London (England) -- Antiquities; London (England) -- History
have done was to turn arches between the original piers, and make it a
stone bridge throughout. The same master was said to have built another
bridge at La Rochelle, and had evidently gained much experience in
such engineering work; and it is perhaps a misfortune that the King's
advice was neglected, as a skilled architect, which Peter certainly
was not, might have saved the city of London much eventual loss and
trouble. Peter was, however, suffered to continue the bridge until his
death in 1205, when a commission of three city merchants completed the
work in four years.
The bridge which these many years of labour had produced was in
every way unsuitable to its position, and mean as compared to
similar buildings erected elsewhere. Lacking the skill to form
proper foundations, Peter had spread them out into wide piers, which
formed an almost continuous dam, through the openings in which the
water rushed like a mill-race. The result was that the scour soon
affected the stability of the piers, which had to be protected round
by masses of masonry and chalk in the form of sterlings, which still
further contracted the narrow waterways. The passage of the bridge by
boat--"shooting the bridge," it was called--was always a dangerous
operation; and a writer of the last century speaks of "the noise of
the falling waters, the clamours of the water-men, and the frequent
shrieks of drowning wretches," in describing it. So imperfectly built
was the bridge that within four years of its completion King John
again interfered, and called upon the Corporation properly to repair
it; and from this time, or perhaps from Peter's death, when the three
merchants were elected to complete the work, the Corporation appears to
have taken over the responsibility of the bridge; and for this purpose
they were endowed with certain properties, which became the nucleus of
the present "Bridge House Estates." The increasing dilapidation of the
bridge, the debris of fallen arches, and the rubbish and waste material
which was suffered to accumulate, still further impeded the natural
flow of the water, and little effort at improvement was ever made. Of
the three widest arches of the bridge, which were called the navigable
locks, the most important had been the one nearest to the city end,
which became known as the "Rock Lock," and it acquired that name on
account of a popular delusion that in its fairway was a growing and
vegetating rock, which was nothing more than an accumulation of fallen
ruins, which caught and held the floating refuse carried to and fro by
the tides. And thus year after year the river dam became more solid,
and the waterfall increased in height until it was said by one who knew
them both that it was almost as safe to attempt the Falls of Niagara as
to shoot London Bridge.
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