'Living bridges’ in medieval towns in Europe

Abstract

Lying within the borders of the former Roman Empire, medieval Europe took on a cultural legacy that included a network of highly organised roads and bridges, which made this great political organism function so smoothly for hundreds of years. According to current estimates, there may have been around 40,000 bridges on the roads of the Empire, mostly built of wood. Only some of the bridges were stone structures.

After the fall of the Empire, however, many roads and bridges vanished from the landscape, since maintaining their technical efficiency was no longer workable. Nevertheless, many structures built entirely of stone survived into the Middle Ages, and sometimes even into the present day. Only the wooden bridges, the largest number of which used to span the banks of smaller rivers and streams, have not stood the test of time. Europe had to wait several hundred years more for new stone bridges to be built, as the renaissance of some roads and bridges, undoubtedly linked to the development of medieval towns, was not observed in Europe until the 11^th and 12^th centuries. This stemmed from the fact it took so long for the professions of stonemasons and builders to be revived – they had to acquire the necessary knowledge anew, using mainly empirically acquired skills. It was also vital that the preserved Roman bridges could serve as an excellent model for builders of similar structures in medieval times. The construction of new stone bridges is evidence by almost 600 smaller and larger stone bridges built in France alone between the mid-11^th century and the mid-14^th century; and we may speculate that also thousands of wooden bridges were constructed at the time. It is worth recalling at this point that all these investments coincided with the construction of the famous Gothic cathedrals in many European states. The same stonemasons would be often involved in the construction of both bridges and cathedrals. As numerous examples show, medieval builders, however, did not passively process Roman models. In addition to employing construction traditions, they developed vaults in the form of strongly flattened arches, with a circular section smaller than a semicircle, sometimes elliptical vaults and, in the spirit of the new Gothic architecture, pointed arch vaults.

Bridges have always been among the most essential elements of the spatial, communication organisation of medieval, and later, European towns. It is in them that human will to overcome natural boundaries, people’s desire to subdue space divided or fragmented by the current of a river is most vividly evidenced. This is why the architecture of bridges is one of the most individual, foregrounding features that identify urban space.

The history of medieval inner-town bridges is linked not only to all spheres of human activity: construction and economy, politics and wars, and finally religion and law, but also to factors completely beyond human control, including various natural disasters. Hence the bridges of this time, like no other architectural works of man, reflect not only existence and culture, but their narrow ribbons also concentre the history of towns in all the variety of minor and major events. The construction of inner-town bridges has always been accompanied by an extraordinary aura, resulting from their unique position in the architectural and urban expression of the urban fabric.

It was important for the economic life of the town that the crossings not only served the movement of pedestrians, horses and carts. Bridges within the towns often occupied their central, key points, leading to royal and princely residences, cathedrals, parish churches or, last but not least, town squares and town halls that could not be bypassed. In general, a narrow ribbon of a bridge led shoppers straight to the free-standing stalls of traders, merchants and craftsmen selling various products as well as to the brokers, moneychangers and usurers, whose services were popular in the large medieval towns. Also, the limited walled area of the former towns made bridges an attractive area for the erection of residential houses along their roadways, with shops, exchange offices or workshops on the ground floor facing the roadway.

 In this paper, we will barely discuss the bridge as an engineering work, which reduces it to its main function related to communication. Instead, we will focus our attention on the extra-communication roles of the bridge, commercial and residential, which were frequently inextricably linked. Identified on a daily basis with their ‘living’ image, bridges were constituted by those who lived and worked on them, produced a variety of goods and enjoyed their cultural and entertainment activities there.

Located on an island in the Seine, medieval Paris used to boast the most remarkable group of bridges performing commercial and residential functions. The island has always been linked by bridges. The two oldest ones, the Grand Pont and the Petit Pont, were mentioned as early as in the 11^th century. The Pont St.-Michel bridge, built at the end of the 14^th century, and the Pont Notre Dame, built at the beginning of the 15^th century, complete the list of bridges of medieval origin, but these were constructed slightly later on new sites. Other Paris bridges include the Pont-aux-Meuniers and Pont-aux-Changeurs. These two took over the tasks of the old bridge, the Grand Pont, which was destroyed by a violent fire in 1621. With its numerous mills, the former only residually fulfilled transportation functions, while the latter took over commercial and residential activities. At the start of their existence, all the Parisian bridges were wooden structures and as such were repeatedly destroyed by war and natural disasters such as fires, but first of all by countless floods and ice floes. Quite early on, some of these bridges were replaced by stone structures; by the early 12^th century, the Grand Pont was already built of stone.

