River Fleet (was- Smallest Cities)
John Bennett
On Wed, 21 Jan 1998 Martin Ludgate <edi...@navvies.demon.co.uk> wrote:
-----------snip-----------------------
>I think someone mentioned the City of London - an area of one square
>mile, and a population of about 5000. No navigable canals, but it does
>have the Thames as its southern boundary, and used to have the navigable
>River Fleet (now a buried sewer) as - I think - its western boundary. I think
>the nearest thing it has to a canal is the moat of the Tower of London (if it
>is actually within the 'square mile'), part of which was proposed for
>restoration recently.
-------------snip--------------------
By co-incidence the River Fleet is being discussed in uk.rec.subterranea
at the moment. A couple of postings of relevance below:
On Mon, 19 Jan 1998, Roger J Morgan <gw...@dial.pipex.com> wrote
>Read 'The Lost Rivers of London' by Nicholas Barton
On Wed, 21 Jan 1998, Nigel <vd...@dial.pipex.com> wrote
>On Wed, 21 Jan 1998 11:12:17 +0000, Michael Wallace
><mic...@lacasita.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>Hi all,
>>
>>Most of the books on the history of London say that the River Fleet was
>>changed into a storm drain in 1860-1865 and discharged into the River
>>Thames, just up river of Blackfriars Bridge.
>>
>>I can remember that prior to the Blackfriars under-pass being built,
>>seeing a large non-return valve in the river wall at low tide, just up
>>river of Blackfriars Bridge, this was to stop the water from the Thames
>>going up the Fleet.
>>
>>Also in the 1960's buildings in Faringdon Road & Steet, that had deep
>>basements would flood due to the Fleet running under these roads.
>>
>>Mike Wallace
>>
>
>Yes, I think you will find that just under Blackfriars Bridge on the
> pedestrian embankment, the west (upriver side) of the bridge, the
>River Fleet can be seen bubbling out of its pipe. Depending on the
>state of the tide. Rather an eerie experience to watch the huge
>bubbles, rather akin to awaiting for some monster to surface.
>
>I also believe that the pipe carrying the R. Fleet can be seen from
>one of the train platforms on the London Underground. The pipe
>actually crosses inside one of the station platform tunnels. Am I
>right in saying this is either Holborn or Chancery Lane Station ?
>
>Look forward to comments regarding this.
>
>Best Wishes to you all from Nigel
------------------
Cheers John
--
John Bennett
Cheddar **To travel hopefully is a better thing than to arrive**
Somerset UK (Robert Louis Stevenson)
Mark Annand
John Bennett posted:
> >I also believe that the pipe carrying the R. Fleet can be seen from
> >one of the train platforms on the London Underground. The pipe
> >actually crosses inside one of the station platform tunnels. Am I
> >right in saying this is either Holborn or Chancery Lane Station ?
Thanks for this, John.
The author may be thinking of the Tyburn? that crosses Sloane Square station's
platforms in a big iron trunk
In the eighteen twenties this river ran on the surface. Part of it still does - as
the serpentine in Hyde Park. It was crossed by the Grand junction canal using a
culvert just east of Little Venice - It's more or less the first structure on the
canal, and I'd expect that the first bit from Little Venice to be on an embankment.
It joins the Thames a little upstream of the Grosvenor canal, (the terminal basin
of which is now Victoria Station)
Mark
John Bennett
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998 Mark Annand <m.an...@bathspa.ac.uk> wrote:
>John Bennett posted:
>
>> >I also believe that the pipe carrying the R. Fleet can be seen from
>> >one of the train platforms on the London Underground. The pipe
>> >actually crosses inside one of the station platform tunnels. Am I
>> >right in saying this is either Holborn or Chancery Lane Station ?
>
>Thanks for this, John.
>
>The author may be thinking of the Tyburn?
There was another posting today in reply to this on uk.rec.subterranea:
On Thu, 22 Jan 1998, Roger J Morgan <gw...@dial.pipex.com> wrote
>> You are becoming confused with the River Westbourne which can be seen
>crossing Sloane Square UndergrounD station above the platforms in a large
>cast iron tube.
This all makes me wonder just how many of the Capital's Rivers are now
flowing, unseen, in rusty pipes on the London Underground?;-)
It all seems just a little sad!
Mark Annand
John Bennett wrote:
> You are becoming confused with the River Westbourne which can be seen
> >crossing Sloane Square UndergrounD station above the platforms in a large
> >cast iron tube.
>
> This all makes me wonder just how many of the Capital's Rivers are now
> flowing, unseen, in rusty pipes on the London Underground?;-)
>
Medaeval London having grown beside the Thames and its tributaries and being a
pretty wet place, much of the transport was structured around water in one
form or another. Short ferries across the river, long ferries up and down -
not many bridges. The tributaries will have played their part in this process.
The Fleet certainly, and presumably some of the others.
Some of those rusty pipes must contain the ghosts of navigations ...
