Showing posts with label European History. Show all posts
Showing posts with label European History. Show all posts

Wednesday, 8 October 2014

Great Fire of London 1666...

Published: July 10 2007 on Helium



The early 17th century was the worst of times for the English people. There was civil war in 1642 and King Charles I was beheaded in 1649. Oliver Cromwell's replacement republican government of 1653-1658 was puritanical and now, the new the monarchy of Charles II was not so popular. In 1665, England was "slapped" with the Great Plague. And then, in 1666, came the ultimate "punishment", the Great Fire of London. Medieval superstitions and belief in omens were rampant.
The possible significance of the numbers "666" did not go unnoticed.

Novelist, Daniel Defoe, commented, after the plague, "God had not sufficiently scourged the city" and so sent the fire.

The Great Fire of 2nd September 1666 sparked from Thomas Farryner's bakery in Pudding Lane, inner London, by the Thames River. It had plenty of "fuel" to quickly turn it into a firestorm, lasting five days. This fuel comprised both physical fuel and the "fuel" of poor resources to fight the fire. And the weather helped too.
"After two rainy summers in 1664 and 1665, London had lain under an exceptional drought since November 1665, and the wooden buildings were tinder-dry after the long hot summer of 1666."

The fire ravaged London's narrow, cobblestone, unguttered, undrained medieval streets. Buildings were made of flammable timber, wattle and daub, plaster and pitch; and they were close together. Many 6-7 storey buildings had "jetties" which were upper floors jutting out across narrow alleyways. Often, these jetties were almost touching the opposite building. Inside could be found flammable, everyday items such as straw for floor coverings, tallow and firewood for the hearth. Further, most buildings did not have chimneys to release smoke.

Of particular note, this area was a part of the port of London. Here were warehouses filled with gunpowder, (left over from the English Civil War), stored in wooden barrels. Imports of oil, fabrics, fats, turpentine, coal, alcohol and sugar were also stored here. And in between were the tenements of the poor; just tarred paper or rickety wooden buildings.

London had experienced a great fire in 1220, and had endured further outbreaks since that time. You would think, by now, there would be some worthwhile fire fighting equipment. Some "fire engines" had wheels, but many were mounted on sleds. And the fire engine itself was little more than an inflexible pump that could be connected to a series of elm pipes running from a high water tower at Cornhill. The tower was fed by the river at high tide. Amazingly, 30,000 homes in London were part of the elm pipe system. But connection was costly. There is no evidence, at such a critical time, that the network could be utilized. The water wheels under London Bridge were alight, so river water could not be pumped to the tower. (But surely there would have been some stored water?)

Instead, old-fashioned firehooks were used. (They were stored in every parish church along with long ladders, axes and leather buckets.) Firehooks were selected to pull down burning buildings or to create a firebreak by demolishing an area of buildings.

It is estimated there were only 5 to 17 deaths from the fire. This is incredible considering that London Bridge was the only way out to the south side of the Thames. Already, this was proven a deathtrap in the 1632 fire, for people lived on the bridge. The only escape was through one of the 8 gates in the 5.5m ancient Roman wall surrounding the city. The strength of the heat was horrific. It is recorded that the chains and locks on the gates melted.

And so, in despair, the likes of Samuel Pepys watched the fire burn from the safety of theTower of London, remembering every shocking detail and recording it in a diary for posterity. John Evelyn recorded that Londoners were simply "running about like distracted creatures without at all attempting to save their goods". www.authorsden.com

After 5 days, the fire finally burnt out at Temple Church near Holborn Bridge. Perhaps desperately blowing up fuel with gunpowder helped. Perhaps the fire simply burnt itself out. But the end result was that four fifths of London was destroyed and poor King Charles had lost his major source of revenue, the customs revenue of the port. He called upon Christopher Wren, the current great architect, to reconstruct London. Wren built 49 churches and St Paul's Cathedral. Future homes were required to be constructed of brick or white stone. Owners insured properties against fire and insurance companies employed people to put out fires. It was a "win-win" situation.

But there was one more twist to the story. Robert Hubert confessed to lighting the fire and was subsequently hanged. Yet he could not describe the bakery or show where it was. Superstition, it seemed, was still rife! Someone, anyone had to be blamed!

Indeed, it seems that the Great Fire of 1666 may not have been so great if there had been more control of many types of fuel. There was too much fuel lying around in enclosed places. There were too many buildings that could become fuel. There was no organized response to fire and little to no worthwhile equipment. And the final fuel, superstition, impelled many who thought this was a curse on the English, to simply run rather than fight. But perhaps, the Great Fire was a blessing. Perhaps it helped to diminish the spread of the plague. Unsanitary, medieval buildings sorely needed demolition.

