Journal, containing

writing and photo essays about different aspects of

the city, is sent free of charge to all members.

The Society’s motto is ‘antiqua tegenda, pulchra

petenda, futura rolenda’: ‘Protect the best of the

past; Strive for quality today; Plan properly for the

future’ – a mission that the Society still promotes

through its publications, events and lobbying.

London Topographical Society members can get

12 months’ membership of the London Society for

just £20 (it’s usually £25) and will also receive a

free copy of a recent Journal when they join. For

full details visit www.londonsociety.org.uk/society

page 3

Queen Victoria supported by Justice and Clemency, Palace of

Westminster, by John Gibson

How many houses were destroyed

in the Great Fire of London?

Our member Ian Doolittle explores the source of

some much repeated statements.

To readers familiar with the history of the Great

Fire this will seem an odd question to ask. The total

of 13,200 is inscribed on the Monument.1 It is

firmly set in all the histories, whether popular or

academic, and invariably features in descriptions of

the destruction. The most detailed account appears

in W. G. Bell’s Great Fire of London:

“373 acres burnt within the walls, and

63 acres 3 roods without the walls.

89 parish churches, besides chapels burnt.

13,200 houses burnt in over 400 streets and

courts.

75 acres 3 roods still standing within the walls

unburnt.

11 parishes without the walls yet standing”.2

Apart from attributing them to the surveyors Jonas

Moore and Ralph Gratrix (now usually Greatorex),

Bell gives no source for the figures and given their

importance I thought I would trace their origin. As

far as I could tell, subsequent historians have simply

taken the figures as fact. So I looked further.

I thought I had found the key clue in the scholarly

biography of Moore by Frances Willmoth, who states

that the survey only appears in Hollar’s Exact

Survey.3 That rehearses some but not all of the

analysis given in Bell and I thought that perhaps

Bell had simply embellished the figures. Then I

came across a fuller version in the controversial

pamphlet which purported to give A True and

Faithful [i.e. anti-Catholic] Account of the Several

Informations exhibited to the ... Committee appointed

... to inquire into the late dreadful burning of the City

of London (1667). This included the details in Bell’s

list (albeit in a different order) save for the reference

to 400 streets and courts. Perhaps that detail was

an addition by Bell? No: it was included in the

Monument inscription (i.e. in 1677).4 And then I

found the same certificate (with minor differences),

in manuscript, in the Verney archives:5

“Upon the second of September 1666 the fire

began in London, at one Farriner’s house, a baker

in Pudding Lane, between the hours of one and two

in the morning, and continued burning until the

sixth of September following; consuming, as by the

surveyors appears in print, three hundred [and]

seventy three acres within the walls of the City of

London, and sixty three acres three roods without

the walls. There remains seventy five acres three

roods yet standing within the walls un-burnt: eighty

nine parish churches, besides chapels, burnt:

eleven parishes within the walls yet standing:

houses burnt, thirteen thousand two hundred.

(Jonas Moore )

per ( ) Surveyors

(Ralph Gatrix)”6

The phrasing and indeed the meaning is odd:

what in particular does the phrase about appearing

in print signify? Was there an earlier fuller version

– the one Bell might have been using? But these

two ‘certificates’ at least made it clear that there

was

indeed

a

contemporary

survey

which

‘produced’ the 13,200 figure. So I then investigated

how the survey was carried out.

Moore and Greatorex together and separately had

successful surveying careers. Moore was also a

scientific instrument-maker and Greatorex an

engineer. The figures in their certificate have a

precision which suggests they are derived from

systematic, professional work.

Who then appointed them? They are described as

certifying their figures as simply ‘surveyors’. They

certainly do not appear to have been commissioned

by the City itself. Many historians follow Bell in

calling them Corporation Surveyors, but Dr

Willmoth found no record of their appointment in

the City’s archives; and T. F. Reddaway, who

studied the post-Fire City records more closely than

anyone else, makes no mention of them at all. He

refers to 13,200 as a fact requiring no attribution.7

It is more likely that Moore and Greatorex were

appointed by the Crown. They had already worked

for the Navy/Ordnance Board and had recently

worked together surveying the new fortified colony

of Tangier. It was this work that prompted Evelyn

to recommend Moore as a surveyor of the destroyed

City.8 I have not, however, found any reference to

the appointment in what I assume are the likeliest

page 4

A detail from the Monument erected to commemorate the Great

Fire, with sculpture by Caius Cibber. The distressed City of

London, with sword, resting on broken masonry, is revived by

Time and Industry. Behind are citizens in consternation

page 5

sources – the Privy Council Registers and the State

Papers. Perhaps the plain designation ‘surveyors’

indicates an informal appointment?