Especially given the tides, and even with the starlings of the old London
Bridge rather disrupting their influence, I think that we tend to
underestimate the ease with which things could be moved on the Thames even
without engines, if favoured by wind and tide. Setting aside the craft skills
that allowed lighters to be moved and placed anywhere within reason (and
sometimes in thoroughly unreasonable places) it is not exactly hard work, in a
skiff, to travel from Greenwich to Teddington on an evening tide: or from
Richmond to Limehouse single handed in a morning: though unless used to the
latter one certainly looks forward to the windless noon calm when one is say
tucked into the bend of the river under Limehouse dock, alone in a boat, in a
city of nine million, the midday sunlight is flat and hazy, the water is still
after the turbulence of the narrows through Southwark and London Bridge, only
the occasional passenger boat sends its wake curling across from the opposite
bank, and the bustle of docklands construction does not quite mask the
possibility that one can catch strange foreign spicy odours from some hidden
and possibly forgotten warehouse: with the pleasure of meeting friends for the
return pull upstream on the incoming tide some hours away. Another time,
leaving the confines of the Regents canal at Limehouse we were surprised by a
sudden low illumination of late afternoon wind and sun and the entire river
took on the appearance of some old dutch landscape painting, the light
catching the roughened water just so, with a green translucence from beneath
the surface, and ghosts seemed to shimmer in all directions, giving the sense
of a stage very recently cleared by the cast. Very much in keeping with the
recent history of the Thames river.
Mark
D.Hockin
>
>
>
> John Bennett wrote:
>
> > You are becoming confused with the River Westbourne which can be seen
> > >crossing Sloane Square UndergrounD station above the platforms in a large
> > >cast iron tube.
>
> Mark
Just to be utterly pedantic (aren't I always?), it should be just the
"Westbourne"! There is no need to say "River" Westbourne, since the
"bourne" bit is the equivalent of "river",
being a stream that only flows throughout part of the year - e.g.
Winterbourne - a stream that only flows in the winter.
We have a similarly named ill-named river here at Bristol - the "River"
Avon! Afon (and similar words in other languages!) is Welsh for "river",
so we stupidly have the "River River"!
For the even more pedantically inclined, (strewth, will he ever give
up?) "Avon" is pronounced AY-vn, and not ay-VONN, which is an American
maker of direct-sale perfumes :(
Lecture over till tomorrow, children - now go out and play with your
boats, but GUY - remember - DON'T FALL IN!
If he does, will Dral PLEASE film it, so we can all see how he does it so
easily.......
and please, make sure the Headmaster gets a GOOD copy this
time, not one on an old tape with naughty bits showing straight after the
main film............
Dave. Hailey Wood, Dundas.
Robert Laws GSES95
> Just to be utterly pedantic (aren't I always?), it should be just the
> "Westbourne"! There is no need to say "River" Westbourne, since the
> "bourne" bit is the equivalent of "river",
>
> Avon! Afon (and similar words in other languages!) is Welsh for "river",
> so we stupidly have the "River River"!
>
>
Lake Niassa = Lake Lake
Robert
Mark Annand
D.Hockin wrote:
> Just to be utterly pedantic (aren't I always?)
I hope not ...
> We have a similarly named ill-named river here at Bristol - the "River"
> Avon! Afon (and similar words in other languages!) is Welsh for "river",
> so we stupidly have the "River River"!
Silly us :-)
<SOTTO VOCE>Just as well he doesn't live oop north. He'd be railing at Pendle Hill
next.</SOTTO VOCE>
:-)
Mark
Mark Annand
Mark Annand wrote:
> <SOTTO VOCE>Just as well he doesn't live oop north. He'd be railing at Pendle Hill
> next.</SOTTO VOCE>
er, Thats Pen - Hill
Dell - Hill
Hill - Hill
There.
Now I've gone and replied to one of my own messages.
Mark
Martin Ludgate
In message <8j+D8KCR...@johnpb.demon.co.uk>, John Bennett
<jo...@johnpb.demon.co.uk> writes
>
>This all makes me wonder just how many of the Capital's Rivers are now
>flowing, unseen, in rusty pipes on the London Underground?;-)
>
House & Leics. Uni. Press, re-pub. 1982 Historical Publications Ltd, ISBN
0 9503656 3 7. A fascinating book with an excellent fold-out map.
The Fleet river was probably navigable as far north as Kentish Town Road,
Camden, as an anchor was once found in the old river bed near there.
Battle Bridge was a one-arch brick bridge over the Fleet - the battle that it
commemmorates is obscure; tradition has it that this was where Boadicea
was defeated but this is incompatible with historical accounts.
Our nearest river in East Dulwich was the River Peck, which gave its name
to Peckham, and flowed into the Earls Sluice, which emerged into the
Thames above Deptford.
--
Martin Ludgate (which was just east of Fleet Bridge)
Robert Laws GSES95
>
> er, Thats Pen - Hill
> Dell - Hill
> Hill - Hill
>
>
or Nessodden (near Oslo) = "nose nose"
Robert
David E. Hockin
On Fri, 23 Jan 1998 15:21:19 +0000 Mark Annand
<m.an...@bathspa.ac.uk> wrote:
> Mark Annand wrote:
>
> > <SOTTO VOCE>Just as well he doesn't live oop north. He'd be railing at Pendle Hill
> > next.</SOTTO VOCE>
>
> er, Thats Pen - Hill
> Dell - Hill
> Hill - Hill
>
> There.
