By Permission of Heaven: The True Story of the Great Fire of London

by Adrian Tinniswood

Book Overview

Adrian Tinniswood's magnificent account of the Great Fire of London explores the history of a cataclysm and its consequences. A dynamic recounting of the horror that gripped London in 1666 after a... This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Hardcover
• Language: English
• ISBN: 1573222445
• ISBN13: 9781573222440
• Release Date: January 2004
• Publisher: Riverhead Books
• Length: 331 Pages
• Weight: 1.55 lbs.
• Dimensions: 1.2" x 6.4" x 9.6"
• Age Range: 18 years and up
• Grade Range: Postsecondary and higher

Customer Reviews

Permission to enjoy Permission From Heaven

Very readable story about the Great Fire of 1666 in London. And what a story it is. I knew it would be interesting, but I was surprised to find this book to be a page turner. Tinniswood covers all the details, but without sacrificing the wonderful character of the story. He makes it easy to imagine what it was like in 1666 London and what a disaster the fire must have been. Informs your observation of current day disasters -- almost 400 years later, we can still make as big a mess of things, and our methods for dealing with them aren't all that much better.

Intriguing book on how catastrophes impact nations...

Tinniswood is an author I will be looking for in the future. His history of the great London fire of 1666 makes it memorable, and it is amazing how much is still the same as per politics and political maneuvering by those in power during such a daunting happening as this fire, that more or less razed London to the ground. England was in the midst of a war as per usual with Holland and France when this fire broke out in the late summer of 1666. Even though it would have been easy to blame this fire on England's enemies (and some did exactly that...the war-mongers will always be with us I fear), King Charles and his many courtiers and even his generals made it more than clear at the Parlimentary Committee that was established to determine how the fire got started, that the extremely dry summer, the way London homes were built with wood and with extensions over alleys, and the lack of accessible water and plans for fighting a city fire were at fault for the loss of London. I thoroughly enjoyed the research Tinniswood did on the writings from that time period. Not only does he include official writings of the fire, but also poetry lamenting the fire, the various preachers and sermons they gave on what the fire meant as far as God was concerned, and later in the book, information concerning the rebuilding of the city of London. This information incorporates all the thinking of the time into a very pleasing history on a single occurrence, which like the sinking of the Titanic, had an impact on the way people did things. In this case, London was rebuilt with bricks and stones, rather than wood, people were kept from building right down to the Thames (at least for a while), and other laws were incorporated to make all cities safer from fires. A couple of things I found amazing was how little life was lost due to this fire. Considering the great amount of people in such a small space, one would have expected a great loss of life...but that didn't happen. The other thing that was amazing was the fact that most people just gathered up their families and things and left. It wasn't until Charles gave his brother the task of trying to stop the fire that anything was done, and he did a good job at it. Great history. Karen Sadler, Science Education

Resurgam

This book is a fascinating mix of disaster epic, social history, biography, and just plain good storytelling. I highly recommend it.Adrian Tinniswood, the author of a biography of Christopher Wren and a history of architecture (among other titles), brings us to the intersection of those two topics, the massive fire that swept through the City of London in early September, 1666. For me, as I'd suspect for many readers, about the only thing I knew about the Great Fire of London was that it allowed Christopher Wren to demonstrate his genius in rebuilding the city's churches. In fact, the story is quite a lot larger than that.Tinniswood's recounting of the fire itself is a narrative worth the price of the book. But what really makes this memorable history is the way the author places the fire in a larger social context of municipal politics, religious bigotry, the fear of war and reprisal, and much more.What I found more fascinating even than the fire, however, was the author's description of the rebuilding of London and what it demonstrates about the English. In other nations and other times, politicians would not have hesitated to use the Fire as an excuse for a massive "visionary" building of a glorious new capital. But in London, any such plans foundered on the rocks of economic and property rights. The government simply refused to trample propertyholders' legitimate claims -- and the landowners and tenants themselves refused to be driven off their land merely to accommodate the social engineers' dreams of a newer, greater London.Similarly, "A nationwide tax [to pay for rebuilding the City] would have been turned down flat by Parliament -- why should the rest of the country be made to suffer for London's losses?" [p. 225]. Parliamentary and City leaders even hamstrung the power of the powerful Companies to limit entry to their trades in order to keep reconstruction costs down ... sort of the seventeenth-century equivalent of Right to Work laws.On the whole, there is a lot going on in this story. But Adrian Tinniswood ties it all together extremely well. Even for readers whose interests may not lie in the history of the Restoration era, this is an interesting tale that's both educational and inspirational. And that's not a bad way to spend your reading time.

Wow, an exciting book.

Wow, an exciting book. Adrian Tinniswood has an undergraduate degree in history and a master's in literature and is a respected journalist. From the extensive bibliography for By Permission of Heaven, one can see that his training in historical research has enabled him to dig a first rate story out of historical archives, while his training in literature produced a riveting tale. The True Story of the Great Fire of London reads like a novel. Tinniswood's effective mining of his sources has paid dividends in the creation of historical characters at least as engaging as those of fictional works, and these individuals are set in the dramatic setting of the fire and its aftermath. The author chronicles the birth and progress of the fire, its amazing destructiveness with little fatality, and its effects on later London and English society. Adding excitement to the story is the fact that, unlike the Chicago fire which was almost as devistating, the London event was set in the midst of war with another country and the very real fear of invasion. At the end of the book I felt like there should be more story to read and began to cast about for biographies and other historical works on 17th Century England. What more can one ask from a good book?FOR THOSE WRITING PAPERS IN HISTORY, ANTHROPOLOGY, OR SOCIOLOGY: One might write a comparison of the Chicago fire and the London fire using the author as a resource. How were they different? What types of political factors in both made the situation better or worse for either? What kinds of social factors entered into these situations if any? Why were there so few fatalities during the London fire? How did things change for the working class after the fire? Why? Could either fire have been prevented? Why were these cities particularly vulnerable? Were they more vulnerable than other cities of the time or just unlucky? Could Per Bak (How Nature Works: The Science of Self Organized Criticality) or similar authors on the subject of criticality have predicted these events? What would they say about them? Are cities still as vulnerable to fire today despite our better preventive and fire fighting measures? Under what circumstances might such a fire occur today? Would there be more or fewer fatalities? Are third world countries prone to this type of event even today? Why or why not?