the houses of parliament and parliament square_a reflection of modern london

7/31/2019 The Houses of Parliament and Parliament Square_A Reflection of Modern London

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-houses-of-parliament-and-parliament-squarea-reflection-of-modern-london 1/9

In what ways did the the Houses of Parliament and Parliament Square, combine to create

the image and identity of London?



London is a scattered city. It has grown from a collectionof smaller towns and communities gravitating around thetwo most dominant: the City, centre of commerce andWestminster, home of the royal citadel (Salvadori, 1990,p11). Unlike many of its European counterparts, London’s

development has not been a product of unified, masterplanning. It has grown more organically, with pocketedareas developing at different rates and at differenttimes. This has led to a city with an extensive wardrobe

of styles and history. London’s identity cannot be found ina definitive centre but more in the many highly individualspaces that make the city special.

It is Parliament Square and the New Houses ofParliament of the 19th century that I feel capturesan amazing part of London’s image, identity andaspirations. It is an urban space that has developedmuch like London, combining a rich history, advanced

technologies and a mixture of styles to result in somethingfar more memorable, unique and iconic than the sumof its component parts. It announces London as themodern city it is today. It cements a change of power

from the monarchy and the sovereign to parliament andthe people. A strengthening of the House of Commonsabove the House of Lords and a country urbanising,leaving the country for the city. Leaving for London.

Fig 1. Parliament Square (London Sterioscopic Co. 1903).



Parliament square and the Houses of Parliamentdeveloped from a complex of buildings in the heart

of Westminster. In the 10th century, St Edward theConfessor established Westminster as a centre of themonarch with the rebuilding of Benedict St Peters Abbey.Westminster Palace, and later St Margaret’s Church,were built to provide a royal residence and parishchurch. The complex continued to grow, and after majorreconstruction under the reign of Charles II, the Abbeytook its French Gothic form as it is today and set thestyle for the surrounding area.

The strength of Parliament grew in parallel with itsoccupation of the Palace grounds. In 1512 after a firedestroyed most of the royal residence, WestminsterPalace became solely dedicated to parliament(Department of Planning and City Development, 2008,p13). Over the centuries, parliament took more poweras the governing body above the monarch, but it tookanother fire to cement this change.

On the 16th of October 1834 a fire ravaged the Palace

of Westminster only leaving behind Westminster Hall, thecloisters and St Stephens Undercroft.

An open competition was launched in 1835 to designthe New Palace of Westminster. It was a time of twocompeting styles: Neo-Classical and Gothic Revival.However it was stipulated that the new building mustbe either Gothic or Elizabethan in style. The Elizabethan

style was considered undefined by many architects atthat time and of the 97 design proposals the majority

were in the Gothic style. It was clearly the mostharmonious style, allowing the building to sit comfortablywith the Westminster Abbey and the surviving Hall.

The competition attracted many big names of the time.Runners up included Robert Hamilton (architect of the

Glasgow Exchange), J.C. Buckler (Cozy Hall, Norfolk)and J Roulton (Nelson’s Column) (Loudon, 1836, p103).The winning proposal was the product of collaborationbetween architect Charles Barry and draughtsmanAugustus Welby Northmore Pugin.

The pairing was mutually beneficial. Charles Barry wasan accomplished Classical architect, his most acclaimedbuilding at the time being the palazzo style TravellersClub (1829-31) (Fletcher, 1987, p1094). He was not as

well practised in the Gothic style and he needed anexpert. Fortunately Pugin’s skills went beyond a meredraughtsman. He was a master of Gothic design andthe perfect partner for the project. He was, however,a devout Catholic in Protestant England. His book“Contrasts” openly slandered the Protestant church,blaming it for “a complete loss in the Nobler perceptionsof Mankind” (Kelly, 1973, p383). Without the backing of

Barry, he would never have been allowed to design agovernment building on the scale of Westminster Palace.

