In 1823-4, when George Rennie designed New London Bridge, London was
probably two hundred times as big as was Montauban in the fourteenth
century; and certainly the Thames was not inferior to the Tarn as a
historic inspiration. Yet Rennie failed to understand the importance
of being large in scale. In less than fifty years his work was
“insufficiently wide for the traffic”;[109] and since then, on a
good many occasions, we have been asked to disfigure London Bridge
with overhanging footpaths. “London can well afford to pay for new
bridges, but can by no means afford to part with a single object of
real beauty.”[109] For Rennie’s bridge, despite all errors of scale,
has points of charming interest. Her roadway has a graceful curvature
that delights the eye, her arches have an excellent shape, and the
variation in their size could not well be bettered.[110] Later we shall
see (p. 325) that much money was ill-spent on hammer-dressing the whole
external face of the masonry; but an engineer with a very weak feeling
for scale was afraid to use either scabbled stone or stone with a
rough-axed facing. Rennie learnt all that he could learn by studying
fine models of style, such as the Roman bridge at Rimini, but his own
equipment as an artist was terrene.
Would that we had in England an old bridge equal to the Pont des
Consuls! Would that old London Bridge had been delivered down to our
sixpences and shillings! Yet I suppose we must consider ourselves
lucky in the fact that historic bridges in Great Britain, though much
inferior to those on the Continent, are fairly numerous in districts
where there has been but little increase of traffic. We possess three
bridges with defensive gateways (Stirling, Warkworth, and the Monnow
Bridge at Monmouth); five with chapels, or with relics of chapels
(St. Ives in Huntingdonshire, Derby, Bradford-on-Avon in Wiltshire,
Wakefield, Rotherham); and many good specimens exist of bridges with
angular recesses built out from parapets and forming part of the
piers.[111] These recesses were designed not only as shelter places for
wayfarers, but because they lessened the cost of production, inasmuch
as they gave width to narrow footways; and so their value in an old
bridge is very similar to that of bay-windows in cottage rooms.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account