And when was the work carried out? No date is

attached to the Verney certificate,9 but a few of the

figures appear in the famous London Gazette for 3-

10 September. In a ‘list of buildings destroyed in

this terrible disaster [which] hath been taken’ there

appeared ‘13,200 houses’, ‘87 [not 89] churches’, ‘6

chapels’ and various public buildings and such like.

My current surmise is that immediately after the

Fire Moore and Greatorex were commissioned by

the King to give a basic assessment of the

damage.10 Some of their figures were reported

straightaway in the London Gazette.11 The full

printed version was as Bell rehearses (as witness

its stilted phrasing), while somewhat tailored

versions were circulated first in manuscript. The

latter version for some reason became the one

reproduced in post-Fire publications, though for

the Monument the full version was consulted.12 But

this is only my best guess from my findings so far

and much turns on Bell’s missing source. Can a

reader point me to it? I hope it’s not obvious.

Of course, the final step is to ‘test’ the 13,200

figure itself. What does it mean? Properties in the

City were then so sub-divided and intermingled

that the term ‘house’ had different meanings. I am

looking into the number of ‘houses’ in the City in

1666. I am planning to say something about it in

the next LTS Record.)

– Ian Doolittle

1.  C. Welch, History of the Monument (1893), 29-30.

The use of Roman numerals for 13,200 went wrong!

2.  (1920), 174. I have ignored Bell’s (entirely justified)

correction of 89 to 87.

3.  Sir Jonas Moore (1993), 137.

4.  Together with some new/different figures, referring to

wards not parishes.

5.  Sue Baxter, archivist to the Claydon House Trust,

has been most helpful.

6.  I have modernised spelling etc. but for obvious

reasons kept the odd phrasing. The signatures are in

the same (copyist’s) hand.

7.  Rebuilding of London (1940), 26, (73), (75) and 270.

8.  Willmoth, Moore, 136-7.

9.  There is no clue in the document or the archive. The

fact that it is included in its natural chronological

place in Memoirs of the

Verney Family, eds. F. P.

and M. M. Verney

(2 vols., 3rd edn, 1925),

ii. 259

evidently does not signify.

10.  Cf. S. Porter, The Great Fire of London (1996), 70-1.

11.  The

total

of

12,000

given

in

Rege

Sincera’s

Observations (1667), 13, is unlikely to be an early

estimate, before the Moore and Greatorex figures

appeared (as Bell surmised: Fire, 223). In fact, it may

have been a total for houses within the walls: W.

Maitland, The History and Survey of London (2 vols,

1756), Ii. 837. The figure appears also in a foreigner’s

account dated 20 September: Bell, Fire, 330.

12.  i.e. it includes the 400 streets; but in other respects it

departs from Moore and Greatorex.

Changing London

If you explore the confusion around the Crossrail

works near Tottenham Court Road, you may arrive

at the once quiet corner where Flitcroft’s elegant

Georgian church stands as successor to the

medieval leper hospital of St Giles-in-the-Fields.

Across the road some battered eighteenth-century

houses have been allowed to survive in Denmark

Street; round the corner there are only shored-up

façades facing the blocky forms of the lower parts of

Centrepoint (you can see the great hole behind from

Charing Cross Road). But press on south, past the

west front of St Giles down a little passageway, and

there is a surprising sight of greenery. The Phoenix

Garden (taking its appropriate name from the

Phoenix theatre in Charing Cross Road) was created

here in 1984 on a carpark made on a bombsite. It is

now the only survival from seven community

gardens established with the help of the Covent

Garden Open Spaces committee. After many

struggles the garden acquired a new 20 year lease

in 2015, and relandscaping is in progress, with a

smart new garden building at the southern end. For

more information see www.thephoenixgarden.org

where there is an excellently researched history of

the site by Jane Palm-Gold.

The Phoenix Garden, looking toward the tower of St Giles-in-the Fields

Circumspice

What is the subject of this sculpture and where is

it? For the answer see p.15.