Pugin continued to openly publicise his strong Catholicviews throughout the buildings conception. He was,however, never taken off the project, indicating thatthe driving force was Parliament and not the ProtestantChurch.

The project was vast and outlived both Charles and

Augustus. Within Barry’s design, he created a publicsquare in front of the new palace; Parliament Square.

However both the building and the Square were notcompletely finished until 1868, eight years after hisdeath.

Fig 2. Map of Westminster (Strype 1755).



The Palace of Westminster is comprised of hundreds ofdifferent rooms and spaces. There are several dominantfeatures: the original Westminster Hall that meetsParliament Square, the long elevation fronting the RiverThames (see fig 5) and the three towers (see fig 3).

The tallest tower is Victoria Tower, which marks the

Sovereign entrance to the building. The second tallest isthe Clock Tower and the most recognisable feature of the

Palace which houses Big Ben. The smallest is the Centraltower that serves to unite the towers at each end.

On first glance the building appears Gothic to its core.However, it is a cocktail of styles much to Pugin’s disdain.Upon looking at the Palace mid completion, Pugindescribed it as “all Grecian, Tudor details on a Classicalbody” (Dixon and Muthesis, 1978, p156). However, I

believe had he seen it completed his opinion would bedifferent. It is more than just a superficial dressing of styles,it is a clever selection of stylistic elements combined totackle issues of heritage, aesthetics and function.

The plan is a result of resolving the many and variedfunctions of the building. It has prominent classical features.

Apart from the original Westminster Hall, the plan hasa central, symmetrical layout (see fig 4). The two main

axis, parallel and perpendicular to the river, meet at thecentral lobby with service corridors running parallel andperpendicular to the axis. This allows the building to bemultifunctional and forms a central meeting point for itstwo main entrances, sovereign and public. The CommonsChamber and the Lords Chamber sit either side of thecentral hall while libraries, commons and drawing roomsrun along the river façade.

Victoria Tower andSovereign’s entranceClock Tower

Fig 3. View of Westminster Palace from Parliament Square

Fig 4. Plan of the Houses of Parliament, showingdifference in elevations and central axis.(Barry 1852)

Parliament SquareElevation

River Elevation



Classical features continue in the façade design andare most noticeable on the river elevation (fig 5). The

massing is symmetrical and like that of a Palladian villa.The fenestrations are repeated with regular spacingaround the entire building regardless of room use (Dixonand Mathesius, 1978, p156). Barry has employed theseclassical elements to unite the building of many parts onits riverside, where it need not relate to context. However,he lets the building fragment towards Parliament square

and Westminster Abbey, creating a more Gothic aestheticwhich fits in contextually (see fig 4). Barry also combinesGothic and Classical features: the structural buttresses

resemble classical pilasters in their repetition but alsoemphasise the vertical, a key aspect of perpendicularGothic (see fig 6). Gothic pinnacle towers and turretspierce the skyline, detracting from the horizontal massingby emphasising an upwards motion. These pinnacles,towers and turrets pierce the skyline at differing heightsand densities in a picturesque, homage to Britain’s countryhalls and palaces.

The Palace’s ornament and decoration is Gothic bothoutside and in and almost entirely designed by Pugin.

The elevations are a rich tapestry of Gothic motives andBritish history. Pointed arched windows fill the spacesbetween the buttresses. Bands of carved stone panellingdocument the sovereign rulers of Britain and divide thebuilding horizontally (see fig 6). Carved into the centralband are the Royal Arms of England for every monarchfrom William I to Queen Victoria, with inscriptions of the

dates of the Sovereigns accession and decease (Guide tothe Palace of Westminster, 1911, p14-19).

The building is also decorated with carvings of religiousiconography. Nestled within the parapets are repeatedstatues of angels holding shields. On Victoria Tower largestatues of patron saints of England, Scotland and Irelandmark the Sovereigns entrance (fig 7).

