Pen nibs were required by many people in the Victorian era. More people were learning to read and write, and industries and companies needed book keepers, accountants and clerks, all of which required the person working to be literate. Also, all documents were written by hand, as the typewriter had not yet been invented, and so pen pens were widely used, resulting therefore, in a high demand for pen nibs.
Pens were originally made out of goose feathers. However, only 12 quill nibs could be made from each feather and because of the high demand for these nibs, there were simply not enough feathers. Steel nibs began to replace the goose feather nibs, but there were problems with the earliest steel nibs. The early steel nibs were very stuff, and the ink would rust the metal. There were alternatives to the steel nibs, but these alternatives also had problems. Gold was expensive and wore down far too quickly and nibs with ruby tips lasted longer, but were too expensive, jut like the flexible, hand-made steel nibs.
A breakthrough was made in the 1820s when Sheffield steelmakers produced a flexible and non corrodable steel: stainless steel. New inks were also made which were less corrosive and new machinery to press out nibs meant that the nibs could be mass-produced. Mass production meant that nibs were cheaper, which mean that ordinary people could buy them. This consequently meant that it was no longer just the wealthy that learned to read and write.
In the 1823 trade directory, there was only one pen maker listed. However, in 1829, there were 9, and by 1835, there were 13 makers. Joseph Gillott’s works produced over 30 million nibs in 1837.
There were many stages involved in producing pen nibs. First, sheets of cast Sheffield steel were cut into strips, heated and then rolled to the right thickness. Nib blanks were then cut from the strips using a hand operated press, with the hole and slit being cut in afterwards. The nibs were then reheated and the maker’s name and the nib number were pressed on using a foot operated press. The nibs were ‘tempered’ after that to give them the correct springiness. Next, the nibs were tumbled in a barrel of ‘grits’ to remove any rough edges and the nib point was ground to help the flow of ink. The nibs were treated with chemicals to give them a coloured finish and to make them rust resistant. The finished nibs were finally boxed up and labelled.
The Jewellery Quarter was a suitable area to make these nibs, because there were many workshops suitable for nib production, and there were many workers with skills developed in the toy trade. There were also suitable tools used by workers in the toy trade, which could also be used in the pen trade, such as presses, punches and dies. Because of this, Joseph Gillot set up his factory at 76 Graham Street, on the corner of Vittoria Street.
Working conditions in the Jewellery Quarter was also an issue and was often investigated. The information I have about the working conditions of children came from the second report of Commissioners on the labour of women and children in factories (Parliamentary papers, Volumes XIII, XIV and XV).
According to this source, parents acquired the extra money to pay bills by borrowing money off their employers and the employers of their children. The adults repayed this money from their children wages, with the employer docking wages according to how much money parents had borrowed.
In Phipson’s Pin Manufactory, the workshops, apart from those in which children worked, were well-lighted and well ventilated. There were two workshops for ‘headers’, who were children who made the pinheads. One of these workshops where 43 children worked was 24”9’ by 20”0’ and 9”1’ high and was lighted by two opposite rows of windows. The room was too small and low for the number of workers in there, and was too dark at night, especially in winter, when lights are required. The second workshop contained 49 machines and was 41 feet by 12 feet. There was only one row of windows and it was far too crowded and dark, particularly at night.
The commissioners found the privies (toilets) in terrible conditions. There were two toilets for the work people, not including the headers, which were kept locked. For the 90 to 100 headers, boys and girls, there was only one toilet, which, when the commissioners visited, had excrement all over the floor and was completely unfit for the use of humans. On the commissioners’ last visit, the place had been emptied, and the floor washed, but it was still in a filthy state.
Workplaces had a ‘strapper’, whose role was to keep watch over the children, and make sure that they did not slack while working. If the children ‘relaxed’, even slightly, she would cane them. As soon as she turned up in the workplace, the children would immediately increase their work activity, for fear of being struck. Most of the children working in Phipson’s Pin Manufactory were very young. The examples given in the source were Joseph Harwood, 7; John Bridgwater 7; John Feny, 7; Edward Burnett, 9; H. Bearman, 7; Elizabeth Cannon, 10 and Jane Cannon, younger.
This shows that all the children were quite young, being under the age of ten years.
