Beginning History: The Great Fire Of London

Product Information

But before they could use fire hooks, the people of Pudding Lane needed to ask the Lord Mayor if they were allowed to – and he had to say ‘yes’. London possessed advanced fire-fighting technology in the form of fire engines, which had been used in earlier large-scale fires. However, unlike the useful firehooks, these large pumps had rarely proved flexible or functional enough to make much difference. Only some of them had wheels; others were mounted on wheelless sleds. [42] They had to be brought a long way, tended to arrive too late, and had limited reach, with spouts but no delivery hoses. [c] On this occasion, an unknown number of fire engines were either wheeled or dragged through the streets. Firefighters tried to manoeuvre the engines to the river to fill their tanks, and several of the engines fell into the Thames. The heat from the flames by then was too great for the remaining engines to get within a useful distance. [41] Development of the fire Sunday Approximate damage by the evening of Sunday, 2 September, outlined in dashes ( Pudding Lane origin [a] is short vertical road in lower right damage area) [44]

The social and economic problems created by the disaster were overwhelming. Flight from London and settlement elsewhere were strongly encouraged by Charles II, who feared a London rebellion amongst the dispossessed refugees. Various schemes for rebuilding the city were proposed, some of them very radical. After the fire, London was reconstructed on essentially the same medieval street plan, which still exists today. [5] London in the 1660s It seemed there was nowhere safe from the fire, so everyone was really worried – including the diary writer Samuel Pepys. Not everyone at the time thought that the fire was an accident. Some said foreigners caused it. Others felt that the fire was started by those not free to follow their own religion. Some even saw the fire as a punishment from God. According to Jacob Field, "the reaction to the Fire revealed England's long-standing hostility to Catholics, which manifested itself most visibly at times of crisis". [120] Allegations that Catholics had started the fire were exploited as powerful political propaganda by opponents of pro-Catholic Charles II's court, mostly during the Popish Plot and the exclusion crisis later in his reign. [151] [120] The Royalist perspective of the fire as accidental was opposed by the Whig view questioning the loyalties of Catholics in general and the Duke of York in particular. [152] Hanson, 77–80. The section "Fire hazards in the City" is based on Hanson, 77–101 unless otherwise indicated.

What happened after the fire?

By the 1660s, London was by far the largest city in Britain and the third largest in the Western world, estimated at 300,000 to 400,000 inhabitants. [6] [7] John Evelyn, contrasting London to the Baroque magnificence of Paris in 1659, called it a "wooden, northern, and inartificial congestion of Houses". [8] By "inartificial", Evelyn meant unplanned and makeshift, the result of organic growth and unregulated urban sprawl. [9] London had been a Roman settlement for four centuries and had become progressively more crowded inside its defensive city wall. It had also pushed outwards beyond the wall into extramural settlements such as Shoreditch, Holborn, Cripplegate, Clerkenwell and Southwark, and the Inns of Court. To the West it reached along Strand to the Royal Palace and Abbey at Westminster. [9] [10] Thomas Farrinor and his wife got out of their bakery in time, but their maid was too frightened to jump from the roof. She was the first to die. Surprisingly, only nine people died as a result of the fire.

Suspicion soon arose in the threatened city that the fire was no accident. [70] The swirling winds carried sparks and burning flakes long distances to lodge on thatched roofs and in wooden gutters, causing seemingly unrelated house fires to break out far from their source and giving rise to rumours that fresh fires were being set on purpose. Foreigners were immediately suspected because of the ongoing Second Anglo-Dutch War. Fear and suspicion hardened into certainty on Monday, as reports circulated of imminent invasion and of foreign undercover agents seen casting "fireballs" into houses, or caught with hand grenades or matches. [71] [72] [73] There was a wave of street violence. [74] Cultural responses to the Great Fire emerged in poetry, "one of the chief modes of media in seventeenth-century England", [166] as well as in religious sermons. [120] At least 23 poems were published in the year following the fire. [167] More recent cultural works featuring the Great Fire include the 1841 novel Old St. Paul's [168] (and the 1914 film adaptation), [169] the 2006 novel Forged in the Fire, [170] the 2014 television drama The Great Fire, [171] and the musical Bumblescratch, which was performed as part of the commemorations of the 350th anniversary of the Great Fire. [172] See also

Claim A FREE Book Reviews Activity Pack!

Hanson, Neil (2001). The Dreadful Judgement: The True Story of the Great Fire of London. Doubleday. ISBN 0-385-60134-4.

On Charles' initiative, a Monument to the Great Fire of London was erected near Pudding Lane, designed by Christopher Wren and Robert Hooke, standing 61 + 1⁄ 2 metres (202ft) tall. [137] [160] In 1681, accusations against the Catholics were added to the inscription on the Monument which read, in part, "Popish frenzy which wrought such horrors, is not yet quenched". [161] The inscription remained until after the passage of the Roman Catholic Relief Act 1829 when it was removed in 1830 following a successful campaign by City Solicitor Charles Pearson. [162] [163] Another monument marks the spot where the fire is said to have died out: the Golden Boy of Pye Corner in Smithfield. [164] [161]Topic Guides – Explore our topic guides and discover teaching ideas, resources, facts, videos and books that will help you to teach your children about a wide range of topics and themes.

Tuesday, 4 September was the day of greatest destruction. [87] The Duke of York's command post at Temple Bar, where Strand meets Fleet Street, was supposed to stop the fire's westward advance towards the Palace of Whitehall. He hoped that the River Fleet would form a natural firebreak, making a stand with his firemen from the Fleet Bridge and down to the Thames. However, early on Tuesday morning, the flames jumped over the Fleet and outflanked them, driven by the unabated easterly gale, forcing them to run for it. [88] [89] This article is about the 1666 fire of London. For other "Great Fires", see List of historic fires. For other notable fires in London, see Early fires of London and Second Great Fire of London. Colsoni, F (1951). Le Guide de Londres (1693) (in French) (Reprinted.). London Topographical Society. Who Was Samuel Pepys? by Paul Harrison – simple biography of Pepy’s life, including a section about his recount of The Great Fire.Two people have left us eyewitness accounts of the fire. The first is Samuel Pepys, who worked for the Navy. He kept a diary from 1660-1669. The second is John Evelyn, who also kept a diary. Both men describe how dramatic and scary the fire was. Jones, J.R (2013). The Anglo-Dutch Wars of the Seventeenth Century Modern Wars In Perspective. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-317-89948-8. Townspeople: Fire! Fire! We need to tell somebody about this… I wish someone would invent the telephone. And the fire brigade.Let’s get The Lord Mayor.