The heavy use of religious and monarchical imagery isnot just to show Britain’s rich history but also symbolises

a change in power and parliaments understanding ofprecedent.

Fig 6. Facade detail Fig 7. Stone details around Sovereign entrance

Fig 5. Original River Elevation design from 1840 (Barry)



The palace’s interior is as lavish and intricate as its exterior.Pugin designed every part in the Gothic style right downto the ink cups used in the library. Barry believed the

parliaments interiors should be of “royal magnificence andlavished upon it the treasures of decoration” (Barry, 1867,p248). Pugin delivered this through his amazingly detailedGothic interiors throughout the building. Most spectacularis the Lords Chamber. The palette of materials is extremelyrich. Carved wooden panelling covers the walls and ceiling.

The windows are stained glass. Red leather benches fillthe room and the gilded gold Royal throne and canopyform the centrepiece. Pugin’s designs rebelled against theindustrial mechanisation of the time, instead deriving their

beauty from the skill of the craftsman and the materials.The interiors become more than just Gothic splendour;they are establishing the design ideals of the Arts andCrafts movement. As famous Arts and Crafts architectJohn Dando put it, “We would have no Morris, no Street,no Webb...but not for Pugin.” (puginfoundation, 2010)

During the 19th century, London was an extremelytechnologically advanced city, and fittingly, the Palace ofWestminster was an extremely technologically advanced

building. It incorporated many new construction techniques.Due to poor ground conditions and the difficulties ofbuilding into the river, cutting edge foundation strategieswere employed, including one of the first concrete rafts(Allison, 2006, p149). Iron joists were used in the roofconstruction to prevent a repeat of the fire damage

caused in 1833. This construction method was effectivelythe beginnings of steel frame construction. Barry alsodesigned the Palace around a passive lighting andventilation system. Internal courtyards and exterior glazing

provide natural lighting while the towers and turrets act asventilation chimneys. These ideas have been executed inmany modern, environmental designs.

Charles Barry designed Parliament Square to provide asetting for the Houses of Parliament and create a publicsquare for the people of London. Together the spaces

become an extension of one another.

Fig 8. Lords Chamber (PA 2009) .



The square negotiates the Gothic frenzy of the surroundingbuildings through its simplicity. The original design provides

a vista towards the Palace, clearly distinguishing it asbelonging to Parliament and not Westminster Abbey. Itsgrass public lawn provides a setting for the building andin combination with the picturesque skyline of the Housesof Parliament, creates a city garden and a sense of thecountry moving into the city. Charles also provided roadsin the design to reduce the increased congestion due tourbanisation.

The political history that decorates the Houses of

Parliament is continued in the ornamentation of thesquare. Brass statues of famous political leaders line thepaths. The earliest was of Henry John Temple in 1859(londongov, 2011)

The Houses of Parliament’s technological advances alsocontinued through Parliament Square, becoming the homeof London’s first traffic lights.

Throughout the years, the Houses of Parliament haveundergone many reconstructions. However, the majority

of the building remains as Charles Barry and AugustusPugin designed. The largest reconstruction followedthe blitz in World War II, when the Palace was heavilybombed. Sir Giles Gilbert Scott was tasked withreconstructing the building and chose to stay true to theoriginal design, making slight alterations for modern useand future proofing.

In 1949 Parliament Square was redesigned by GreyWornum for the expected increase in traffic from the

Festival of Britain. This is the design that still stands today.Wornum increased the size of the public lawn and

changed the paths to provide vistas onto the Houses ofParliament and also Westminster Abbey (Department

of Planning and City Development, 2008, p20). Statueshave been continually added documenting politicalhistory and now include Robert Peel, David Lloyd Georgeand Nelson Mandela.

The great irony and shame is that as more have movedto the city and London’s traffic has increased, the publicsquare has become more and more inaccessible. Plans

are now being pushed to pedestrianise the square andgive Parliament Square back to the people as Charles

Barry originally intended it to be.