The roadways of the Parisian bridges were variously occupied: starting from numerous free-standing booths and market stalls to buildings with shops and workshops on their ground floors facing the roadway and flats on the opposite side of the buildings, facing the Seine. There was no one pattern of how the houses were placed on bridges: sometimes they were located singly on the bridge piers, as the ones on the Grand Pont, but most often the houses formed strings of compact buildings, on both sides of the bridges. In terms of house types, some bridges housed only single-storey buildings (Pont-aux-Changeurs), while others had two-storey (Pont St.-Michel and Pont Notre Dame) or even four-storey houses. The latter were erected on the new bridge in Paris, known as the ‘Pont-au-Change’, which replaced the Pont-aux-Changeurs bridge destroyed by flooding in 1621. The old, house-built Parisian bridges generally disappeared at the end of the 18^th century, which was related to the new modernisation project of Paris, including the demolition of the houses on the bridges and the construction of new waterfronts.

          In Florence, too, of the four medieval bridges over the Arno River connecting opposite parts of the town, two were built-up structures. One of them, the Ponte Vecchio, built in 1345 to replace the old bridge destroyed by a flood, still stands today as a more than 100 metres long structure, with three symmetrical arches. Its compact two-row development, with a considerable width of 19 m, is dominated by three-storey houses. Their ground floors housed dozens of goldsmith and jewellery shops.

            The Ponte delle Grazie bridge represented a slightly different variant of residential development, with single houses (small, single-storey buildings) situated along the bridge roadway, on both sides of all six piers. This nine-span stone road-crossing location on the river with semi-circular vaults was built in 1237.

            The longest built-up bridge fulfilling commercial, residential and public functions in medieval Europe was London's Old Bridge, located near the medieval royal Tower castle. Approximately 276 m long, this all-stone structure was supported by 19 ogival vaults of varying spans, ranging between 4.6 and 10.5 m, raised on variously sized piers ranging from 4.60 to 10.67 m. London’s Old Bridge was built between 1176 and 1209, and as early as the 14^th-century written sources tell us that at that time, its both sides housed 138 residential structures, with merchant counters and various workshops occupying their ground floors. The houses were arranged in eight compact, single-row blocks, four on each side of the structure. Royal death sentences were also publicly executed on the bridge. The increase in navigation on the river led to calls for the structure to be completely demolished as early as in the 18^th century. In 1820, another design for a new five-span bridge was drawn up, which was realised between 1831 and 1834, not far from the Old Bridge. It was also at this time that the crossing, which had functioned there for more than 600 years, was completely demolished.

      The last of the bridges under discussion, operating in the major conurbations of medieval Europe, is the Venetian Ponte di Rialto, spanning the banks of the Canal Grande. Unlike other bridges, The Rialto Bridge had never fulfilled a residential function, but carried only merchant stalls at all times. In the early phases of the Middle Ages, a number of wooden bridges were erected in this spot. In the mid-15^th century, wooden stalls were added on either side of the bridge roadway, open to its main communication route, where traders in books, sweets and perfumes displayed their goods. However, the wooden bridge needed successive repairs, so it was a decision was taken to erect a stone structure, which was indeed completed in 1591. Since then and until the present day, Ponte di Rialto has presented itself as a bridge with a great carrying arch, spanning 28 metres. Three passageways cross it on both sides, two external and one internal, and two rows of small shops, a total of 24 merchant counters, occupy the bridge, 12 on each side. Today, these shops are still dominated by the sale of goldsmiths' wares, fine porcelain and various Venetian souvenirs.

In Germany, the most outstanding example of a 'living' bridge, fulfilling commercial and residential functions is the so-called Krämerbrücke in Erfurt, spanning the Gera River. The large urban agglomeration on both banks of the river was originally connected by a number of wooden bridges, which were not spared by fires or floods, hence a decision to build a massive stone structure on the same site. In 1325, the 78 m long, six-span structure with barrel vaults was completed. On the bridge, along the roadway, 62 single-storey timber-framed houses were located, with traders' and craftsmen's stalls occupying the ground floors. The width of the houses with stallholders' counters could not exceed 2.8 metres. Furthermore, two brick churches were erected above the abutments, closing off the entrance to the bridge through their gate towers. After the fire of 1472, some 60 timber-framed buildings were reinstated on the bridge in two rows. This time these were two- and three-storey building units, with merchant counters on the ground floor. Subsequent renovation work and alterations to the buildings, which took place between the 17^th and 19^th centuries, replaced the previous circa 60 houses with stalls on the ground floor with 32 three-storey buildings, much wider than before, mostly 5.5–6.0 metres wide, present to this day. It was not until 1997–2002 that a very extensive programme was carried out to restore the bridge to its full architectural splendour. After all this lengthy restoration and adaptation work, the houses on the bridge were given a completely fresh design. In the ground-floor rooms of the buildings, the tradition of the former bridge stalls is today maintained by shops and various galleries, as well as numerous cafés and wine stores. All these shops and their activities are still part of the intensely ‘living’ image of the Krämerbrücke.

