Sir Bloodworth And The Destruction Of The City Of London

1823 Words 8 Pages
This would of forced the City to pay back the damages to all of its citizens. So instead, an inferno caused by a forgetful baker, fueled by a strong wind and indecisive leadership, was blamed on Catholics and a young Frenchmen for over 150 years. Overlooked however, is the role of Sir Bloodworth; though Sir Bloodworth might not have had a personal hand in starting the fire, abusing his civic duty allowed the destruction of the Fire to increase before authoritative action was taken by Charles II. Hubert was executed and Farriner condemned in history as the careless baker who burned down the City of London; however, another person that played a major role in the destruction of the City was The Lord Mayor, Sir Thomas Bloodworth. After about …show more content…
The idea was to replace the medieval mix of irregular buildings and intruding narrow streets, that were characteristic of the pre-Fire London. Houses were categorized based on their site and conditions of building; concerned with matters including the height of stories, depths of cellars, and thicknesses of the wall. There were four categories established; the smallest ones, of two stories and an attic were in streets and lanes, those of the second sort were of three stories and an attic on the streets and lanes of note and the River Thames. Furthermore, those in the third category were four stories and an attic, fronting the high and principal streets. Finally, the fourth category was made up of mansion houses from citizens and other personal of extraordinary quality. The fourth category were not standing on either streets or lanes, but were still limited to four stories. Further interventions issued by the Common Council involved regulating street widths, levelling steep streets and lanes running down to the Thames, creating one new Street from Guildhall to the Thames, creating open docks along the river and mouth of the Fleet. The uniformity proposal was approved by the Common …show more content…
Nonetheless, during this time London transformed itself from a medieval town made of wooden buildings into a modern metropolis of stone and brick; the transformation also included the expansion from the original Roman City walls. Due to the Lord Mayor, Sir Thomas Bloodworth’s decision to not act when addressed about the spread of the Fire, he increased the amount of destruction faced by the City. This abuse of his civic duty forces him to be tainted as one of the worst Lord Mayors in London’s history. Christopher Wren’s plan was impractical for rebuilding the City; Wren’s plan for the rebuilding of the City focused more on looks than the effectiveness for life of the city and the people who lived there. This flaw led to City officials declining his plan and decide to build the City on the say layout, just in a modern and regulated way. Finally, the rebuilding caused many people to move outside of the City limits and, more so, created a City divided into two parts, rich and poor. This social divide within the City is still present today with the West-End and East-End

Related Documents