Why were the City of London's gates destroyed?

Originally posted by Mercian We know all seven were destroyed between 1760 and 1762, but anyone any idea of specifically why? Improving thoroughfares, and general expansion of the City's boundaries doesn't seem adequate enough reason to destroy all seven such known landmarks at the same time. I tried looking up about the PM at the time, Pelham, the Duke of Newcastle, but couldn't find any policy references. Cheers!

You seem to assume that the fact these gates were landmarks or monuments must in itself have been a reason to consider to preserve them in spite of them having become redundant or even bothersome. But historical awareness is a relatively new thing. It was not until the nineteenth century, with the emergence of nationalsm and national pride, and the subsequent awareness of historical pride and the uprise of scientific approach towards history that the idea that buildings needed to be preserved for the sole purpose of preservation of landmarks that any such considerations would be taken into account when deciding the fate of such buildings. From an eithteenth century point of view, a building like a gate or city wall which had lost its purpose (it was no longer needed as a defence) and which was in the way (they would severely hamper traffic), and wich would cost an enormous amount of money for upkeep had no real right to exist. So intact defensive works only still exist in towns where their existance was no real problem, because they could still be used, or because they were not in the way so much that the cost of destroying them was not worth the effort of removing them. In such a big city like London, this was clearly not so, and the demolition of the gates therefore not surprising.

Edited by Aelfgifu - 10-Mar-2008 at 17:17