The Park Villages and HS2

Geoffrey Tyack, whose books include studies of the

architects John Nash and James Pennethorne, tells

the story of Nash’s influential Park Villages on the

edge of Regent’s Park, and their decline due to the

coming of the railways. He highlights how the

planned fast railway line from Euston will further

undermine the character of Park Village East.

Park Village West has long been recognised as an

almost perfectly preserved prototype of the

nineteenth-century planned middle-class suburb.

Leafy, secluded and architecturally highly eclectic,

this attractive enclave was first conceived by Nash

in 1823 as part of a plan for developing a seven-

acre tract of Crown land beyond the north-eastern

corner of Regent’s Park, and was built in 1832-7

under the supervision of his pupil James

Pennethorne, who inherited the older architect’s

practice following his semi-retirement to the Isle of

Wight. Nash’s original project, designed ‘more for

amusement than profit’ (National Archives, Cres

2/778; MPE 911), envisaged the creation of a

‘village’ of picturesque cottages on either side of a

branch of the Regent’s Canal, completed in 1820, of

which he was a major promoter. One group of

houses would be built around the loop that now

constitutes Park Village West, leading off Albany

Street. Another, larger, group would be strung out

along a sinuous ‘village road’ (now Park Village

East) leading south-east from the present Parkway

to the canal basin and Cumberland Market, laid

out by Nash as the economic hub of a planned new

artisan quarter, now entirely redeveloped for

council flats. The first houses were built along the

canal side of the ‘village road’ in 1824-6, and were

illustrated in a pair of engravings by T. H. Shepherd

in James Elmes’s Metropolitan Improvements

(1827), one of them showing the curving street with

the York and Albany pub at the far end, almost as

it is today, the other the backs of the houses with

their gardens sloping down to the canal with its

traffic of barges. More houses followed in the late

1820s, most of them semi-detached but some

detached, their disparate architectural styles

contributing to the sense of ‘variety’ which was an

essential

characteristic

of

the

Picturesque

aesthetic. By 1829, when Philip Hardwick surveyed

the land (National Archives, MPE 907), Nos 1 to 28

had all been built on the canal side of the street, as

had a group on the far end of the other side,

bounded by a ‘Serpentine Road’.

It is highly unlikely that Nash, preoccupied at the

end of his career with the building of Buckingham

Palace, devoted much time or effort to the detailed

design of the Park Village East houses, but their

stuccoed exteriors (e.g. the Neo-Tudor Nos 2-4, and

No. 36 with its octagonal tower) echo the earlier

country houses and villas with which he had made

his reputation as an architect. Some were built by

William Smith, builder of Sussex Place, one of the

terraces on the western side of Regent’s Park;

others may have been designed by Charles James

Mathews, a pupil of Augustus Pugin, one of Nash’s

most important early collaborators, who later

retired from architectural practice to become an

actor. The leases were bought as investments by

businessmen and shopkeepers, some of them

based in Regent Street, completed to Nash’s

designs in 1823. They sub-let the houses to middle-

class occupants who included the brother of the

future Cardinal Newman, a Professor of Latin at the

newly-founded University College, London; he lived

at No. 14, a three-bay detached villa with a

projecting slate roof on eaves-brackets.

page 6

The Park Villages on Bacon’s map of London c.1912

Park Village West

Park Village East, No. 36

The far side of Park Village East, away from the

canal, was less attractive to investors and tenants,

and it became even less so when the London and

Birmingham Railway was driven through a cutting

at the bottom of the gardens in 1836-8 on its

approach to Euston Station. Building nevertheless

continued, and nearly all of the available plots were

shown as occupied in a rate-book of July 1837 (St

Pancras parish, London Borough of Camden

archives). But in 1900-6 the houses on the far

(eastern) side of the street were all demolished to

make way for new railway tracks, now hidden

behind a brick retaining wall (see the map above).

This led to the loss of the ‘Serpentine Road’ at the

southern end of the street, along with the attractive

round-towered Italianate villa at its northern end

shown in a watercolour of c.1840 (Camden

archives, Heal Collection). In 1941 a bomb hit Nos

18-20, a pretty Tudor-Gothic pair in the canal side

of the street, the site of which is now occupied by a

block of flats called Nash House, and the canal

itself was filled in with rubble after the end of the

Second World War. Since then the remaining

houses in both Park Village East and West have

been well-preserved by the Crown Estate and

cherished by their occupants, but the future of

those in the eastern part of Nash’s ‘village’ has now

been thrown into question. Under plans for the

approach of HS2 into Euston the roadway of Park

Village East will be dug up in order to construct a

steel and concrete structure for the high-speed

trains, a new retaining wall erected opposite the

houses, and, most damaging, ‘ground anchors’

inserted underneath the houses, potentially

damaging their foundations (see www.publications.