Together, The Houses of Parliament and Parliament squareuse the ingredients that make London to create one of thekey spaces that defines London. Combined, they reflectthe city’s many styles, from the Gothic, to Classical to thePicturesque. They showcase London as a progressive cityboth in politically and technologically but also as a city

appreciative of its amazing history, heritage and countryorigins.

Fig 9. Map of Westminster from 1870 (Corporate GIS Team 2008).

Fig 10. Map of Westminster from 1870 (Corporate GIS Team 2007).



Books:

Dixon, Roger and Muthesius, Stephen. 1978Victorian Architecture

London. Thames and Hudson

Long, David. 2006Spectacular Vernacular

Gloucestershire. Sutton Publishing

Sir Banister, Fletcher. Edited by Musgrave, John. 1987 A History of Architecture.London. Butterworths

Barry, Alfred 1867Life and Works of Charles Barry

London. John Murray

Anonymous 1903Guide to the Palace of Westminster

London. Warrington & co.

Salvadori, Renzo. 1990 Architects Guide to London

Oxford. Butterworth Architecture

Allison, Kenneth. 2006The Architects and Architecture of London

Oxford. Elsevier Ltd

Aldrich, Megan. Atterbury, Paul. Bergdoll, Barry.Henderson-Floyd, Margaret. Hill, Rosemary.Meara, David. O’Donnell, Roderick.Saint, Andrew. Wainwright, Clive.Edited by Atterbury, Paul.1995

A. W. N. Pugin – Master of Gothic Revival

London. Yale University Press

Web based:

Online journals:

Westminster City Council2008 Westminster Abbey and Parliament Square Planning Document

No. 24, pp. 1-28Accessed 19/12/2011http://www3.westminster.gov.uk/docstores/publications_ store/Westminster%20Abbey&Parliament%20Square%20CAA%20SPD.pdf

W. J. Rorabaugh,1973 Politics and the Architectural Competition

for the Houses of Parliament,1834-1837 Victorian Studies , Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 155-175Published by: Indiana University PressAccessed: 19/12/2011http://www.jstor.org/stable/3826182

J. C. Loudon1836 On the new designs for the Houses of Parliament

Architectural Magazine, vol 3, pp. 104Accessed: 21/12/2011http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=r4lAAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontco

ver.

Charlotte M. Kelly1933 Augustus Pugin,1812-1852 The Irish Monthly , Vol. 61, No. 720, pp. 380-389Published by: Irish Jesuit ProvinceAccessed: 24/12/2011http://www.jstor.org/stable/20513554

Websites:

London.gov 2011 Statues in Parliament SquareAccessed: 26/12/2011http://www.london.gov.uk/parliamentsquare/about/palmerston.jsp

The Pugin Foundation 2006-2010Accessed: 26/12/2011http://www.puginfoundation.org/pugin/

Images sources:

Fig 1. London Sterioscopic Co. 1903. Photo taken fromGuide to the Palace of Westminster (see previous reference)

Fig 3, 6 & 7. Sloan Brittain, Otis. Taken 24/12/2011

Fig 4. Barry, Charles. 1852. Life and Works of Charles Barry (seeprevious reference) p238.

Fig 5. Barry, Charles 1840. Taken from Parliament website 2011.Accessed 26/12/11 http://assets3.parliament.uk/iv/original/id_ 617.jpg

Fig 8. Press Association 2007. Image from Daily Mail. Accessed2/1/12 http://i .dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/11/18/article-1228892-0744754A000005DC-475_ 634x378.jpg

Maps from 2008 Westminster Abbey and Parliament SquarePlanning Document (see previous reference)Fig. 2 - Strypes 1755Fig. 9 - Corporate GIS Team 2008Fig. 10 - Corporate GIS Team 2007

the houses of parliament and parliament square_a reflection of modern london

Documents