Docklands History Group Meeting October 2002 the Defences of the Thames by Victor Smith

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Docklands History Group Meeting October 2002 the Defences of the Thames by Victor Smith Docklands History Group meeting October 2002 The Defences of the Thames By Victor Smith Victor started by explaining the need for fortifications to defend the river and in particular the docks. By Henry VIH’s reign eighty per cent of England’s exports used the Thames. It was the hub of the Empire with dockyards and shipping, the arsenal at Woolwich, gunpowder magazines at Purfleet and the starting point for mercantile and naval expeditions. Guns were set up to fire from the shore but it had to be born in mind that defences were not just fortifications on land. The first line of defence downstream was the Navy. On shore it was the army. Up to the sixteenth century fighting was ship to ship or hand to hand when an enemy landed. After this time there was effective gunpowder and artillery grew in importance. Some defences were local, such as Cooling Castle. At Gravesend the Thames narrowed and guns could be sited to attack enemy warships. However, picket ships, block ships, boom ships and chains were still needed. After the 1530 continental invasion the first national scheme for artillery fortifications was drawn up. Block houses were built, including one at Gravesend and one at Tilbury. They had twenty to twenty-five guns each with a range of 1,000 metres. At Gravesend cross fire was used to cover the whole of the river, but ricochets could be a problem. At the time of the Spanish Armada there was a boom defence and a camp at West Tilbury. In the Civil War Parliament used the Gravesend and Tilbury blockhouses as check points. After the Dutch raid of 1667 new temporary Trinity forts were built. These were linked to Trinity House, but it is not known where they were located. There was a naval battle off East Tilbury. The authorities were criticised because the block ships they had sunk were said to be too good. Tilbury Fort has arrowhead bastions. The barracks were built to house the national standing army. In 1690 the Fort was criticised because it only provided protection for the fort itself, and none for the river. The gun line was added later outside. In 1799 forts were built at East Tilbury, Shornemead and Hope Point. A new pattern traversing gun platform was introduced. The platform moved in an arc on metal rails and the gun ran on an inclined frame. During the Napoleonic wars, ships were moored across the mouth of the Thames. In the 1840s Shornemead fort was replaced with a polygonal fortification. Martello towers were built. Steam ships emerged which were resistant to round shot. By the 1860s there were wrought iron shields and concrete to protect the guns. Optics and electric searchlights, telephones and telegraphs and armoured steamers made the old defences redundant. Weapons were now placed at low level to blend into the landscape and were able to traverse. In the 1890s came the Brennan torpedo. Cliffe fort was a launching bay.In the world wars came air defence gun zones, balloons, pill boxes, and trench systems in Kent and Essex. Warden Point had a concrete acoustic mirror to catch aircraft noise. Radar towers and towers to detect mine laying aircraft and off shore forts in the Estuary were built. There were mine watch posts to look for parachute mines landing in the river and a boom from Canvey Island to the Kent shore. There were also electronically operated minefields, and anti-tank and other beach defences. Victor ended by explaining that the jet engine made fixed defences vulnerable. In 1956 the gun defences had been abandoned. With the advent of NATO, the Thames had ceased to be “strategic” and so it no longer required defences. There were strategic warden posts, and nuclear bunkers in the vicinity, but these were not created as part of the Thames defences..
Recommended publications
  • Skylarks and Shipping
    1 Skylarks and shipping Sole Street station - Cobham - Shorne Woods - Upper Ifield - Shornemead Fort - Church Street - Higham station Length: 10 miles (16.1km) Useful websites: The walk passes through Ashenbank Underfoot: Mainly field and woodland Wood, Jeskyns country park, Shorne paths on high ground, so only likely to be Woods Country Park. On the Thames bank particularly muddy after poor weather. you pass Shornemead Fort and walk a Marsh sections mainly on surfaced tracks short section of the Saxon Shore Way. or levees, so reasonably dry underfoot. Getting home: Higham is served by two Terrain: With one brief exception in Southeastern trains per hour daily to Shorne Woods, generally very gentle London Bridge (56 mins) and London ascents and descents throughout. Charing Cross (64 mins) via Woolwich Arsenal (33 mins) and Lewisham (46 Maps: 1:50,000 Landranger 178 Thames mins) both for DLR connections. It is also Estuary; 1:25,000 Explorer 163 Gravesend possible to change at Gravesend (8 mins) & Rochester. for high-speed services to London St Pancras via Stratford International. Note, Getting there: Sole Street is served by an however, that connections at Gravesend hourly Southeastern service daily from are poor and there is therefore little time London Victoria (47 mins) via Bromley saving for getting to central London made South for connections from London by using the high-speed route. Blackfriars via Peckham Rye (26 mins). Fares: The cheapest option is to purchase a day return to Rochester, which will cover all the journeys, for £16.10 (£8.05 child, £10.65 railcard). Note that if you wish to return on the high-speed service from Gravesend, you will also need to purchase a supplement (£3.20).