parliament.uk/pa/cmhs2/petitions/0834.pdf.). Not

only will the residents’ lives be disrupted by up to

seven years of engineering works; the very

existence of an integral part of one of the most

significant urban developments of the nineteenth

century – the ancestor of countless planned

suburbs throughout the world – may, assuming the

project goes ahead, be threatened. All lovers of

London’s urban landscape should hasten to see

and enjoy it while they still have the opportunity.

– Geoffrey Tyack

The Survey of London

in Whitechapel

Peter Guillery introduces a new approach to

research by The Survey of London – in which your

participation is invited – (see the website mentioned

below) – and sets it in the context of the Survey’s

past history.

East London is the Survey of London’s spiritual

home. C. R. Ashbee launched the project in 1894–6

for a monograph about Trinity Hospital on the Mile

End Road, followed up with the first Survey of

London parish volume, devoted to Bromley by Bow

and published in 1900. Since then eastern

dalliances have been at best occasional. It is 60

years since the Survey covered Spitalfields (volume

27, 1957), and 30 since we last embarked on the

study of an East End district – that was Poplar,

Blackwall and the Isle of Dogs, where work began

in 1986 (volumes 43 and 44, 1994). In recent years

the Survey has turned to south London, previously

long neglected, to investigate Woolwich and

Battersea (volumes 48 to 50, 2012 and 2013), and

to the West End for what we are calling South-East

Marylebone (volumes 51 and 52, forthcoming

2017), and Oxford Street (volume 53, forthcoming

2019). So it seems timely and appropriate that the

Survey is now beginning work on the parish of

Whitechapel, an East End place of great historical

interest in the throes of major change.

This will lead in due course and in the traditional

way to a book in the parish series (volume 54).

However, we are keen to make it known that the

Survey is following a new path to that end. Now

that we are housed within a university, in the

Bartlett School of Architecture at University College

London since 2013, the Survey is eligible to receive

research-council funding. This is important

because the kinds of innovations that we have long

wanted to introduce to the Survey’s methods have

not been possible heretofore for want of money. We

are delighted and fortunate that the Arts and

Humanities Research Council has approved a grant

proposal for a three-year experimental project to try

out in Whitechapel a reshaping of the way the

Survey conducts its research.

page 7

Park Village East, looking north

Whitechapel Road looking west in 2016 by Derek Kendall

In collaboration with the Bartlett’s Centre for

Advanced Spatial Analysis we have been able to

create a website – Survey of London, Histories of

Whitechapel (surveyoflondon.org), launched in

September 2016. This functions as a research base

as we accumulate information about Whitechapel.

Crucially,

the

map-based

website

will

be

participative up to the end of 2018, enabling any

and all with an interest in or experiences of

Whitechapel’s places and buildings (that very much

includes you, dear Top Soc newsletter reader) to

contribute knowledge, ranging from research

findings to reminiscences to photographs or

drawings. We are keen not only to engage our

existing readership, but also to extend it, both

locally and globally, and to widen our sources in a

way that we feel would have pleased Ashbee, for

whom the recording of London’s built fabric was

what would now be called a public-engagement

mission. The grant has also made possible the

cataloguing of Whitechapel archives (mainly deeds)

held by Tower Hamlets Local History Library and

Archives, material that will soon be accessible

through their online catalogue, the commissioning

of new photographs and drawings, and the hosting

of events, such as workshops, walks and

exhibitions (see the website).

