Wellington Arch
Template:Short description Template:For Template:Use dmy dates Template:Use British English Template:Coord
The Wellington Arch, also known as the Constitution Arch or (originally) as the Green Park Arch, is a Grade I-listed triumphal arch by Decimus Burton that forms a centrepiece of Hyde Park Corner in central London, between the corner where Hyde Park meets Green Park. The Arch stands on a large green-space traffic island with crossings for pedestrian access. From its construction (1826–1830) the arch stood in a nearby location, slightly to the east, directly across from Burton's Ionic screen entrance to Hyde Park; it was moved a short distance to its current site at the top of the Constitution Hill road in 1882–1883. The triumphal arch originally supported a colossal equestrian statue of the 1st Duke of Wellington by the sculptor Matthew Cotes Wyatt, acquiring its name as a result. Peace descending on the Quadriga of War by sculptor Adrian Jones, a bronze of the Goddess of Victory Nike riding a quadriga (an ancient four-horse chariot), has surmounted the arch since 1912.
HistoryEdit
ConstructEdit
,_p326.jpg){kind=link}
Both the Wellington Arch and Marble Arch (originally sited in front of Buckingham Palace) were planned in 1825 by George IV to commemorate Britain's victories in the Napoleonic Wars. During the second half of the 1820s, the Commissioners of Woods and Forests and the King resolved that Hyde Park, and the area around it, should be renovated to match the splendour of rival European capital cities, and that the essence of the new arrangement would be a triumphal approach to the recently completed Buckingham Palace.<ref name="Williams p.49">Template:Cite book</ref> The committee of the project, led by the Prime Minister, Lord Liverpool, and advised by Charles Arbuthnot, President of the Board of Commissioners of Woods and Forests, selected Decimus Burton as the project's architect. In 1828, when giving evidence to a Parliamentary Select Committee on the Government's spending on public works, Arbuthnot explained that he had nominated Burton "having seen in the Regent's Park, and elsewhere, works which pleased my eye, from their architectural beauty and correctness".<ref name="Williams p.49"/> Burton intended to create an urban space dedicated to the celebration of the House of Hanover, national pride, and the nation's heroes.<ref name="ODNB Decimus" />
The renovation of Hyde Park, Green Park, and St James's Park began in 1825, with the demarcation of new drives and pathways, subsequent to which Burton designed new lodges and gates, viz. Cumberland Gate, Stanhope Gate, Grosvenor Gate, the Hyde Park Gate/Screen at Hyde Park Corner, and, later, the Prince of Wales's Gate, Knightsbridge, in the classical style.<ref name="Williams pp.49-50">Template:Cite book</ref> There were no authoritative precedents for such buildings, which required windows and chimney stacks, in the classical style, and, in the opinion of architectural historian Guy Williams, "Burton's reticent treatment of the supernumerary features" and of the cast iron gates and railings was "greatly admired".<ref name="Williams pp.49-50"/>
At Hyde Park Corner, the King required "some great ceremonial outwork that would be worthy of the new palace that lay to its rear",<ref name="Williams p.50">Template:Cite book</ref> and accepted Burton's consequent proposal for a sequence comprising a gateway and a classical screen, and a triumphal arch, which would enable those approaching Buckingham Palace from the north to ride or drive first through the screen and then through the arch, before turning left to descend Constitution Hill and enter the forecourt of Buckingham Palace through John Nash's Marble Arch.<ref name="Williams p.50"/> The screen became the neoclassical Hyde Park Gate/Screen at Hyde Park Corner, which delighted the King and his Committee, and which Guy Williams describes as "one of the most pleasing architectural works that have survived from the neo-classical age".<ref name="Williams p.50"/> The triumphal arch became the Wellington Arch at Constitution Hill into Green Park, which has been described as "one of London's best loved landmarks".<ref name="Williams p.11">Template:Cite book</ref> Burton's original design for the triumphal arch, which was modelled on the Arch of Titus at Rome, on which the central and side blocks of the Screen had been modelled, was more technically perfect, and coherent with the Screen, than that of the arch that was subsequently built: this original design, however, was rejected by the Committee – who had envisaged a design based on the Arch of Constantine, on which Nash's Marble Arch had been modelled – because it was not sufficiently ostentatious.<ref name="Williams p.51"/> Burton created a new design, "to pander to the majestic ego",<ref name="Williams p.51">Template:Cite book</ref> which was much larger and modelled on a fragment found in the Roman Forum, which was accepted on 14 January 1826, and subsequently built as the present Wellington Arch.<ref name="Williams p.51"/>