Unlike the fire of 1212, when about 3,000 were killed, the Great Fire of 1666 claimed but a few lives. Unpopular King Charles took over operations from London's incompetent mayor. He directed firebreaks and used navy rations to feed those who fled from burning homes. Perhaps rather than take life, the fire gave life, even to Charles!



Sources
www.angliacampus.com
www.europeanhistory.about.com
www.answers.com

Thursday, 2 October 2014

Barbarian Invasions of the Early Medieval Period...

Published: July 10 2007 on Helium
 


The Early Medieval Period is sometimes referred to as "The Dark Ages".
This was a period of chaos and change, beginning as the mighty Roman Empire fell in the 5th century A.D. It lasted until there was clear evidence of some stable, ongoing politics and society. Historians disagree on exactly what dates to assign this period, marked by a complex web of "short and sharp", "action and reaction" events. (In fact, the origins of many invading groups are obscure.) But there is general consensus that it spanned from c. 400 to 900A.D. And it certainly was over by the time Norman invader, William the Conqueror, overwhelmed the Anglo Saxons in England at the Battle of Hastings in 1066.

And those invading "barbarians" of this time were not strictly wild cavemen. This was originally a generic term, used by the Romans, to refer to any non-Romans. The Gauls were referred to as "barbarians", even by the mighty orator Cicero. The Romans liked to protect their superior dignity. (N.B. The Gauls were in fact connected by language and culture with those living in England, Wales and Ireland in Roman times. We now call the whole group Celts).

Notable among the invaders were the Huns from Mongolia, north of China. They were skilled herdsmen in their day to day activities, but, when "on the warpath", were fearless warriors skilled in archery. Over the 4th and 5th centuries A.D., their surprise attacks were well known in India and China; they were extended to India and Persia. Finally, their most devastating attacks were made on Europe in the 5th century; and that included Rome. Rome was already split into the Western Roman Empire and the Eastern Roman Empire. Under pressure from the infamous Attila the Hun, the west weakened. (Yet, the eastern empire blossomed into the Byzantine Empire). Attila's death in 453A.D. marked the end of the "Hun era" on European soil. Not until the 13th century, with the rise of the Mongol Empire under Genghis Khan, would warriors come out of Mongolia.

But it is the Goths who are given the credit for sacking Rome in 410A.D. They appeared to originate from Scandinavia and hassled the security of the Roman Empire over the 3rd and 4th centuries A.D.

And now some complexities! Other invaders included Goths, Visigoths (settled in Spain) and Ostrogoths (the Huns drove them out of the Ukraine to Italy). Angles and Saxons invaded in England. The Franks occupied old Gaul, and the Vandals occupied Roman territory in northern Africa. All these branches of the Germanic groups of people of northern Europe replaced the areas of the old Roman Empire. And many were Christian communities living in the countryside.

Some migrating and invading groups merged such as the Jutes (from the Jutland Peninsula) with the Danes (originally Vikings) in Denmark and the Angles (from south west Jutland) with the Saxons (from north west Germany) in England.

In the east, in the early 7th century, Serbs and Croats overran Illyria (present day Albania). Yet, within 50 years, the Bulgars conquered most of the Balkan Peninsula and what is now central Albania.

The marauding Vikings from Scandinavia had a unique evolution. Traditionally, they are remembered for their extensive raids on the European coasts and British coasts. This was a feature of the spring and summer months, but, in winter, they generally returned to Scandinavia. However, some Vikings did not just raid and invade. They settled in milder climates. They became known as Norsemen or Northmen when they settled in the northern reaches of Europe. But when they were settled in France, by the 9th century A.D., they became known as Normans, and their area of settlement was called Normandy.

Strangely, in the midst of this invading "mess" from the north, an empire grew in western Europe. It was the Frankish empire of King Charlemagne in the 8th century A.D. His kingdom covered present day France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Switzerland and parts of Italy and Germany. He unified church and state, creating the Holy Roman Empire. When 4,500 Saxons attempted to rise up against him, he ordered their beheading. His empire was not threatened by "barbarian" invasions. But when he died, so did his empire. And, in the 9th century, the entire area was subject to a range of invasions from tribal groups.

Information on invasions, in the early medieval period, may be fragmented and, at times, frustratingly vague, but a clear trend emerges. The fading of the Roman Empire gave numerous northern groups of people the opportunity for a new life in a new land. Many, like the Vikings, may have invaded to plunder, initially, but many settled and inter-mingled. Only the Huns, after a momentous infiltration into Europe, especially with Attila's exploits, retreated and just seemed to disappear.



Sources:
www.medievaletrusia.co.uk
www.history.com
www.medieval-castles.org
www.country-data.com