Talk:Pulteney Bridge

William and Robert Adam

Paragraph 3 refers to the brothers William and Robert Adam, but William Adam was Robert Adam's father, and died in 1848. Did he have a second son also called William, who was also an architect / builder? If so, please change the link I created to William Adam (architect) to something else.-gadfium (talk) 23:44, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Robert did have a brother William, but he wasn't an architect. I have changed it to James, as Robert and James were partners at this time. Edward Waverley 12:08, 27 Aug 2007 (UTC)

Design

Is there any chance this was designed by the same person who built, or is based on the idea of, the original London Bridge? Simply south 00:04, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

One of Four Bridges in the World?

If the Pulteney Bridge is in a set of four bridges in the world with shops along both sides of their span, and the set includes Ponte Vecchio in Florence and the Rialto Bridge in Venice, both in Italy, then where is or was number four? Not the OldLondon Bridge, which was long gone when Pulteney was built. --Suzikay (talk) 00:20, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

There are at least five long bridges lined with shops. The Krämerbrücke, Erfurt, Germany is one and the rather obviously titled, but now rather shortened, Pont des Marchands in Narbonne, France another. For short single arches as part of a continuous street, they're innumerable. I think there may also be some old Chinese bridges within this group. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:10, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

• If we were ever to start a list article on these (which would be a nice idea), then High Bridge, Lincoln, [1] ought to get a look in too. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:24, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Call for additional pictures + description of waterfalls

I think that this article could benefit from a picture of the bridge taken down the center. If someone lives near it and can take such a photo, it could be added to improve the article. Lexandalf (talk) 03:47, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Can you clarify what you mean by "down the centre"? Do you mean of the road & shops as seen by someone crossing the bridge? If so I have some somewhere, but we could end up overloading the article with pictures dominating the text.— Rod ^talk 08:06, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

I'd also like to see a wider picture of the waterfalls and an explanation of how they were developed. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 10:17, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

You mean Pulteney Weir - see the discussion below. I would not object to a new article being created about the weir. If this article were expanded to include more reference to the weir, its title would perhaps need to be changed to Pulteney Bridge and Weir - which I don't think would be desirable. There is some more about the weir here and here. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:22, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Pulteney Weir

Kennet and Avon Canal, now on the main page, has a piped link to this article under the name of Pulteney Weir. This article on the bridge only mentions the weir in passing. The weir was used for the scene of Javert's suicide in the film version of Les Misérables. See production notes, p. 40. Kablammo (talk) 16:28, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I've added this but couldn't find it in the production notes so have used a local paper report as a citation.— Rod ^talk 21:26, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

The production notes do not use the name, but state:

One shot was added for Javert's final suicidal jump into the Seine, which was shot at the spectacular weir on the River Avon in the center of the Georgian City of Bath.

Production notes, page 40 (at the end of the page). I doubted there are any other weirs on the Avon at Bath, and your local source confirms the identification.

You may wish to consider either creating a separate article on the weir, or else creating Pulteney Weir as a redirect to this article. As I don't have the knowledge to know if the weir is important enough to merit a separate article, I leave that to you.

Best wishes, Kablammo (talk) 16:14, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the additional specifics - I've added the ref & made the redirect - I don't think the weir is notable enough on its own.— Rod ^talk 16:35, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Architecture and anything else before GA nomination

I have been expanding this article and responding to the comments made during the peer review, however I'm having problems finding suitable material for the architecture section. Could anyone help? Also is there anything else which other editors feel needs doing before this article would be suitable for GA nomination?— Rod ^talk 14:20, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Opening sentence

The opening sentence should describe what the bridge is. That is, what it is now. Bathwick is an area of Bath that contains Georgian streets - no doubt, at the time it was described as a "new town", or a newly-built town, as is explained in the text. But it is not a new town now, and, unlike, say, Edinburgh New Town, it is not described as a new town now. It is misleading to readers to describe it plainly as a "new town" when it is obviously not a new town now - it is simply one area of Bath. Those words should not be in the opening sentence - the relationship between the bridge and Bathwick in the 18th century is described in the text. I'd be happy with a wording something like ".... with the Georgian "new town" of Bathwick..." if the consensus is that some wording other than simply "Bathwick" should be included.Ghmyrtle (talk) 06:46, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

How about "... the newly built Georgian town of Bathwick"? Malleus Fatuorum 14:34, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

The problem is that the first part of the sentence doesn't say how old it is - readers don't know that until they get to the next sentence. Describing it as a "new town" might give the casual reader the impression that it's somewhere like Poundbury, or Skelmersdale. Describing it as a "newly built Georgian town" is better, but the sentence still doesn't explain when it was "new". How about:

"Pulteney Bridge crosses the River Avon in Bath, England. It was completed by 1774, and connected the city with the newly built Georgian town of Bathwick. Designed by Robert Adam in a Palladian style, it is one of only four bridges in the world with shops across the full span on both sides. It has been designated as a Grade I listed building...."

Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:29, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Seems fine to me, do it. Malleus Fatuorum 16:09, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

The change looks fine to me as well.— Rod ^talk 16:30, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Done. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:33, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

File:Puente Pulteney, Bath, Inglaterra, 2014-08-12, DD 51.JPG to appear as POTD soon

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Puente Pulteney, Bath, Inglaterra, 2014-08-12, DD 51.JPG will be appearing as picture of the day on December 10, 2016. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2016-12-10. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:40, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Picture of the day

Pulteney Bridge is an arch bridge that crosses the River Avon in Bath, England. Designed by Robert Adam and completed by 1774, it connects Bath with the Georgian town of Bathwick. The Grade I listed building has shops built across its full 45-metre (148 ft) span.Photograph: Diego Delso

The mysterious fourth bridge

Cedar St. Bridge (2007)

"One of only four bridges in the world to have shops across its full span on both sides."

• In addition to the Ponte Vecchio in Florence and the Rialto Bridge in Venice, the four alluded to may include the Cedar Street Bridge in Sandpoint, Idaho, U.S.A. Sca (talk) 16:14, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

I believe the four bridges are 1) Florence’s Ponte Vecchio, 2) Bath’s Pulteney Bridge, 3) Venice’s Rialto Bridge, and 4) Erfurt’s Krämerbrücke. Hope this helps. BrightOrion | talk 13:54, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Cantilevering to the southern face.

The coverage of the development and the loss of Adam's classical purity still isn't well detailed (web searching throws up a few much more detailed sites doing a better job of it). Re this change, it removed the claim that the shops had once been cantilevered out on both sides. I've left this, though unsourced, because I can't find anything to support WP's previous claim that there had ever been cantilevering to the southern, now clear, facade. There's some description of the South side being stripped back before 1951, but it's unclear if this was just the road face, or the outer face too. Sources anyone? Andy Dingley (talk) 10:14, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

I think I wrote this originally based on the work of Jean Manco. There is a hint in this web page when she says "It was not to last. 19th-century shopkeepers altered windows, or cantilevered out over the river as the fancy took them." however the detail is in Manco, Jean (1995). "Pulteney Bridge". Architectural History. 38 (38): 129–145. doi:10.2307/1568625. JSTOR 1568625. (unfortunately mostly behind a paywall) when on page 140 she says "Engravings then show little change until the middle years of the century, when shop-keepers on both sides of the bridge began building timber additions, cantilevered out over the river like those on the Ponte Vecchio. An engraving of 1864 shows the two on the south side, while a watercolour of the north side (Fig 18) was made to support a complaint by William Lewis to the Sanitary Committee in 1873." (it then has a quote from the committee hearing/report about throwing out water closets via holes in the cantilevered parts, straight into the river). (this (dated 1864) or this (1886) may be the image concerned).— Rod ^talk 10:57, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks - I was wondering why I was finding it so hard to find old illustrations of the south face showing this. I just wasn't looking closely enough at the details.

So what are these? Your illustrations confirm that it happened, but nor is it substantial. This isn't the north face, where whole rooms and a staircase were being tacked on. Is a couple of small bits of khazilevering like this enough to justify use of the term?

I hope the IP who removed this (and who has a relevant IP address) might comment further? Andy Dingley (talk) 11:13, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

I've just welcomed the IP and pointed them to this discussion. It appears we have a category of images from ILN 1864 on commons but unfortunately it doesn't include this one.— Rod ^talk 11:25, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

I've just looked up the IP address following your comment - but doesn't mean they are council staff could just be someone using one of their library computers or similar.— Rod ^talk 11:41, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Pulteney Bridge. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110815092052/http://www.holburne.org/muse/search/item.cfm?MuseumNumber=1996.5 to http://www.holburne.org/muse/search/item.cfm?MuseumNumber=1996.5
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080905092941/http://www.wapboat.co.uk/bathboating/hist.htm to http://www.wapboat.co.uk/bathboating/hist.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:01, 30 September 2017 (UTC)