The arch has a single opening, and uses the Corinthian order.<ref name=metro/> Much of the intended exterior ornamentation was omitted as a cost-saving exercise necessitated by the King's overspending on the refurbishment of Buckingham Palace, which was underway at the same time. A contemporary account, written in anticipation of its completion to its original plan, describes what was intended:
The entablature is lofty and elegant with a richly sculptured frieze, and a row of boldly projecting lions' heads on the cymatium, marking the centres of columns and other sub-divisions of the order. Above the entablature, on a lofty blocking course, is raised an attic, the body of which is embellished with a sculptural representation of an ancient triumph. On each of the columns is a statue of a warrior, and on the summit of the acroterium which surmounts the attic is a figure in a quadriga or ancient four horse chariot.<ref name=metro> Template:Cite book</ref>
Sculpture of the triumphal archEdit
The arch at Constitution Hill was left devoid of decorative sculpture as a result of the moratorium in 1828 on public building work, and, instead, despite the absolute objection of Burton, was mounted with a monumental equestrian statue of Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington by Matthew Cotes Wyatt, the son of the then recently deceased James Wyatt, who had been selected by statue's commissioner, and one of its few subsequent advocates, Sir Frederick Trench.<ref name="Williams pp.85-94"/> The bronze by Matthew Cotes Wyatt, which eventually crowned the arch, was, at 40 tons (40.62 tonne) and Template:Convert high, the largest equestrian figure ever made.<ref>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref><ref>Template:Cite news</ref> Matthew Cotes Wyatt has been heavily criticised: Guy Williams claims that he was "not noticeably talented", and F. M. O'Donoghue wrote in the Dictionary of National Biography that "thanks to royal and other influential patronage, Wyatt enjoyed a reputation and practice to which his mediocre abilities hardly entitled him".<ref name="Williams pp.85-94">Template:Cite book</ref>
Trench, and his patron John Manners, 5th Duke of Rutland, had told the public subscribers that the statue would be placed on top of Burton's triumphal arch at Hyde Park Corner; Burton expressed his opposition to this proposal "as plainly and as vehemently as his nature allowed" consistently over successive years, because the statue would "disfigure" his arch, for which it was much too large, and the surrounding neighbourhood, because it would have to be placed, contrary to all classical precedent, across, instead of parallel with, the roadway under the arch.<ref name="Williams pp.85-94"/> Burton had envisaged that his arch would be topped with only a small quadriga whose horses would have been parallel with the road under the arch.<ref name="Williams pp.85-94"/> Burton's objections were extensively endorsed by most of the aristocratic residents of London.<ref name="Williams pp.85-94"/> A writer in The Builder asked Lord Canning, the First Commissioner for Woods and Forests, to ban the project:
We have learnt, and can state positively, that Mr. Burton has the strongest objection possible against placing the group in question on the archway... and that he is taking no part whatever in the alteration proposed to be made in the upper part of the structure to prepare it to receive the pedestal... Mr. Burton, through the mildness which characterizes him, has not expressed this opinion so loudly and so publicly as he ought to have done.... an opinion prevails very generally, that he is a party to the proceedings, and this has induced many to be silent who would otherwise have spoken...<ref name="Williams pp.85-94"/>
The Prime Minister, Sir Robert Peel, contended that another site would be preferable, and proposed, on behalf of the Crown, to offer any other site, but the statue's subscribers rejected all alternative proposals.<ref name="Williams pp.85-94"/> Every single MP except Sir Frederick Trench wanted the statue to be placed elsewhere.<ref name="Williams pp.85-94"/> Canning wrote that "the remonstrances which reach Her Majesty's Government against the proposed appropriation of the arch are so many and so strong, the representations of its architect, Mr. Burton, in the same sense, are so earnest, and the opinion of every other eminent architect, artist, or other competent authority who has been consulted on the subject is so decided [against the placing of the Wellington statue on the arch]".<ref name="Williams pp.85-94"/>
