In Amy Levy’s Romance of a Shop, New Street is briefly mentioned by Phyllis as she, Conny, and Gertrude travel to their new home on Upper Baker Street. “‘What number did you say, Gertrude?’ asked Phyllis, as the carriage turned into New Street, from Gloucester Place” (Levy 75). It’s purpose is minimal, serving as a transitional landmark as the sisters approach their new home on Upper Baker Street. In the footnotes of the text, it is even mentioned, “…. New Street runs eastward into Upper Baker Street” (Levy 75).

Here is a view of it on the Victorian map:

And here is a map of it on the Charles Booth Online Archive:

Now in comparison to Campden Hill, which was filled with red and yellow indicating that it was a pretty well off area. In comparison, the areas all around New Street are a mixture of light and dark blues, indicating a poorer status. In addition to being a transitional setting from Campden Hill to Upper Baker Street, New Street also serves as a transition in surroundings. The Lorimer sisters used to live in an area very well off, and now are traveling into London, passing on this street, which seems to be of the poorer population.

It was hard to locate crimes on Old Bailey as it wasn’t specifically taking New Street, but all the streets in London into account. However I seem to have found some results and the most crimes committed on New Street include burglary, royal offences, and grand larceny (Old Bailey).

Works Cited:

Amy Levy. Romance of a Shop. N.p., 1888. Print.

“Map of New Street.” Charles Booth Online Archive. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Dec. 2015. http://booth.lse.ac.uk/cgi-bin/do.pl?sub=view_booth_and_barth&args=533267,181456,1,large,0

“The Proceedings of the Old Bailey.” London History. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Dec. 2015. <http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/static/London-life19th.jsp>.

Bow Street seems to have been home to a mixed population of middle and lower class families, the middle class evidenced by the purple and red, with the lower class being the duller cool colors.

Bow Street serves as a through-route from Waterloo Bridge to St. Giles’s and Bloomsbury, and is known for the nature of public buildings around it. Bow Street’s association with the law dates back to 1740 when a justice for Middlesex, Thomas De Veil, transferred his office into No.4 Bow Street, which became the court-house of Bow Street magistrates. Across the street from the court-house, the first police station was opened on the street was back in 1832 until it was removed in 1880. The establishment of the police station did not affect the magistrates’ office, and stayed in its location until 1880, whereupon the police were removed to the present station and Nos.33-34 (the police court) was converted into a market warehouse, and then eventually demolished.

Bow Street is mentioned and becomes a crucial setting point in Arthur Conan Doyle’s “The Man With the Twisted Lip”, a short Sherlock Holmes piece where Holmes and Watson investigate the disappearance of Neville St. Clair. After getting an idea of what might’ve happened to Neville, Holmes and Watson travel to the Bow Street Police Court where Neville, disguised as Hugh Boone, a beggar, is being kept in a cell. Holmes takes out a sponge and washes down Boone until the man is revealed to be Neville, who faked his own death out of shame that his wife had caught him while he was leading his double life – one as a respectable man and the other as a beggar. It is the setting of the climax.

Though briefly mentioned in Egerton’s “A Lost Masterpiece”, the London Bridge seems to serve as a passing point for the narrator who leaves the countryside to journey to the city for “the desire to mix with the crowd, to lay my ear once more to the heart of the world and listen to its life-throbs, had grown too strong for me” (Egerton). It is the threshold that serves as the introduction into the city of London, the “heart of the world”.

In the piece, the narrator mentions boarding a river steamer in Chelsea that was bound for the London Bridge. Using this image found on the Victorian Web, we can get an idea of how the bridge appeared in the Victorian era:

Besides getting an idea of how the bridge appeared back then, we also know that if the steamer was headed for the bridge, it would have to cross under. Alongside the river, we see countless numbers of industrialized buildings and wharf that populated alongside the river.

Also interestingly enough there had been a previous London Bridge that had been dismantled in 1832. The newer bridge had been designed by John Rennie and the building began in 1825 and was finished in 1831. On the google map of Victorian London, you can also see an old outline of the old London Bridge compared to the newer one. I thought it was an interesting find to include, as that’s not quite common knowledge that there were two London Bridges, though I doubt Egerton’s piece is referring to the old one.

