BOME

Politics In The Context of Architecture and City Planning In England Up To 1840 - A Short History

   During the time of Roman occupation of England, British cities were constructed in the same manner as other Roman settlements. The city plan consisted of the construction of a central castrum with the entire city set up in a grid pattern. This pattern had two focuses: to easily maneuver through the town in cases of emergency and to more easily protect itself from outside invasion. The grid pattern allowed for the easy construction of a protective city wall, which was common for all Roman occupations. The London castrum, much like others, was constructed near a body of water, usually a river. This allowed the settlement to become a port city and a center of commerce, as well as allowed for easy navigation from one settlement to another settlement by way of sea-based routes.
After the decline of the Roman Empire and the withdrawal of Rome from England, the island began to take a shape of its own. Naturally protected by the English Channel and the Atlantic Ocean, British cities had the freedom to expand in any direction at any rate without the fear of a land-based attack. If there was to be any invasion, it would come from the sea, and England soon developed the world’s mightiest navy in order to protect itself from that threat. Along with the withdrawal of Rome from England went the authoritarian power of future monarchs. With few exceptions the political power of the monarchy was limited by England’s unique Parliamentary system. One obvious sign of the monarchy’s limited strength was in its city planning.
   During the time of Roman occupation, English towns were arranged in such a way that allowed the very centralized Roman government to maintain control over its subjects. The strict guidelines on how to build a city were in place so that should there be any upheaval from the citizenry, the proper governmental authorities would have an easier time of taking control of the situation and putting down what could become widespread riot or rebellion. The England that developed after the decline of the Roman Empire did not retain the style of city planning that it had adopted while under Roman rule, and no future monarch would ever be able to plan already settled British cities in however way they saw fit.
   British cities grew in a more organic, natural way. This differed greatly from French and other continental European cities, which maintained their grid-like patterns in order to maintain the safety of their towns. When French cities expanded, they expanded in such a way that maintained the integrity of the grid, and after the city had grown to a certain size, a new city wall would be built around the larger city. English towns had natural protection, and grew with no preset style or plan.
   English monarchs were unable to implement city planning the way that other European monarchs could. While certain French monarchs, most coming from the Bourbon Dynasty, could easily create long roads that cut through neighborhoods in order to show their immense centralized power, British monarchs, no matter how authoritarian they wished to seem, could not build roads or plan cities in such ways. Even after King George IV attempted to establish Regent Street in order to demonstrate how powerful he was, he had to create it in such a way that went with the natural and chaotic planning of the cities. No straight roads were built and no long stretches of land were cleared in the middle of a city because the King simply did not have the political power, the support, or the resources to do so.
    Despite heavy opposition to the king’s plan, Regent Street was constructed and the king got a new landmark to honor him, and the bourgeoises got new homes in the center of London. In order to make his new street seem more glamorous and ornate that it actually was, the king ordered a facade in the style of classical Greek architecture be built on both sides of his street. This way he could create the illusion of luxury where there was limited luxury, and he could demonstrate that he could in fact create the illusion of a strong centralized government by literally putting masks on his creations. Doric columns, representing the king’s masculinity, decorated the streets, and Greek facades covered the otherwise plain dwellings of the bourgeoises.
    This style of architecture was common not only amongst the 19th century monarchs of England, but also amongst the merchant class of the same period. In an effort to make it seem as if they lived in infinitely gargantuan homes, a cooperative of landed gentry would create a large facade along the entire perimeter of their connected homes, which gave the impression to passing onlookers of one single, large palace instead of multiple brownstone-like homes connected at the walls. The superficiality of the entire project was evident in the elaborate pediments that sat atop the buildings and which protected nothing but the air behind them.
    Even beloved monarchs of the past, namely Elizabeth I, who is widely considered to be the greatest monarch ever to rule England, did not wield the power to do as she wished when it came to the development of new buildings in London. Her only guideline, essentially the only one she could have, was that buildings be created from stone so as to prevent possible fires. The monarchical power of England was never as centralized or authoritative as the continental European powers, mainly because of the way each individual state developed. England focused more on the development of social and industrial services, while countries like France and Austria had to first focus on security. The continental powers’ focus on security meant that they developed slower in terms of technology and political theory. English rulers may have enjoyed fewer political privileges, but they did enjoy better overall stability, along with better technology. Despite England’s lack of a single, centralized power, it grew to be the most powerful European nation throughout most of European history.

- Jorge X. C.

Bibliography

1.) Adam, Robert. Classical Architecture: A Comprehensive Handbook To The Tradition Of Classical Style. Harry N. Abrams, Inc. Publishers, New York, 1990
2.) Ashton, John. Social England Under The Regency. Chatto & Windus, 1899