Decimus Burton himself wrote, "The arch would, I consider, suffer greatly in importance if the colossal statue in question be placed there, because it would become a mere pedestal. The want of proportion in the proposed surmount, compared with the columns and other details of the architecture, would show that they had been designed by different hands, and without reference for each other. ...I have desired to witness the completion of this building, as originally designed by me, and as approved by the Lords of the Treasury, yet I would prefer that the building should remain for the present in its forlorn and bare state, rather than a colossal equestrian statue should be placed upon it... I fear that if this appropriation of the building should be decided upon, a proposition would soon be made for removing altogether the facades of columns, the slender proportions of which would appear so incongruous and out of proportion compared with the prodigious dimensions of the statue".<ref name="Williams pp.85-94"/> Burton had realized that the disciples of Augustus Pugin and advocates of Pugin's anti-classicism would remove all classical elements from his arch if permitted the opportunity to do so.<ref name="Williams pp.85-94"/>
The Government placed the Wellington statue on the arch in autumn 1846; Guy Williams contends that the product was "ridiculous".<ref name="Williams pp.85-94"/> The Builder contended, "down, unquestionably, it must come. As the network of timber is removed, spar by spar, from before it, so do the folly of the experiment, the absurdity of the conjunction, and the greatness of the sacrifice become apparent. Its effect is even worse than we anticipated – the destruction of the arch by the statue, and of the statue by its elevation on the arch, more complete. Every post brings us letters urging renewed efforts to remove the figure to another site". The contestation about the prospective removal of the statue became national.<ref name="Williams pp.85-94"/> However, the Government failed to remove the statue, despite that they had professed, when it had been placed, that they would do so if it provoked the aversion which it had provoked.<ref name="Williams pp.85-94"/> Foreign intellectuals who visited London identified the incongruous fusion of the statue and the arch as "spectacular confirmation" of the "artistic ignorance of the English".<ref name="Williams pp.85-94"/> Guy Williams writes that "[the] arch at Hyde Park Corner is a visible reminder of one of the fiercest attacks that have ever been launched in the worlds of art and architecture. The face of London might have been very different now – freer, perhaps, of the 'monstrous carbuncles' so disliked by the present Prince of Wales – if the attacked party [Decimus Burton] had been a little more pugnacious, and so better equipped to stand his ground".<ref name="Williams p.11"/>
During 1882, traffic congestion at Hyde Park Corner motivated advocacy for Burton's triumphal arch to be moved to the top of Constitution Hill to create space for traffic.<ref name="Williams pp.131-133">Template:Cite book</ref> In response to this advocacy, Burton's great-nephew Francis Fearon compiled and published a pamphlet that advocated the removal of the Wellington statue from the arch in the event of the removal of the arch to another location: Fearon contended that the arch should be "relieved once and for all of its unsightly load".<ref name="Williams pp.131-133"/> The campaign led by Fearon was successful: Wyatt's statue was removed to Aldershot, and its place on Burton's arch, which was moved to Constitution Hill in 1883,<ref name="ODNB Decimus">Template:Cite ODNB</ref> was occupied by a Quadriga by Captain Adrian Jones. In Guy Williams' opinion Jones' statue is not nearly as elegant as Burton's designed statue intended for the arch, but it is more coherent with the arch than Wyatt's statue, and its figures, unlike those of Wyatt's statue, are aligned with the roadway under the arch.<ref name="Williams pp.131-133"/>
Jones's statue is based on a smaller original which caught the eye of Edward VII at a Royal Academy exhibition. The sculpture depicts Nike, the winged goddess of victory, descending on the chariot of war, holding the classical symbol of victory and honour, a laurel wreath. The face of the charioteer leading the quadriga is that of a small boy (actually the son of Lord Michelham,Template:Citation needed who funded the sculpture). The angel of peace was modelled on Beatrice Stewart.<ref>Template:Cite news</ref> The statue is the largest bronze sculpture in Europe.Template:Citation needed The boundary of Buckingham Palace Garden was moved south, and a new road named Duke of Wellington Place was created; this separated the space containing the Arch from the rest of the Green Park.
Public accessEdit
.jpg){kind=link}
The arch is hollow inside and until 1992 housed the smallest police station in London. Transferred to the ownership of English Heritage in 1999, it is open to the paying public: three floors of exhibits detailing the history of the arch, Exhibition space, and high terraces on both sides of the arch with views of the surrounding area.<ref>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref> One half of the arch functions as a ventilation shaft for the Hyde Park Corner road underpass, constructed in 1961–1962.
See alsoEdit
ReferencesEdit
External linksEdit
Template:Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of WellingtonTemplate:Robert Jenkinson, 2nd Earl of LiverpoolTemplate:London landmarks Template:Public art in London Template:Sculptures of Nike Template:Portal bar Template:Authority control