The so-called Innerebrücke, one of the two main bridges in Esslingen, located in the south-western part of Germany, provides another interesting example of a bridge with commercial and residential functions. This 230 m-long stone structure, supported by 10 semicircular arched spans, was based in the central part, at a length of about 150 m, directly on Die Maille Island. The origins of the structure date back to as early as the mid-13^th century; it was probably built in 1286. From its very beginnings until the present day, the Innerebrücke has been associated with trade, crafts and industrial production as well as with the wooden houses and a variety of stalls owned by merchants, traders and craftsmen. However, there is no information that there were permanent residential buildings on the bridge at this time. This is the picture of the bridge as reported by written accounts up to the 17^th century. Multi-storey houses on the bridge were erected after this time. As to the bridge's commercial function, it is worth noting again its location. The Innerebrücke connected the main suburbs of the town with its oldest core, i.e., the market square with the town hall and several churches in its vicinity. This location ensured all-day traffic on the bridge and thus the opportunity to trade and shop, so this pulsating facility grew to become the most important artery of the town, both commercially and in terms of transport.

            Another bridge, one of the most famous 'living' bridges in Germany, is located in Bad Kreuznach, in Rheinland-Pfalz, in the western part of Germany. The houses on the Altebrücke bridge were not located on the bridge roadway, but only on its piers. Originally, the bridge connected two parts of a new town, located here as early as the 11^th century, separated by two arms of the Nahe River, flowing at the bottom of a vast valley. Known as the Altebrücke, the bridge was constructed between 1300 and 1311. With a total length of about 135 m, the stone structure was supported by eight semicircular arched spans. Today, the old, preserved part of the crossing is only about 86 m long. What was special about the bridge, however, was not its construction or location, but the houses standing on its piers, which are mentioned in historical sources as early as 1495. Written sources show that at that time all the piers of the bridge were built up with houses, often on both sides. Numerous wars, floods and house fires have left only three houses on the bridge piers intact. These two-, three- and, in one case, four-storey buildings still embody the concept of a ‘living’ bridge, where its inhabitants live and work. The ground-floor parts of the buildings house various commercial and service facilities, and the upper floors, including the attics, are occupied by studios, warehouses and flats.

Another bridge in Germany, called the Alte Fuldabrücke, was located in Kassel, but it has not survived to the present day. It is known to us only from some written accounts, old paintings and contemporary painted reconstructions. The information about the construction of the residence of the Thuringian landgraves and its connection to the opposite bank, where the old town was located, by a bridge, date from 1277. This wooden structure was repeatedly destroyed by floods and hence, between 1509 and 1512, an all-stone crossing was built in place of the old wooden one, with four rather flat vaulted arches, two larger and two smaller, resting on three stone piers and two abutments. The bridge was up to 60 m long. An analysis of old engravings suggests that houses were located on its three piers. The Alte Fuldabrücke functioned continuously on the same spot for hundreds of years, first as a wooden structure and later as a stone one. In 1792, after the construction disaster of the bridge pier, the entire bridge structure, including the houses, was demolished, and any further reconstruction abandoned.

Returning to the 'living' bridges fulfilling non-communicative functions, it should also be noted that the 19^th century saw not only rampant industrialisation and unprecedented urbanisation of European towns, but it was also a period which left little space for the continued existence of fortified town precincts and tightly built bridges. And although the idea of bridges with residential and commercial functions seemed to have lost its raison d'être forever, recent technologies and materials have now made it close and inspiring again for many bridge builders and architects. This new development trend has become particularly relevant in highly urbanised urban centres, where the only empty spaces left for further, unhindered building development are those along rivers and canals.

Although we have information on more than 80 European medieval bridges fulfilling residential, commercial and sometimes public functions, only a small proportion of these, a mere 15 structures, are discussed in this study. Among them are probably those best known, existing in the largest metropolises of medieval Europe and in some larger and smaller German towns. In addition to the above-mentioned tasks, all of the bridges were naturally river crossings in urban agglomerations, spanning their opposite parts divided by rivers, sometimes also combining many fragmented spatial elements of the town into one coherent organism. The history of all these bridges, which were occupied by buildings for hundreds of years, has shed some light on the extraordinary phenomenon of bridge-building. They existed throughout the European Middle Ages and, in many cases, have survived in historic towns right up to the present day, sometimes retaining their commercial, residential and public functions.

It is worth mentioning that the idea is now being revived in several corners of Europe. Time will tell whether this medieval concept of a 'living bridge' will blend into the landscape of modern city districts, or whether it will remain on the designers' drawing boards only as a bold utopia and a benevolent vision.