The source I have used, the second report of the Commissioners on the labour of women and children in the factories. (Parliamentary Papers, Volumes XIII, XIV and XV) can be seen as either reliable or unreliable with regards to working conditions in the Jewellery Quarter.
This is only one source, and it has no other sources to cross reference to, or to support what it says, which doesn’t make it very reliable. Also, Phipson’s Pin Manufactory is in Broad Street, which is not in the Jewellery Quarter. As we are looking at working conditions in the Jewellery Quarter, this makes this source less reliable. Phipson’s Pen Manufactory is a factory and not a workshop, and in the Jewellery Quarter, the majority of workers worked in workshops. The source is only valid for one day and one time, so we cannot assume that the working conditions were exactly the same in the rest of the Jewellery Quarter. For all we know, it could have been better or worse on different days. Also, this was only one place, and does not apply to anywhere else in the Jewellery Quarter. Though this is a government source, we cannot assume that it will be completely reliable for that reason. The commissioners may not have been honest, and could have made up the terrible working conditions. They may have been susceptible to bribes and they could have gone in with a particular mindset and written something false. We simply do not know.
On the other hand, however, this source is useful as it provides an insight into children’s working conditions in Birmingham. As Broad Street is in Birmingham and is very near to the Jewellery Quarter, it is highly likely that the conditions were the same in the Jewellery Quarter as they were in Broad Street. Also, the source is a government document, so it is more reliable than if it had come from a different group.
I also have another source with which to look at working conditions in the Jewellery Quarter, which is ‘Evidence collected by Mr J.E. White upon the Metal Manufacture of the Birmingham District – 1862’.
The first individual concerned in this source was Frederick Parkes who was 15 years of age. As part of his job, he fetched the pickle (sulphuric acid), put it into a barrel with sand to clean the metal and then took the metal out. He also did other odd jobs when he was needed, but spent most of his time doing his main job, going up to the yard to eat. As he was working with sulphuric acid, which was very corrosive, Frederick Parkes faced many dangers. His clothes got eaten away by the acid, and he often burnt his hands from working with the acid for too long. He could read, but he could not write.
The second individual concerned was Charles Hammond who was 12 years old. He worked in the mill, taking the metal out from the rollers. The proper hours were from 7am to 7.30 pm, but the children often had to work overtime until 9 or 10 o’clock. More often than not, it was 10 o’clock. Charles Hammond worked with hot metal, and also faced many dangers. He often burnt and cut his hands and fingers when the hot metal came out, especially if he was tired because of doing overtime. Sometimes, he would use ‘herbs’ which were most likely weeds to stop the metal burning his hands, but he still burnt his hands often. He could not read fluently, only knowing 2 or 3 letters.
The source I have used, ‘Evidence collected by Mr J.E White upon the Metal Manufacture of the Birmingham districts – 1862’ could be seen as either reliable or unreliable regarding working conditions in the Jewellery Quarter, depending on how you look at it.
This source is quite unreliable as it is only one source, and has nothing to cross reference to or to support it. It is also only valid for one day. This could have been either a bad day or a good day, and so we do not know whether the working conditions were better or worse on different days. Also, we can only deem this investigation valid for one place, and we cannot assume that all other workplaces will be the same. For all we know, they could be better or worse. Another thing is that this investigation is only about children, so we cannot tell from this what the working conditions were like for adults. Also, the information is not official, and so we cannot tell whether the person who collected this evidence is reliable or not. Mr John Mitchell’s Steel Pen Manufacturer, where the two individuals worked, is a factory and not a workshop. As most workers in the Jewellery Quarter worked in workshops, and not factories, this source cannot prove reliable in regards to working conditions in the Jewellery Quarter.
On the other hand, this source can be seen as quite reliable. It is regarding a factory in Newhall Street which is situated in the Jewellery Quarter. As the factory is in the Jewellery Quarter, we can assume that working conditions in the rest of the Jewellery Quarter will be similar. Also, there are two individuals in the source, which means that both individuals back each other up in saying that the working conditions were not that good.
Living conditions in the Jewellery Quarter was also an issue. The information I have about living conditions in the Jewellery Quarter comes from a report on the State of Public Health in the Borough of Birmingham by a committee of Physicians and Surgeons.
According to the source, the wealthy people lived in the surrounding country, comparatively few in the town. The ones who did live in the town lived in New Street, Newhall Street, St. Paul’s and St. Mary’s Squares, The Crescent, Paradise Street and the neighbourhood of St. Phillip’s Church.