Here’s also another map of the London Bridge provided by the Charles Booth Online Archive to give a better layout of the bridge:

According to the British History Online, the London Bridge also has quite a history. Along with serving as a battlefield and a place of worship, it was a place of resort for traders and a show-place for traitors. One passage, that I found was interesting, explained the passage on the bridge: “and the passage between its arches was one of the exploits of venturous youth, down to the very time of its removal” (Thornbury). Which can go back to the text as the narrator passed on from the simple and green countryside to the industrialized city. “The river was wrapped in a delicate grey haze with a golden sub-tone, like a beautiful bright thought struggling for utterance through a mist of obscure words. It glowed through the turbid waters under the arches, so that I feared to see a face or a hand wave through its dull amber—for I always think of drowned creatures washing wearily in its murky depths—it lit up the great
warehouses, and warmed the brickwork of the monster chimneys in the background. No detail escaped my outer eyes not the hideous green of the velveteen in the sleeves of the woman on my left, nor the supercilious giggle of the young ladies on my right, who made audible remarks about my personal appearance” (Egerton).

As mentioned, the bridge had also been the scene of many fights. During Queen Mary’s reign, fighting commenced on the bridge in 1554 was one such example. And during Queen Elizabeth’s reign, the bridge had been restored  until the eighteenth century where it became ruinous.

And finally, one last remaining fact about the location is in reference to the old nursery rhyme “London Bridge is Falling Down”. On the British History Online site, it is mentioned that “if Old London Bridge had a fault, it was, perhaps, its habit of occasionally partly falling down” (Thornbury). Perhaps then this is where the nursery rhyme had its root come from? Thought it was an interesting fact to include in as well.

Works Cited:

I have to say that it didn’t take long for me to have an opinion on this when I first started reading about the opinions of abortions during this time period. It seems that we, as humans, haven’t really changed our viewpoint on the practice since this era. Though we are becoming somewhat more liberal with the pro-choice vs pro-life conflict, it’s still a point of contention and controversy. And according to the first two paragraphs, alone, of this piece, it seems no different in this era as well. On the other hand, I feel like there was some sort of acceptance of infanticide back then depending on the scenario and the country, which I feel like does not exist in today’s world. It seems more like a unanimous thing in today’s world than back then where, between all different cultures (which I thought was an interesting touch of comparison) what would be done.

There was one line that caught my attention in the passage: “Physically she is a miserable invalid, with no disease except the consequence of that utter exhaustion resulting from the forced abortion” (Jackson). In the passage the author is referring to a married woman who terminated her pregnancy so she could sail with her husband to Liverpool. It caught my eye because of what the author calls her – a miserable invalid. Almost as if he is belittling her because of what she chose to do by terminating her pregnancy, and then losing all the other children she birthed. Now while I can’t say I was rooting for what her excuse of terminating the pregnancy was, which was “because her husband was going to Europe in the spring, and she wanted to go with him and couldn’t be bothered by a young one”. But a woman’s body is still her own, and, I believe, she can choose to do what she likes. On the one hand it does, and it doesn’t, surprise me that the attitude that abortion is wrong existed during this time frame since Victorian London was a little more conservative concerning that and sex.

As I had mentioned, comparisons with other countries concerning abortion was very interesting because, again, this is not a topic that you really hear about how they used to terminate pregnancies.  In Madagascar and Greenland, for example, if the mother died during or after her pregnancy, the living child would be buried alongside her. Like what??  And on the coast of Guinea, in the case of twins being born, the feeblest would be killed, or if it were a girl. Again, something that doesn’t truly surprise me because China and other nations have done that before. Athens, listed in this article, is noted to have done the same with any baby girls. I just thought it was interesting to how far this practice extended on offing baby girls because they were deemed undesirable.

I have to say, though it seems like we’ve come a long way since this time, we’re still struggling with the idea of abortion being humane or an act of sin against God.

Hello, my name is Taylor and I’m currently doing my senior year at SUNY New Paltz. My degree is English with a concentration in creative writing. I originally was taking another class in place of this one but there was some confusion over my schedule and getting credits, so I had to drop the other class and was suggested that this one would be interesting to take. And as much as I like writing, I also have an interest in historical things, so why not? And here we are.

I guess the one thing that surprised me about the reading was in Robinson’s article about London being a ‘modern Babylon’. Thinking of Victorian London brings images of poverty and illness and pollution to my mind, and it’s not far from the truth. But it’s hard to picture Victorian London beyond this image, so reading about the appeals and acts that were put in place to ensure cleaner water, cleaner streets, and so on was pretty interesting. And the idea that it was the first global city was surprising. I mean it’s not that far-fetched of an idea in hindsight but when I think of global city, my mind usually goes to New York. Perhaps this was also meant to be the first global city in Europe, but it did kind of surprise me but at the same time not so. I just thought it was an interesting idea.