The History of Bristol Bridge – iLoop Mobile Gallery

Check out these history images:

The History of Bristol Bridge

Image by brizzle born and bred
There cannot be many other cities with such a large number of bridges in such a small area as Bristol. We have not one, but two major waterways which pass directly through the city, the Floating Harbour and the New Cut. And of course, the River Avon and the geology of its gorge created the environment for the city’s most famous bridge.

Only thinking about the Clifton Suspension Bridge, however, does a disservice to the dozens of other bridges in the city, many of which we pass over daily without a second thought. Unless of course there is a bridge swing and we remember what vital importance Bristol’s bridges play in the fabric of city life.

EXACTLY when the first bridge was built across the Avon at Bristol is matter for conjecture. But there is a disposition amongst the trustworthy annalists to affirm that Brigstow, which was the earliest spelling of Bristol, was derived from a tenth-century bridge of wood erected on the site of the present Bristol Bridge, and that the bridge gave the town its name.

There are references to the early history of Bristol Bridge, and to the prosperity of the city and port which followed the building of the first stone bridge in 1247. The timber houses which stood on either side, and were probably built to help to pay for the erection of the structure.

For three centuries there was a chapel on the bridge, dedicated in 1316 to the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin. The chapel was destroyed by fire in 1642, but the houses and shops remained more than a hundred years longer, until, in fact, the bridge was rebuilt in 1768.

Long before the authorities could make up their minds to face the cost of a new bridge, the nineteen feet or so of roadway had become totally inadequate for the traffic. A contemporary description states that " there was a descent from both sides (not ends) of the old bridge, which caused a channel or gutter in the middle, and when two wagons were passing at the same time they leaned towards each other so much as frequently to get locked, which would cause a great stoppage.

A carter has been an hour passing the bridge. A sloop, whose bowsprit touched the bridge, took fire on a Sunday morning, and as the tide was out and she could not be moved, there was great danger of houses being burnt only prevented by great exertion."

These houses were built partly on the bridge and partly on projecting beams, the outer ends of which were supported by a wall, and the east end of the chapel was supported in a like manner. Bow-windows were thrown out over the water to make greater living accommodation in the houses. Good businesses were carried on in them. They were highly picturesque structures, but they had their drawbacks as dwellings, according to modern standards of comfort. Besides the risk of fire from the shipping, it occasionally happened that there was a collision with a vessel’s spars, which usually did more damage to the house than to the ship.

Then the ground floor rooms were cold, the wind often whistling freely through the crevices of the floors.

When Pope came to Bristol, in November, 1739, he told Martha Blount that the first stone bridge was as much crowded as London Bridge, " with a strange mixture of seamen, women, children, loaded horses, asses and sledges with goods, dragging along altogether, without posts to
separate them."

Like London Bridge, Bristol Bridge was rapidly lined with shops. It became one of the busiest commercial centres of the city. Traders lived above the shop and the houses on the bridge rose higher and higher over the centuries. They were timber-built and jettied out over the river and road to enlarge their floor space.

The demolition of the first stone bridge began in 1760. The architect of the second was Mr. James Bridges. This new bridge was opened in September, 1768, and was a fine piece of work. The cost was 49,000. There were three arches instead of four as in the former structure, the centre arch being elliptical with a span of fifty-five feet, and the other arches semicircular with a span of forty feet each.

The story of the Bristol Bridge riots of September, 1793, has been told by Latimer in his Annals.

The trouble was due to a misunderstanding. The abolition of tolls had been promised by the bridge trustees earlier than their finances allowed, and they were too contemptuous of public opinion to explain. The mob was fired upon, and charged at the point of the bayonet.

Eleven persons were killed or died of injuries, and forty-five were hurt, including some innocent spectators. The coroner’s juries, whose sympathy evidently was not with the bridge authorities, found that ten of the killed had been wilfully murdered by persons unknown !

These verdicts were followed by the smashing of the Council House and Guild-hall windows.

The tolls, however, were never again collected, the trustees’ liabilities being discharged by a
private subscription among leading citizens.

It was folly. Bristol citizens first burnt the toll-gates and then the contents of the toll-houses. The Council responded by ordering the Militia to fire on the crowd. Eleven died and 52 were wounded. As the news spread, a wave of shock ran through the city. The events of this day were to live long in Bristol’s memory. They did much to foment the clamour for reform of the Corporation.

At a meeting of the Town Council held on August 13th, 1845, several important street improvements were proposed, one being the making of a new thoroughfare (Victoria Street) from Bristol Bridge to Temple Meads Railway Station. This involved the widening of the bridge, which was estimated to cost £8,000. An Act of Parliament was obtained in 1847 authorising the works, but the costly transfer of the dock estate to the Corporation about this time, as a result of the Free Port agitation, caused indefinite postponement of the more expensive schemes (including the bridge), and the parliamentary powers relating to them were allowed to expire.

In the autumn of 1861 the proposals were revived, and a width of eleven feet was added to the east side of the bridge. This caused the removal of the fine stone balustrade on that side. A new footway was constructed on iron cantilevers, projecting from the main structure, and at a level uniform with the crown of the bridge, making steps necessary at each end. This stupid mode of alteration was generally condemned, and some citizens commenced a Chancery suit against the Corporation over the matter.

The level of the footway was afterwards altered to follow the arch of the bridge, and between March, 1873, and June, 1874, a like widening was carried out on the other side. Thus the architectural impropriety of a bridge with a modern iron railing on one side and a graceful stone
balustrade on the other was removed, but the beauty of the eighteenth-century bridge was entirely destroyed.

Since this work (which cost about £10,000) was completed, a slight improvement has been made at the entrance to Baldwin Street, so as to increase the width of the sweep round the end of the bridge. Now and again there is talk of the undoubted need for a much wider bridge. The traffic is enormously greater than it was thirty years ago, and grows rapidly.

Before the Second World War, Bristol Bridge was an important transport hub. It was the terminus of tram routes to Knowle, Bedminster and Ashton Gate, and other trams also stopped here. It lost importance when Temple Way was built further upstream in the 1930s, and when the tram system closed in 1941.

The bridge is now a grade II listed building.

See image links below

www.flickr.com/photos/brizzlebornandbred/2052650093/

www.flickr.com/photos/brizzlebornandbred/2120675313/

www.flickr.com/photos/brizzlebornandbred/2050367508/

www.flickr.com/photos/brizzlebornandbred/2062470963/

Make Poverty History

Image by Neil T
My Make Poverty History wristband. You should get one, too.