János Végh
What Clarks Have Joined Together...
Imre Gáll and Szilvia Andrea Holló, eds.: The Széchenyi
Chain Bridge and Adam Clark. Budapest, City Hall Publishing House, 1999,
208 pp.
The Chain Bridge, one of the gems of the Hungarian capital
and perhaps the architectural structure best loved by its inhabitants, is
often used as the symbol of Budapest. Like most bridges, it connects the two
banks of a river; and metaphorically it is a link between Great Britain and
Hungary as well. The best-known of Budapest's (and for that matter of all
Hungarian) bridges, it was designed by an Englishman, William Tierney Clark,
and the construction was supervised by a Scotsman, Adam Clark (no relation),
who grew so fond of Hungary that he married and settled here. He was welcomed
and his name was soon Hungarianized, both in spelling and with the Christian
name coming after the family name, to Clark Ádám.
The city itself has only borne the name Budapest since 1873,
when its two for-merly independent parts, Pest and Buda, were unified, together
with Óbuda. They had been separated by the Danube, here not much wider than
the Thames in London. Buda had been built in medieval times on a steep and
easy to defend hill on the right bank, and became the royal seat and capital.
At the time, Pest was in law simply an attachment to Buda, with a certain
amount of autonomy. In the Middle Ages the two were connected by a ferry,
while in the 16th and 17th centuries a pontoon bridge occasionally connected
the two. The 18th century, the first prolonged period of relative peace and
quiet in Hungary after the early 16th century, felt the need for a permanent
link. First a flying bridge was built, replaced in 1767 with a pontoon bridge
consisting of 46 boats anchored and fastened together, much subjected to the
vagaries of the weather. It was wide enough for two carts, leaving just enough
room on either side for pedestrians to cross in single file in one direction
only.
The pontoon bridge was permanent only by comparison with
earlier efforts. When the thaw or floods came, it had to be removed-and this
was both inconvenient and expensive. When there was a flood, passengers were
carried over in boats (with a tariff dramatically increased) while the spring
thaw rendered all contact impossible between the two banks. In those days
the river not infreqently froze over, and when it was covered with a thick
layer of ice, wheelbarrows and tumbrils were allowed to cross, although carts
were considered too heavy. This regular loss of contact, lasting sometimes
for weeks or even longer, seriously affected the life of the residents of
both cities, especially merchants, even if they had become somewhat accustomed
to these interruptions. On the other hand, those travelling on their own account
or on official business, were baffled and appalled at being forced to interrupt
their journey for several weeks.
Towards the end of the 18th century the idea of constructing
a permanent bridge came to the fore. Apart from the problem of the vast funds
required for a project of such a scale, there was also the basic technical
dilemma of whether the bridge should be a pier bridge or a suspension bridge.
They were wary about the first solution for fear of increasing the danger
of a flood by blocking the ice drift with a row of piers, while the suspension
bridge was little known in this part of Europe. Suspension bridges had been
erected in England, France and Germany for over fifty years then, but those
countries were a long way off and all their bridges had been built over rivers
much narrower than the Danube.
The project was first taken closer to success when István
Széchenyi took an interest in it. He followed the most noble traditions of
the Hungarian aristocracy. He came from a family that had established a good,
non-rebellious reputation for themselves at the Habsburg court in Vienna,
which allowed him to carry out his projects without the authorities trying
to block any of his efforts from the start. Count István spared no effort
in combating the backwardness of Hungary, a backwardness due to its lack of
independence, its remoteness, and, more often than not, the general lethargy
and passivity of its people. The Hungarian aristocracy of the Enlightenment
and the era labelled "The Age of Reform" (the two decades immediately preceding
1848) had to take the initiative in many areas where, in more fortunate countries,
the initiatives would come from the ruler. István Széchenyi's father, for
instance, donated his precious collection of books and medals to the nation,
a collection which was to become the core of today's National Museum. His
son offered one year of the income from his vast estates as the financial
basis for a Scientific Society-whence sprang the Hungarian Academy of Sciences.
Apart from his money, István Széchenyi never hesitated to
make use of his excellent management skills. When it came to a worthy cause,
he was so determined that nothing could stop him. As he wrote, "They may cut
my wings and I shall walk. If they cut my legs off, I shall walk on my hands,
they tear off my hands, I shall crawl on my stomach. To be of use at any cost."
He did much to improve the transportation network of Hungary. An important
part in this was the regulation of a stretch of the Danube-the Iron Gates.
This stretch of the river, crossing present-day Yugoslavia and Romania, could
not be used by river traffic because of the sharp rocks covering its bed.
Removing these rocks with explosives opened the passage to the Black Sea for
Hungarian ships. Széchenyi also initiated the flood protection work on the
River Tisza, introduced steamboats onto Lake Balaton and brought horseracing
to Hungary.