The poorer people lived in the courts. These courts were mostly found in the older parts of the town, but in the newer parts of the town, a huge number of streets were made which were occupied by the lower class, poorer people. The courts, in which the poor people lived, were very narrow, extremely dirty, not very well ventilated and badly drained, but this was usually only the case for the old courts. The courts varied in the number of houses they contained, with the numbers ranging from four to twenty, and most of the houses were 3 stories high, and were back to back. There was a wash house, an ashpit and a toilet at the end of one side of the court, and it was quite common that there would be pigstys and heaps of manure found in the courts. The toilets which were provided for the poor people were kept in terrible condition and throughout the entire town people in the courts would empty the toilets and ashpits into the street, from where they were carted away the following day. Cholera was very common in these areas as it was spread through dirty water, and the poorer people did not have very good living conditions, and therefore, water was often contaminated and caused cholera.
The rent paid by the poor people varied from 2 shillings to 4 shillings a week, but most of the houses in the courts had a rent ranging from around half a crown or 3 shillings and sixpence a week. Inquiries have not led people do discover that cellars have been used as dwellings, though there is evidence that landlords did lease out their cellars. The cellars, especially in the Bull Ring were used as workshops and as retail shops.
The source I have used to look at housing conditions in the Jewellery Quarter is a Report on the State of Public Health in the Borough of Birmingham by a committee of Physicians and Surgeons. Depending on how you look at it, this source can be seen as either useful or not very useful at all.
This source is quite useful when investigating living conditions in the Jewellery Quarter as it shows living conditions in the actual Jewellery Quarter, for example, in Newhall St and St. Paul’s Square. This means that we can assume that the living conditions in the other parts of the Jewellery Quarter will be the same or similar as in these areas mentioned.
Also, it can be seen as useful as it looks at the living conditions of not only the poor people and not only the rich people, but of both the rich people and the poor people. It was not only either rich people or poor people who lived in the Jewellery Quarter, but a mixture. This means that it gives an overview into what the living conditions will be like for the wealthy and the poor in the Jewellery Quarter.
Also, it looks at workshops, and how the landlords of Birmingham would rent out their cellars for people to live in and for people to use as workshops. In the Jewellery Quarter, people would set up workshops in their homes, and as people worked and lived in the cellars, we can regard this source as useful when looking at the living conditions in the Jewellery Quarter.
However, this source can also be seen as not very useful. If we look at the source, it shows Newhall Street and St. Paul’s Square which are both places in the Jewellery Quarter, but the source states that these were areas in which the wealthy lived. Therefore, it can be said that this source is not really very useful when looking at living conditions in the Jewellery Quarter as it only looks at the living conditions of wealthy people in the Jewellery Quarter and not the living conditions of the poor people, and for all we know, this could have been a large portion of people living in the Jewellery Quarter.
It can also be seen as not very useful as it looks at workshops in the cellars of the Bull Ring and not workshops in the Jewellery Quarter. As we already know, in the Jewellery Quarter, people set up workshops in the rooms of their houses and they didn’t usually rent cellars in which to set up their workshops. This means that we can not assume that workshops in the Jewellery Quarter will have these same conditions; therefore it can be seen as not useful.
In 1844, the Colmore family’s ninety nine year lease ran out. When this happened, the Colmore family knocked down the slum housing and built new houses in its place, therefore renewing the area of the Jewellery Quarter. Therefore, it is likely that the living conditions after this were better than in most of Birmingham, but we do not know for sure. It could have been the case that the rest of Birmingham had similar conditions or that it was even better. It is likely, however, that the rest of Birmingham had similar living conditions to the conditions in the Jewellery Quarter, as the Colmores may have rebuilt the housing to make it as good as the rest of Birmingham. We simply do not know.
On 1st July 2008, I went to the Jewellery Quarter, Birmingham to carry out a site survey and investigate its uniqueness. The different aspects of the Jewellery Quarter we investigated were:
- The size of the Jewellery Quarter
- The architecture of the Jewellery Quarter
- The working practices of the Jewellery Quarter
- The Jewellery Quarter as a community
- The Jewellery Quarter today
The Jewellery Quarter was at its peak in the 19th Century, with a workforce of over fifty thousand employees. In the present day, around four thousand people are employed in the Jewellery Quarter. This makes the workforce in the Jewellery Quarter unusual, as it employs a lot of people whereas other places use machines to do the work and only a few people to operate them. In the Jewellery Quarter, however, most of the work is done by hand; therefore more people need to be employed, which is why the size of the workforce is so vast.