Whitechapel’s history: a story of immigration

Whitechapel has a rich and complicated history in

which immigration has a central place. As

Elizabethan London expanded, many came from

the English countryside and John Stow famously

found Whitechapel ‘pestered with Cottages and

Allies’. There followed Irish, Huguenot and German

arrivals in the seventeenth and eighteenth

centuries. Sugar baking, based on Caribbean

imports into the Port of London, was a significant

local industry, largely handled by German

immigrants who possessed the secrets of the trade

– Whitechapel retains Lutheran and Catholic

German churches, though the former is no longer

in use as such. It is better known that large-scale

Jewish immigration from Eastern Europe followed

pogroms in the last decades of the nineteenth

century. Then in the post-war period there was

another major shift in the area’s population as

Bengali immigrants, largely Muslim, settled in

Whitechapel. The majority of the district’s

population now is of Bangladeshi origin, albeit

many at one or two generations remove, and there

are numerous other smaller groups of recent

immigrants. There is also much new purpose-built

student housing, and gentrification has taken hold

in the area’s remaining pre-Victorian houses and in

a slew of new tower blocks across the parts of the

parish nearest the City. This area is bisected by

Whitechapel High Street on which stands the

Whitechapel Gallery, though ‘placemakers’ are

spinning vigorously to re-designate it Aldgate –

Whitechapel

evidently

has

undesirable

connotations. On Commercial Street, directly

opposite Toynbee Hall, new apartment blocks

place-make with yet more absurd naming –

Kensington Apartments, Ladbroke House and

Sloane Apartments; they evidently do not expect

prospective purchasers to be local. Whatever it is

called, this inner district has been transformed in

the last few years by cliffs of glass.

Further east on Whitechapel Road the former

churchyard of St Mary Matfelon, the parish church

that replaced the eponymous medieval ‘white

chapel’, is now Altab Ali Park, renamed in memory

of a young man murdered in a racist attack in

1978. The park has a Shaheed Minar (martyrs’

monument) of 1999, a secular memorial copied

from a larger monument in

Dhaka that commemorates

those who died fighting for

Bangladeshi independence.

Beyond is the Whitechapel

Bell

Foundry,

an

extraordinary survival of

manufacturing given its

central

location,

which

retains

front

buildings

from when it moved to this

site in the 1740s from the

then densely built-up inner

part of the parish. Further

along is the East London

Mosque, London’s most

used mosque and a major

local presence. It moved

here from the Commercial

Road in the 1970s and into

its present main building

in the early 1980s. The

mosque

has

expanded

gradually since on to a

larger

site

that

now

page 8

Shaheed Minar, Altab Ali Park, Whitechapel, in 2015, photograph by Lucy Millson-Watkins

page 9

comprehends the former Great Synagogue on

Fieldgate Street, the last of many dozens of

synagogues in the parish, now fallen redundant

and possibly destined for use as a heritage centre

to encourage links between faiths.

Whitechapel highlights

The east end of Whitechapel Road is what all would

agree is Whitechapel. Here the tube station

(stations are the latter-day anchors for place names

more than high streets or parish churches) has

mutating entrances while it is reconstructed for

Crossrail, a change that will have a further

transformative effect. Across the road is another

landmark, the Royal London Hospital. Since 2012

the hospital has occupied new buildings, set back

from the road. The former roadside hospital, which

traces its origins to the 1750s, is to be converted to

be a civic centre for Tower Hamlets Council. That

seems an enlightened and hearteningly appropriate

reuse of an historic public building.

The parish of Whitechapel also extends south to

take in places not normally associated with the

place-name. Alie Street, Leman Street, Mansell

Street and Prescot Street form a near-square on the

map that was laid out around 1700 with good

houses, a handful of which survive. Also here are

notable reminders of the scale of the co-operative

movement in Co-operative Wholesale Society’s

buildings, now largely converted to residential use.

Finally, there is Wellclose Square, laid out by

Nicholas Barbon at the end of the seventeenth

century. A Danish church at its centre was

replaced by a charming Victorian school and early

houses were all cleared in the 1960s, while close by

Wilton’s Music Hall has been preserved.

The Survey of London has long since moved on

from cherry-picking major sites, so perhaps

mentioning

these

highlights is misleading as

to the nature of our work.

There is a great deal else to

be investigated, mostly of a

more quotidian character.

Our

interest

is

in

everything on the ground

and,

within

reason,

governed by pragmatism,

what

has

gone.

Our

interactive map is made up

of

1,395

vectorised

polygons,

each

representing a building,

behind which there are

historic maps for help in

reconstructing

vanished

topographies. Clicking on

any

site

opens

the

possibility

of

reading

content already present (in

many cases there is as yet

no more than an address

and a rough identifying

snapshot), and of contributing stories, facts, images

– anything historical about Whitechapel’s buildings

(though not too much please by way of Jack the

Ripper-ology, amply housed elsewhere on the

internet). Please do contribute. We are eagerly

looking forward to compiling this Survey of London

volume together with our readers.

l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l

Hidden in the corner of the map…:

town vignettes on early maps and

charts

Peter Barber, formerly head of the Map Department

in the British Library, reflects on how the views of

towns and buildings which can be discovered on

early maps may reveal the interests and priorities of

patrons or mapmakers.