    [Show full text]
  • Essex Area Update
    Essex Area Update Welcome to the June Edition of the Essex Area Update Lockdown Thoughts I suppose I’m lucky. No walking round public parks for me on my daily permitted exercise. Instead it’s out of the front door, walk 50 yards down the street, turn left and I’m on the Harcamlow Way. Cross the Cam (a trickle in this dry spring) and a few hundred yards later I can choose to go left towards Saffron Walden, straight ahead for Debden, or right for a circumnavigation of Newport. At this time of year, things change almost every day: there are different shades of green and fresh blossoms. Normally, even on a Sunday (if I can avoid the temptation of Sky Sports’ Premiership offerings), it would be rare to meet anyone. But now, whatever the time or day of the week, I keep meeting people. Some are in family groups, others couples or individuals. We always say hello, and sometimes strangers stop for an appropriately socially-distanced chat. This is unusual; it’s part of the etiquette for walkers to greet each other but we’re British and supposed to be reserved. One man insists on telling me about his obviously traumatic recent divorce. I listen politely and I’m happy to act as a sort of psychotherapist, but there’s part of me that’s a bit embarrassed. I guess he’s lonely and maybe I’m the only person he has spoken to in days. Hardly anyone I meet is what we ramblers would regard as properly shod; most are wearing trainers or less solid footwear, and I wonder how they would have got on if lockdown had happened a month earlier when the mud was ankle- deep.
    [Show full text]
  • The Planning Act 2008 Proposed Port Terminal at Former Tilbury Power
    The Planning Act 2008 Proposed Port Terminal at Former Tilbury Power Station Tilbury2 Examining Authority’s Report of Findings and Conclusions and Recommendation to the Secretary of State for Transport Examining Authority Dr Mike Ebert, MSc, PhD, CEng, MICE, CMC, FIC, CITP; Panel Lead Paul Hudson, BA, MA, MSc, MRTPI, FRGS Max Wiltshire, BSc, MSc, CEng, MICE 20 November 2018 ERRATA SHEET – Tilbury2 - Ref TR03003 Examining authority’s Report of Findings and Conclusions and Recommendation to the Secretary of State for Transport, dated 20 November 2018 Corrections agreed by the Examining Authority prior to a decision being made Page No. Paragraph Error Correction 3 1.4.7 (USI: (USI): A10 2.1.1 450m 450 metres (m) 10 2.1.1 9km 9 kilometres (km) 37 4.3.12 “I” at end of Delete “I” paragraph 69 4.7.26 “hive” “give” 85 4.9.42 Delete underscore To read “is satisfied” after the word is 206 7.1.20 Delete underscore To read “Article 24” after article 236 Provision Formatting error in To read “Paragraph 133 Schedule 10 final paragraph (140) which deals with consents...” etc Insert in Appendix C Abbreviations or usage Reference Km Kilometre m metre N-deposition Nitrogen compounds deposition PPV Peak Particle Velocity OVERVIEW File Ref: TR030003 The application, dated 31 October 2017, was made under s37 of the Planning Act 2008 and was received in full by The Planning Inspectorate on 31 October 2017. The applicant is Port of Tilbury London Limited. The application was accepted for examination on 21 November 2017. The examination of the application began on 20 February 2018 and was completed on 20 August 2018.