The architecture in the Jewellery Quarter was very much like the architecture of most inner city Victorian buildings like those in Manchester and other similar areas. There were certain bits of architecture, however, that were unusual and unique in the Jewellery Quarter.
At site 4, we came across back-to-back houses and many purpose built workshops on Vittoria Street. Back-to-back houses were extremely common throughout the 19th century, particularly in industrial areas where land was scarce which meant that they were not unique or unusual during that period in time. Poorer people habituated the back-to-back houses, and they were particularly common in the main cities of England, where a lot of industrial work took place such as Birmingham, Manchester and London. The houses in Vittoria St were built around 1840 and had very distinctive architectural features, the primary ones being keystones, terracotta bricks, sash windows, Florentine design, and plaster moulding.
Back-to-back houses are no longer as common today as they used to be in the 19th century. This is because most of the back-to-back houses around the country were knocked down, and better housing was built to replace them. Back-to-back houses are now very unusual, which means that the back-to-back houses in the Jewellery Quarter are also unusual.
At site 9, we came across the artisan’s and jeweller’s houses. They had a domestic style of architecture, but bay windows had been added on. Bay windows were not unique, as a large portion of Victorian houses had and still do have bay windows, for example, there are many houses with bay windows in the Small Heath area of Birmingham. Bay windows in the Jewellery Quarter, however, were used for a unique purpose. Bay windows were put into the front of workshops so that more natural light was let in, meaning that it was easier for the jewellers to see what they were doing. As jewellers worked mainly with small items, they needed as much light as possible so that they saw what they were doing and didn’t make mistakes. A bay window was an ideal way of ensuring that they could get more natural light. This use of bay windows was unique to the Jewellery Quarter.
At site 11, we came across the Standard Works. From the outside, the appearance of the Standard Works is very misleading, as a person assumes that it is one big factory, whereas it has many separate workshops inside. The Standard Works was not a unique building as there were many buildings similar to it in area where land was scarce, and traders needed to make the most of the land available.
At site 6, we saw the Victoria Works which was built in 1837. The Victoria Works was also known as the Jubilee Works, because it was finished in 1887, Queen Victoria’s jubilee year. Both names were meant to give a sense of patriotism and a sense of honour for Queen Victoria. Today, the Victoria Works is used as an architectural office, and has many distinctive architectural features including terracotta bricks, plaster moulding and columns.
The most distinctive feature of the Victoria Works, however, is the courtyard. As land was scarce in the Jewellery Quarter, people built upon all the land they could. With the Victoria Works, they left space in the middle for a courtyard, to bring in, and take out goods. This makes it unique within the Jewellery Quarter, as no other building would have a courtyard because they would want to build upon all the land they possibly could in order to earn enough money. However, the Victoria Works is not unique to the Jewellery Quarter. Many larger buildings and factories had courtyards for the same purpose – To bring in and send out goods quickly and easily.
At site 5, we came across the Ramgarhia Sikh Temple which was built in 1879. The building was previously used as a Protestant church. The Ramgarhia Sikh Temple has many architectural features including keystones, columns, pediments, and it was symmetrical. These architectural features were not unique, as many Victorian buildings had a lot of these features.
At site 3, we came across St. Paul’s Square, where St. Paul’s church is located. The church was built in 1779 and was also known as the Jeweller’s Church, as many master jewellers who lived near to the church attended St. Paul’s Church. The Square is the last Georgian Square remaining in Birmingham, making it a unique area in Birmingham; however, it is not unique in the country, as there are many cities such as Bristol, Bath, London, Edinburgh, Worcester and Glasgow that all still have Georgian Squares.
The working practices in the Jewellery Quarter are different from modern working practices in other areas. This is because, in the Jewellery Quarter, the item being made is passed from place to place for each jeweller to add their part, by hand, until the item is completed, whereas in factories, an item would be made in one place by machinery operated by one person.