Modern maps, whether digital or hard copy, are

generally intended to answer predictable questions

in a standardised way. Since the location of

features is considered a prime requirement, the

locations of towns and cities on small to medium-

scale maps are indicated by signs that have become

immediately recognisable to most users through

centuries of repetition.

This has not always been so, however. While

signs – of varying degrees of elaboration but

lacking individualised features – are to be seen on

maps from earliest times (for instance on medieval

copies of Roman maps of their empire, or on the

‘Gough’ map of the Great Britain now dated to

about 1400 in the Bodleian Library), early maps

and sea charts often contain miniaturised views

and, later, plans of town ultimately derived from

The former London Hospital, Whitechapel Road, in 2016. In the foreground the head of the figure of

Justice, W. S. Frith, sculptor, from Whitechapel Market’s drinking fountain of 1911, photograph by

Derek Kendall

direct observation or survey. ‘Ultimately’ is the key

word. While none seem to have been the product of

direct observation, neither are the vignettes on

maps necessarily unthinking copies of their

prototypes. Certain features may be exaggerated,

or specific buildings added in ways which throw

light on the values of the mapmaker or their

patron.

As has often been pointed out, the Hereford World

Map of about 1300 contains a realistic depiction of

Lincoln cathedral on top of a hill – a feature which

almost certainly appeared on the map’s model,

(which was created at Lincoln), while the

importance of Hereford is acknowledged on the

map through the depiction of nearby Clee Hill

rather than the town itself. The same map – and

most medieval world maps influenced by the

theories of an early twelfth-century German

theologian, Hugh, who taught in the Abbey of St

Victor near Paris – also has a realistic map of Paris

as an island in the Seine. The years that saw the

creation of the Hereford map, witnessed very

different, and more utilitarian sea charts being

created in Catalonia and Italy. The only decoration

on the Italian-style charts – mostly made in Venice

– are vignettes of Venice and its rival republic,

Genoa, as seen from the sea.

As Catherine Delano Smith has demonstrated in

the most thorough recent discussion of the

evolution of map signs in early modern Europe,1

the years between 1530 and 1560 were the golden

age of the town vignette on European maps.

England at that time had no map trade of its own

and virtually no maps were printed here either.

However it was close to Antwerp, which was

becoming a European mapping centre, and the

English were becoming increasingly adept at

mapmaking – most of which appeared in

manuscript. As a result, views of London appear

as vignettes on a number of these early maps,

such as one of the manuscript maps used by

Henry VIII in planning the journey to England of

Anne of Cleves in 1539 (British Library Cotton MS

Augustus I.ii.64), the map of the British Isles by

George Lily that was published in Rome in 1546

or an anonymous woodcut map of the British Isles

printed in the Netherlands in 1548-9, the unique

surviving example of which is now in a private

American collection.

Such

vignette

views

are

of

particular

importance to people with an interest in London

history because so few other views of medieval

and early modern London are now known. It is

generally assumed that only a minuscule fraction

of this early material – perhaps as little as 5% –

now survives. So the historian has to clutch at

straws – and these vignettes are one of them. As I

have argued elsewhere, though they are not

original works in themselves, they give as close

an idea as is now possible of the lost and much

larger prototype.2 These are likely to have been

much copied and well-known in their time and to

have formed the accepted image of early Tudor

London.

After 1560 the percentage of non-individualised

settlement signs on printed maps increased, and

from about 1590 the miniaturised views and town

plans tended to appear in the borders of printed

maps – particularly those published in Amsterdam.

But the particularised vignette on a map did not

disappear. There is, by way of an example, an

attractive miniature view of London on John

Norden’s map of Middlesex in the Middlesex volume

of his Speculum Britanniae, published in 1593.

Moreover, in this respect manuscript maps followed

their own trajectory. Some may have been no more

than rough sketches on paper or parchment, but

many – and a high percentage of those that survive

were

objects

of

exquisite

draftsmanship

commissioned by or intended for presentation to

the great and the good, including the monarch.

They often contain details which, while of little

relevance to the theme of the map, repay detailed

study.

page 10

Lincoln Cathedral on the Mappa Mundi

London on George Lily’s map of 1546

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Made with Publuu - flipbook maker