In the case of the construction of the Chain Bridge, the
importance of the issue and the high costs made it impossible for him to carry
out the whole project alone. So he gained the consent of the Habsburg Palatine-in
essence a Lord Lieutenant of Hungary-which made it possible to collect all
the necessary data concerning the Danube. By founding a 'Bridge Society',
he raised the interest of several groups, and as soon as some in the highest
circles in the land decided to join, bankers ceased to be reluctant to finance
the project. Strange as it may sound, the government took no part in the project
whatsoever, and thus the first-and for quite long time the one and only-permanent
bridge to cross the Middle and Lower Danube was built as a private enterprise.
It took much effort to complete. Széchenyi, a great admirer
of English industrial progress, obviously decided to invite English know-how
when it came to the technological realization of his idea. He got in touch
with Brunel, the famous bridge and tunnel engineer, as early as 1827. His
two trips to Britain in 1832 and 1833/34 served the purpose of preparing the
construction. It was in this period that he met Tierney Clark, the civil engineer
of London's Hammersith Bridge, which is still standing, though no longer in
use. Clark's suggestion, that of a suspension bridge with two piers in the
river, soon gained dominance. After several trips to Hungary and detailed
observation of the site, Clark agreed to draw the plans in 1839. However,
he had several other commissions to complete, so rather than coming to live
to Hungary, he offered the post of resident engineer to a young Scotsman,
who had gained some experience in navigation on the Danube by designing and
testing a dredger here.
Construction began in 1839, when piles of top quality timber
were placed at the bottom, as the first stage of building a lock chamber,
which housed the two piers under construction. Both Clarks agreed that only
top quality material was to be used, so the granite to cover the piers was
brought from Mauthausen, in Upper Austria, while the steel for the chains
came straight from England. It was a complicated process, but it brought perfect
results. The first real-life testing occurred in 1849, when the insurgent
Hungarian troops followed by the Habsburg army marched along the newly built
bridge with all their artillery and ammunition. The bridge was officially
opened in late 1849, after the collapse of the Revolution, and the ceremony
had no significance whatsoever. Neither Széchenyi nor Tierney Clarke attended.
The Chain Bridge has served as a link between the two halves
of the city, mutually dependent on one another for over 150 years. Because
of the wear and tear caused by motor vehicles, all steel parts had to be replaced
in 1914/15. The bridge was blown up by the Germans towards the end of the
Second World War. The Red Army took the city after a savage two month seige,
by the end of which all that was left of the bridge was its two piers.
The book I am reviewing gives all the information on the
history of the bridge in greater detail, and more. It is a collection of papers
on cultural and technological history by British and Hungarian authors, and
this, like the bridge itself, links Britain and Hungary. Chapter 1 is about
the temporary bridges and the birth and development of the idea of a permanent
bridge, including all the legal and organizational obstacles, with special
emphasis on the role of István Széchenyi. Chapter 2 gives an overview of the
existent cultural links between Great Britain and Hungary at the time, while
the next article is a portrait of Tierney Clark. The next two are about Adam
Clark and other "lad o'pairts", as young, travelled Scotsmen were referred
to. They are supplemented by excerpts from his letters to his parents, and
commentaries. Then follows a professional paper for those interested in the
technical history on the construction and several reconstructions of the bridge.
The last two articles place the bridge in the context of art history as an
architectural achievement, in the context of its age and its surroundings,
and deal with its many representations in painting since the middle of the
last century.
The production and appearance of the book is worthy of praise
too. Even its cover feels good in one's hand. Obviously, it is richly illustrated,
predominantly with graphic and photographic images of the Chain Bridge itself,
including its plans. The book features portraits of all the major personages
mentioned, including a respectful rather than mocking caricature of Széchenyi,
as well as numerous old cityscapes and maps. There is a picture of the bridge's
inspiration, Hammersmith Bridge in London. But this is more than just a book
that is pleasant to look at: it is also a scholary piece of work, with plenty
of footnotes to support its data. What makes it even more significant is the
fact that it is the very first book to appear in English on the Chain Bridge-one
of the great architectural achievements of its age, though little known outside
Central Europe.
Remarkably enough, Géza Hajós, the renowned art historian,
whose idea the book was, is a descendant of Adam Clark -little wonder he starts
his introduction with the words:
The offspring of Adam Clark became involved in a most active
correspondence in the wake of a personal investigation which came about
by accident, led from Edinburgh through Australia as far as Budapest and
finally they even met in a small cemetery in Scotland. It was this romantic
reunion and the more intimate family relationships which emerged that launched
the history of this book on the Chain Bridge, which has its 150th birthday
celebrated in 1999, and on its creator.
János Végh
is Professor of Art History at the Academy of Applied Arts, Budapest. His
books include: Fifteenth Century German and Bohemian Panel Paintings in Hungarian
Museums (1967), Sixteenth Century German Paintings in Hungarian Museums (1972),
Early Netherlands Paintings (1977), all from Corvina Press, Budapest, and
also in English.