>
> Now I've gone and replied to one of my own messages.
Its all circular :)
> Mark
Well :)
There is "Nesscliff(e?)" on the way up north from here to ?
somewhere or other! (Shrewsbury-direction, I think)
Will that do :)
Ness = nez = nose = headland = pen(!)insula = cliff :)
Dave. Hailey Wood, Dundas
----------------------
David E. Hockin
Dave....@bristol.ac.uk
url http://ssa.bris.ac.uk/~sadeh/hockin.htm
The Dral
> and please, make sure the Headmaster gets a GOOD copy this
> time, not one on an old tape with naughty bits showing straight after the
> main film............
>
> Dave. Hailey Wood, Dundas.
>
>
>
boring boaty stuff at the start did you!
--
--
__________________________________
- Dral -
__________________________________
The Dral
> The Fleet river was probably navigable as far north as Kentish Town Road,
> Camden, as an anchor was once found in the old river bed near there.
At what point does it cross paths with the Regents Canal. Was the
Fleet still "open" when the Regents Canal was built?
Martin Paterson
Mark Annand wrote:
> Mark Annand wrote:
>
> > <SOTTO VOCE>Just as well he doesn't live oop north. He'd be railing at Pendle Hill
> > next.</SOTTO VOCE>
>
> er, Thats Pen - Hill
> Dell - Hill
Dell = valley ??
> Hill - Hill
>
> There.
>
> Now I've gone and replied to one of my own messages.
>
> Mark
Pat Clapham
In article <1998012315...@nutmeg.scr.slb.com>, Robert Laws
GSES95 <gse...@cambridge.scr.slb.com> writes
> > Just to be utterly pedantic (aren't I always?), it should be just the
>> "Westbourne"! There is no need to say "River" Westbourne, since the
>> "bourne" bit is the equivalent of "river",
>>
>> Avon! Afon (and similar words in other languages!) is Welsh for "river",
>> so we stupidly have the "River River"!
And what about all the people who will insist on adding "Lake" to all
the waters in the Lake District which are already meres, waters or
tarns? There is only ONE lake in the Lakes - that is Lake Bassenthwaite.
Lake Windermere doesn't exist it is simply Windermere, anyone who knows
the area can differentiate between the lake and the town.
--
Pat Clapham (p...@pclapham.demon.co.uk)
Occasional crewmember, nb Escapade
Peter A. Smith
In article <SIMEON.98...@pc220.bristol.ac.uk>, "David E. Hockin"
<Dave....@bristol.ac.uk> writes
>Ness = nez = nose = headland = pen(!)insula = cliff :)
<PEDANT>
Wrong sort of pen - in this case, 'paene insula', Latin, 'almost an
island'</PEDANT>
--
Peter A. Smith
And the people all cried "Never fear,
Here comes Smith, the Engineer".
Mark Annand
The Dral wrote:
> > The Fleet river was probably navigable as far north as Kentish Town Road,
> > Camden, as an anchor was once found in the old river bed near there.
>
> At what point does it cross paths with the Regents Canal. Was the
> Fleet still "open" when the Regents Canal was built?
In parts, yes. it seems to be crossed by the canal between the bottom two locks
of the Camden flight, though it's not clear. In the mid 1820's there were
surface sections of the Fleet some way upstream of where the Holborne viaduct
crosses, in course of being straightened ...
Mark
Martin Ludgate
In message <34CC6108...@bathspa.ac.uk>, Mark Annand
<m.an...@bathspa.ac.uk> writes
doesn't seem to show any open surface sections of the Fleet between the
Thames and what is now the junction of Pancras Way, Pancras Rd,
Crowndale Rd and Royal College St. (roughly mid way between Camden
Town and Kings Cross). It is shown as an open channel from this point to
the two sources at Hampstead and Highgate, apart from where it crosses
the canal: the canal is shown crossing it below Camden locks, not
between the bottom two as stated above. It isn't clear exactly where it
crosses: it is flowing from West to East at this point, and comes alongside
the canal on the north side of the bottom lock, then disappears at the road
bridge over the lock tail. It reappears on the south side about 100-200
yards further east. Was there a short culverted length above or below the
actual crossing? Or did it cross in a culvert built on a long diagonal
course? 'The Lost Rivers of London' says "...the Fleet crosses UNDER the
Regents Canal..." and uses this to illustrate the way the ground level has
been built up over the years; at some points the Fleet is now 25ft below
modern street level.
Incidentally, the map is in the 'Village London Atlas' (pub. Alderman Press
1986 ISBN 0-946619-26-3) which is a reprint of three separate maps of
London at 2in to the mile, orinally published in 1805-22, 1876-87 and 1903
onwards. It is a fascinating record of the way the various villages were
incorporated into the growing metropolis, and the development of the
various transport systems.
--
Martin Ludgate