    [Show full text]
  • V1 (Flying Bomb) Vengance Weapon Site, Hazebrouck
    V1 (flying bomb) Vengance weapon site, Hazebrouck stock advisor stock advisor Counter Sometimes finding parking at an airport is impossible...I hate driving around JFK airport parking lot and not being able to find a spot...Making parking reservations is the perfect solution to this problem! Before you head out for a trip make discount airport parking reservations . It's so easy and it will save you a ton of time when you get to the airport parking garage! The descriptions and plans of buildings have been taken from the signs that guide the visitor around this Home Page remarkably well preserved site hidden in the woods. The Coalhouse Fort Project was started in the 1980's to Click Here to see map of the area maintain, restore and promote Coalhouse Fort. The From 1942, the German Air Force, The Luftwaffe, developed an unmanned aircraft, a flying bomb known as Fort was built between 1861 the V1. This was one of two weapons being developed, the other being a stratospheric rocket. This was to and 1874 and remained in be the V” and Hitler hoped it would be used to destroy London, force the UK to surrender and enable him to service until 1956 when concentrate his efforts on attacking the USSR. Coastal Defence was abolished. In order to launch the V1, the Germans begin the construction in the spring of 1943 in France of four large bunkers and 96 bases. These were located from the Cotenin region to the Belgium border. The site at Bois Open Days For 2007 des Huit-Rues was chosen for one of the bases.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Port Terminal at Former Tilbury Power Station Tilbury2
    PLANNING ACT 2008 INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING (APPLICATIONS: PRESCRIBED FORMS AND PROCEDURE) REGULATIONS 2009 REGULATION 5 (2) (a) PROPOSED PORT TERMINAL AT FORMER TILBURY POWER STATION TILBURY2 TRO30003 VOLUME 6 PART 3 ES APPENDIX 12.B: BUILT HERITAGE ASSESSMENT DOCUMENT REF: 6.2 12.B Built Heritage Assessment In respect of Tilbury2 Land at former RWE Power Station Tilbury Essex On behalf of Port of Tilbury London Ltd CgMs Ref: JCG22584 October 2017 rpsgroup.com/uk | cgms.co.uk CONTENTS CONTENTS Pages Prepared by: 1.0 Introduction 3 Nicola Storey BA (Hons) MA 2.0 Legislative and Planning Policy Framework 2.1 Legislation and National Planning Policy 5 Louise Ryan BA (Hons) MSc 2.2 National Planning Guidance 7 2.3 Local Planning Policy and Guidance 9 3.0 Architectural and Historical Appraisal Authorised by: 3.1 Historical Development: Tilbury 11 3.2 Historical Development: Tilbury Fort 13 Jonathan Smith BA (Hons) MA PGCE PGDip MCIfA IHBC 3.3 Historical Development: Tilbury Power Station 16 3.4 Historic Map Progression 17 4.0 Site Assessment 20 Report Status: 5.0 Proposals and Assessment of Impact Final 5.1 Development Proposals 23 5.2 Identification of Heritage Assets and Assessment Methodology 28 5.3 Assessment of Heritage Assets: Scheduled Monuments 32 RPS CgMs Ref: 5.4 Assessment of Heritage Assets: Conservation Areas 55 JCG22584 5.5 Assessment of Heritage Assets: Listed Buildings 68 5.6 Assessment of Non-Designated Heritage Assets 81 5.7 Cumulative Impacts 82 Issue Date: 6.0 Summary 84 October 2017 Appendices Appendix A: References COPYRIGHT © CgMs Part of the RPS Appendix B: Viewpoint Locations The material presented in this report is confidential.
    [Show full text]
  • General Index Illustrations Are Denoted by Page Numbers in Italics
    Archaeologia Cantiana Vol. 130 - 2010 GENERAL INDEX Illustrations are denoted by page numbers in italics AS Anglo-Saxon Anderson, Trevor see Moody, Gerald BA Bronze Age Andrews, Dury and Herbert, map (1769) EIA Early Iron Age 231, 232 IA Iron Age Andrus, Francis Sedley, obituary 436 LBA Late Bronze Age Anglicus, Johannes 73 LIA Late Iron Age Anglo-Saxon/Saxon period MBA Middle Bronze Age Ashford 377, 378 RB Romano-British barrows and ring ditches 279, 283-4, WWI World War I 296, 303, 309 WWII World War II Canterbury, pit 356 Deptford area, inhumations 261 Ackolte, Thomas de 195 feasting utensil 356 Acol, barrows 290, 307, 311 Holmesdale, settlements 40 Addington Long Barrow 339, 341, 342, Minster, settlements 86 343, 344, 346, 347 Monkton 358 Adisham, barrows 307 Ringlemere, inhumations 363 Adye, Peter 130 settlement evidence 386-7 adze, Mesolithic 362 Shrubsoles Hill, settlement 85 agriculture (farming) see also Kingsborough Manor; Ash 381 pottery; sunken-featured buildings Canterbury 355, 356 animal bone Downs 36 cattle horn cores 382 Kingsborough, LBA/EIA 93, 100 horse 355 Monkton 358 sheep/goat 177, 336 Ramsgate, BA 336-7 sites Sevenoaks area 36-7, 42-3, 45, 47 Ashford 376, 378 aircraft debris, WWII 186 Canterbury 69, 70, 356 air defence, 20th-century 9-11, 13-14, Dover 198, 199, 203 19, 20 Greenwich 366 air raid shelters 16-17, 17, 25-6 Headcorn 176, 179 air raid warden posts 15, 16, 29 Kingsborough 88, 89 Albrincis, William de 195 Medway megaliths 348 Alchin, Thomas, miller 230 Ramsgate 164 Aldridge, Neil, ‘Investigations at a pre-
