London rebuilding: the king’s declaration and the city that returned
London rebuilding acquired a firm material rule in Charles II's declaration of 13 September 1666: new houses were to be made of brick or stone. The printed declaration preserved by London Museum also suspended construction until a new design had been developed and authorized the removal of illegally erected buildings. The king wanted a city better arranged for use and appearance, with measures intended to reduce the danger of another fire. His declaration connected rebuilding to the control of private construction.
The surviving royal instructions show the practical work beginning before that declaration appeared. On 10 September, Charles appointed Wenceslaus Hollar and Francis Sandford to make an exact survey of the City and its adjoining suburbs, depicting the ruins. The National Archives reproduces the order with a later map. Its inscription credits six surveyors, including John Leake, John Jennings and William Marr, with the original six plates drawn in December 1666. Leake reduced them to one plate. City walls, ward divisions and the coats of arms marking company halls helped locate the surviving framework of streets and institutions.
The declaration's material requirement applied to buildings large and small, with demolition specified for a breach. Its other clauses approached fire prevention through the arrangement of space. Main streets were to be broad enough to limit the spread of flames across them. New lanes and alleys required a finding of necessity. Houses were to stand back from the river. Brewers, dyers and sugar-bakers received particular attention because their continual smoke made neighbouring areas unhealthy. Charles directed the Lord Mayor and aldermen to consider a suitable place where smoke-producing trades could be housed together. London rebuilding involved streets, workplaces and public health as well as house walls.
The museum's description of the 1666 pamphlet adds the property arrangements accompanying those ambitions. A survey of the ruins would establish ownership of house plots. Compensation was offered where public works reduced someone's land. A planned quay or wharf along the Thames would accompany the setback from the river. For properties within the burnt area, the hearth tax was suspended for seven years. These measures joined restrictions on construction to incentives and compensation. London rebuilding required decisions about who owned each site and who would lose ground when public space expanded.
Grand layouts offered further possibilities. London Museum holds a 1748 print showing proposals by Christopher Wren and John Evelyn, rather than an executed street map. Wren submitted his design on 11 September 1666. It contained long, wide streets, a canal along the Fleet, a straight quayside, open squares and regular building blocks. Evelyn presented his plan on 13 September and proposed a grid of broad vistas and squares. Neither overall layout was adopted. The print records alternative designs for London rebuilding, with the later date of the surviving impression distinct from the date of the original proposals.
Some individual changes did take place. The museum identifies King Street and Queen Street as new routes linking the Guildhall to the river. A uniform quayside was planned but remained incomplete. Work on the Fleet canal followed between 1671 and 1674. Selected street improvements therefore existed alongside the failure to replace the whole inherited layout. Curator Meriel Jeater explains the underlying pressure: much of the City belonged to private owners, with complicated relationships among landlords, tenants and subtenants. Residents needed new homes quickly. Negotiating an entirely new street pattern across those interests was not the immediate priority.
A much smaller surviving object records one business's displacement during London rebuilding. Ralph Butcher issued a copper-alloy trade token dated 1666, now in London Museum. One face carries his name and the year; the reverse gives his new location outside Bishopsgate, accompanied by a lion above a bundle of candles. His former premises had been in Tower Street. The museum connects his move with the fire's damage and the demolition of houses to protect the Tower of London's gunpowder store. Such tokens served as small change when low-value coins were scarce. Names and place inscriptions left a physical record of businesses operating in altered locations. Butcher's token measures only 17 millimetres across, yet it names a particular trader and his new trading address.
Housing remained a problem for years. Jeater describes temporary settlements on fields rented out by the City authorities, including Moorfields, while landlords in unburnt districts raised rents. The Additional Rebuilding Act of 1670 required makeshift sheds, shops and other buildings in Smithfield, Moorfields and other open areas to be removed by 29 September 1674. That deadline extended eight years beyond the fire. Behind the new brick and stone frontage stood a longer process of temporary shelter, relocation and negotiation over land. London's winding medieval street network survived through that process, even as particular streets, river access and construction materials changed.
- London Museum, Charles II, His Majestie’s declaration to his City of London, 13 September 1666, object 42.39/19 — www.londonmuseum.org.uk
- The National Archives, Great Fire of London: how London changed — royal survey order, Hollar survey and declaration transcripts — cdn.nationalarchives.gov.uk
- London Museum, Wren and Evelyn rebuilding plans, 1748 print of the 1666 proposals, object A13124 — www.londonmuseum.org.uk
- London Museum, The Lion and Candle — Ralph Butcher’s 1666 trade token, object 96.66/194 — www.londonmuseum.org.uk
- Meriel Jeater, London Museum, How the Great Fire caused a London housing crisis — property rights, temporary settlements and the 1670 deadline — www.londonmuseum.org.uk