Winter, 1664–1665 • 25brick and metal work, tanning and brewing and glass making. Youths
worked side by side with their uncles and cousins as weavers or dyers for
wealthy employers. Many hoped to make their mark as apprentices to spe-
cialized tradesmen, such as Henry Foe the saddle maker, east of the wall, or
John Moore, who dealt in lead in the city. In the city and suburbs, three
thousand shoemakers were employed.^22
This configuration of a prosperous “city” surrounded by much poorer “sub-
urbs” was typical of early modern Europe’s metropolitan areas. In Paris, Ma-
drid, Florence, and a score of other cities on the Continent, the population
explosion that followed recovery from the Black Death had brought prosper-
ity to the merchant-dominated city center while drawing huge numbers of
working-class men and women to cheap housing in the adjacent suburbs.^23
These European city centers were something to behold, with half-timbered
residences of three, four, and five stories and adjacent large shops with entic-
ing mercantile displays. The squalor of poorly built housing predominated in
working-class suburbs, but the city centers had their own pockets of poverty
hidden away in narrow alleys, where unsanitary conditions and overhanging
roofs choked out sunlight and air and were thought to breed disease.
London differed from the European urban pattern in one major respect.
Other capitals had their royal court and palace in the heart of the old city;
London’s palace and the surrounding courtier district were situated a mile
southwest of the city wall amid the teeming working-class suburbs. Royal
Whitehall, a major residence of English monarchs since Henry VIII, boasted
two thousand rooms to accommodate high officers of state and many of the
courtiers who congregated around royalty. So Greater London really had two
centers: one for metropolitan and national commerce, and the other for the
nation’s court and government. Although they were separated by the city
wall and had different political jurisdictions, London’s two centers developed
a thriving symbiotic relationship. The royal court and government in sub-
urban Westminster needed the city for its goods and services and its wealth,
which could be tapped for taxes; the courtiers did their share of fueling the
city’s economy with their extravagant tastes.^24
Nothing, it seemed, could hold London back. Its trade with the rest of
England was enormous. Its huge merchant fleet and mile-long wharf area
beckoned the riches of the entire world, rivaling the success of the greatest
international traders of the day, the Dutch. And, unlike most European cap-
itals, which produced few goods of their own, London’s manufacturing
strength equaled its trading prowess. The city and suburbs made or finished
an enormous variety of products, concentrating in the clothing, building,