    [Show full text]
  • Medway Heritage Asset Review 2017 Final Draft: November 2017
    Medway Heritage Asset Review 2017 Final Draft: November 2017 Executive Summary The Medway Heritage Asset Review intends to provide a comprehensive overview of the heritage assets in Medway in order to inform the development of a Heritage Strategy to support the emerging Medway Local Plan 2015. Medway benefits from a rich heritage spanning millennia, underpinning the local distinctiveness and creating a unique and special character that can be readily interpreted through the historic environment. The main report is broken down into sections, initially looking at the topography of Medway and how this influenced human settlement in the area, then looking at the development of the key settlements in Medway; taking into consideration the key drivers for their establishment and identifying existing heritage assets. Furthermore, the main influences to development in the area are also considered; including Chatham Dockyard and the military, the brick, cement and lime industry, agriculture, maritime and religion. Through investigating Medway’s history both geographically and thematically, the significance of heritage assets and the importance of historic landscapes can be readily identified; enabling a better understanding and providing opportunities to enhance their enjoyment. Non-designated heritage assets are also identified using a broad range of sources; providing a deeper knowledge of what shapes the distinct local character experienced in Medway and the how this identity is of great importance to the local community. The report concludes with suggestions for additional areas of research and identifies themes to be considered to inform the development of a coherent and robust Heritage Strategy that will help enhance, understand and celebrate Medway’s heritage for years to come.
    [Show full text]
  • Kent's Twentieth Century Military and Civil Defences Smith
    http://kentarchaeology.org.uk/research/archaeologia-cantiana/ Kent Archaeological Society is a registered charity number 223382 © 2017 Kent Archaeological Society KENT'S TWENTIETH-CENTURY MILITARY AND CIVIL DEFENCES: PART 1 - THAMESIDE VICTOR T.C. SMITH Kent County Council's Defence of Kent Project is studying the county's twentieth-century militaiy and civil defences. Surveys of Gravesham, Dartford. Medway and Canterbuty council districts have been completed. This paper, the first of three, provides an overview of findings from Gravesham and Dartford districts, known jointly as Kent Thameside. This involves analysis of over 500 sites, now available for viewing on the on-line Kent Historic Environment Record (www.kent.gov.uk/HER). The aim of the Defence of Kent Project is to better understand the role, evolution, distribution and survival of the county's varied militaiy and civil defence stmctures, built or used during the twentieth century.1 It is hoped to bring tliis subject more fully into the public domain, providing greater awareness by publication, educational and interpretational projects, by highlighting sites for protection or conservation as well as by improving physical access. Information sources have been wide and varied, including War Office and Home Office memoranda at the National Archives, records at the Centre for Kentish Studies and other local authority archives and libraries, as well as tlie holdings of service museums and Kent County Council's aerial photograph collection. Minutes of local councils provided useful infomiation about civil defence. Studies by the Council for British Arcliaeology and the Defence of Britain Project have also been consulted.2 Additional infomiation was obtained from the recollections of individuals and from local historical societies and parish councils.
    [Show full text]
  • Defence Archaeology
    South East Research Framework Resource Assessment and Research Agenda for Defence (2013 with additions in 2019) Defence since the application of gunpowder: 1380- 2020 Victor Smith With contributions from Luke Barber, David Bird, Martin Brown, David Burridge, Chris Butler, Jonathan Coad, Wayne Cocroft, Ben Croxford, Paul Cuming, Ben Found, John Goodwin, Peter Kendall, John Kenyon, Andrew Saunders and John Wells Contents Resource Assessment ................................................................................................ 3 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 3 Geographical factors and influences ................................................................... 3 The meaning of the region’s defences................................................................. 4 The defence heritage resource ............................................................................ 6 The beginning of the Age of Gunpowder................................................................. 6 Gunports in castles and town walls ..................................................................... 6 The role of firearms in fortifications as part of the strategy of defence ................ 6 The new age of long range artillery defence ........................................................... 7 The decline of the castle and walled town ........................................................... 7 The strengthening of the Crown and a new emphasis on systems
    [Show full text]
  • Kent's Twentieth-Century Military and Civil Defences: Part 1
    Archaeologia Cantiana - Vol. 130 2010 KENT’S TWENTIETH-CENTURY MILITARY AND CIVIL DEFENCES: PART – THAMESIDE VICTOR T.C. SMITH Kent County Council’s Defence of Kent Project is studying the county’s twentieth-century military and civil defences. Surveys of Gravesham, Dartford, Medway and Canterbury council districts have been completed. This paper, the first of three, provides an overview of findings from Gravesham and Dartford districts, known jointly as Kent Thameside. This involves analysis of over 500 sites, now available for viewing on the on-line Kent Historic Environment Record (www.kent.gov.uk/HER). The aim of the Defence of Kent Project is to better understand the role, evolution, distribution and survival of the county’s varied military and civil defence structures, built or used during the twentieth century. It is hoped to bring this subject more fully into the public domain, providing greater awareness by publication, educational and interpretational projects, by highlighting sites for protection or conservation as well as by improving physical access. Information sources have been wide and varied, including War Office and Home Office memoranda at the National Archives, records at the Centre for Kentish Studies and other local authority archives and libraries, as well as the holdings of service museums and Kent County Council’s aerial photograph collection. Minutes of local councils provided useful information about civil defence. Studies by the Council for British Archaeology and the Defence of Britain Project have also been consulted.2 Additional information was obtained from the recollections of individuals and from local historical societies and parish councils. This information has been assessed, mapped where possible, and visits to sites made, to produce an historical synthesis.
    [Show full text]
  • Birmingham Botany Collections the Herbarium of James Eustace Bagnall
    Birmingham Museums Birmingham Botany Collections The Herbarium of James Eustace Bagnall Edited by Phil Watson and Emily Gough © Birmingham Museums Version 1.0 October 2014 Birmingham Botany Collections – Herbarium of J E Bagnall 1 Birmingham Botany Collections – Herbarium of J E Bagnall Introduction A brief biography of Bagnall (1830-1918) was given in Birmingham Botany Collections – Mosses (http://www.bmag.org.uk/uploads/fck/file/BBC%20Mosses.pdf ) and there is no need to repeat this here except to reiterate that he was Birmingham’s greatest botanist whose passion was driven by the compilation of his The Flora of Warwickshire (Gurney & Jackson, London and Cornish Brothers, Birmingham, 1891) and, subsequently, The Flora of Staffordshire which was published as a supplement to the Journal of Botany 39 (West, Newman & Co, London 1901). He presented his herbarium in its entirety to Birmingham Museum in 1913. This included 4570 specimens of mosses, 700 liverworts and 180 lichens all of which have already been published in the respective fascicles of Birmingham Botany Collections . The present fascicle covers his collection of vascular plants and contains a little over 6400 specimens. Of these he collected almost 3700 (57%) himself. The remaining 43% (just over 2750 specimens) were collected and passed on to Bagnall by a whole range of different people from across the country. Of these the most prolific was A. Ley who supplied almost 200 items. Only 135 specimens (a mere 2%) have no collector recorded for them and 72 of these are from Warwickshire, Staffordshire or Worcestershire so could well have been collected by Bagnall himself.
    [Show full text]
  • Thames Tech Report.P65
    Green Cluster Studies Thames & Medway Canal Technical Report March 2008 Executive Summary The Green Cluster studies set out an ambitious vision for the Green Grid public realm and provide an Action Plan to support its delivery across north Kent. Seven Green Cluster Studies have been undertaken to date, and a further Cluster Study is planned for the Isle of Sheppey.. Each one focuses on areas of intensive regeneration and change where there are superb opportunities to create strategically sited new greenspaces which will raise expectations, add value to existing investment and create high quality green infrastructure for future development. The Cluster Studies have adopted a partnership approach to co-ordinate discussions amongst key stakeholders in each cluster. Many are engaged in developing ideas and drawing up plans for individual sites and the Cluster Studies' workshops have provided a valuable opportunity to focus attention on the relationships between projects and the wider landscape setting. Originally constructed in the early C19th, the Thames & Medway Canal was a speculative venture to provide safe passage for ships between the Thames and the Medway Rivers during a period when this strategic maritime gateway to London was perceived to be at risk of attack from the French. Today the Canal is a dramatic landscape feature, linking the urban fringe of Gravesend with its rural hinterland and its heritage. Gravesend's historic Riverside Leisure Area, the Canal Basin and canal will be the focus for a distinctive sequence of urban public spaces, a range of new and enhanced wetland habitats, a superb recreational facility, and sustainable links to the Shorne Marshes, Higham Station and the flagship RSPB Cliffe Pools nature reserve.
    [Show full text]