Smith and Peppers is very unique within the Jewellery Quarter. This is because the working practices there were completely different from the rest of the Jewellery Quarter. In Smith and Peppers they produced jewellery on a much larger scale, and they produced it all in one place. In the rest of the Jewellery Quarter, there was smaller scale production in small workshops and the jewellery was passed on from workshop to workshop to complete all the different parts.
The working practices in the Jewellery Quarter were not unique in the 19th Century, but they were unusual. Peter Akroyd states in “London – A Biography”, “The nature of its manufacture with different artisans in different districts making one small part of the assembly, means that Clerkenwell itself could be seen as a clockwork mechanism with its face to the sky.” This shows that in Clerkenwell, there were different craftsmen working on different parts of the watches, and then putting them together at the end. The working practices in Clerkenwell were similar to those in the Jewellery Quarter in the 19th Century, which means that the working practices in the Jewellery Quarter were not unique, but very unusual.
The working practices in the Jewellery Quarter are unique today, however, because watch making in Clerkenwell is no longer around, as most watches are now made in Switzerland, whereas the Jewellery Quarter remains, making the working practices in the Jewellery Quarter unique today.
A community is a group of people who live and work together. A community can be similar in the interests they have but they can also be completely different. The Jewellery Quarter is a community in many aspects. First of all, within the Jewellery Quarter, there is St. Paul’s School at site 7. This shows that children within the community came together to learn. There was a pub, the George and Dragon at site 8, where people went to socialise with one another. There were also back-to-back houses at site 4 which shows that people lived close to one another, as a community. At Site 3, there was St. Paul’s Church, and this shows that people came together as a community to pray to God.
Being a community does not make the Jewellery Quarter unique, however, as there are communities in every city in every country, all over the world. The community is unique in terms of the production of jewellery, however, because the whole community was geared towards the production of jewellery on a huge scale and this is something that cannot be found anywhere else in the country.
In the Jewellery Quarter, the socio-economic mix was very diverse. The working class people and the middle class people lived very close to one another. We know this because at site 10, we came across a wealthy man’s house. We know this was a wealthy man’s house as it had a garden. This house was only 30 seconds away from the back-to-back houses where the poorer working class lived. Usually, you will find that, the middle class live in the suburbs of a city, and the working class live in the inner city areas, and the more money they make, the further out they move.
This socio-economic mix in the Jewellery Quarter is very unusual, but it is not unique. There are a few areas with this kind of socio-economic diversity within the community, one example being Clerkenwell, as stated in “London – A Biography” by Peter Akroyd : “In almost every street there was private houses which had door plates, the sign of escapement-maker, engine-turner, springer, finisher and so on. These were modest but solid properties, with the workshop generally constructed at the back. But not all the tradesmen were so fortunately placed, and a nineteenth century essay upon clocks in Charles Knights Cyclopaedia of London remarks that ‘if we wish to be introduced to the workman who has had the greatest share in the construction of our best clocks, we must often submit to be conducted up some narrow passage of our metropolis, and to mount into some dirt attic where we find illiterate ingenuity closely employed in earning a mere pittance” This source tells us that the working class and the middle class people did live in very close proximity in Clerkenwell in the 19th Century as well as in the Jewellery Quarter today. Another example of an area with a wide socio-economic diversity is Small Heath in Birmingham, where wealthy people and poorer people mingle and live side by side.
In the Jewellery Quarter today, the same tools are still being used, as were being used in the 18th Century. Jewellers in the Jewellery Quarter still use bow drills, hacksaws, anvils and punches, and many similar old tools, whereas all the other companies are now using machinery, computers and robots. We came across Turley’s Jewellery Repair Shop at site 14, and we noticed that the exact same tools were used as shown in Source (?) – an 18th Century jeweller at his workbench. The same style curved bench was used and the same tools were used. This makes the Jewellery Quarter unique, as no one else still uses the same tools that were used 200 years ago. All other companies use machinery.
The Jewellery Quarter is unique in many ways. The Jewellery Quarter has not really changed, and looks almost the same as it did 200 years ago. The jewellers still work in small workshops, do not produce jewellery on a large scale, and use the same tools that were used over two hundred years ago. No other companies do this, as thy have all upgraded to machinery. During the Recession in 1920, people could not afford to buy jewellery anymore, meaning business slowed incredibly. As business slowed, jewellers moved out and closed down their shops. However, this picked back up again and the Jewellery Quarter is now doing very well. New roads have been built and some of the old buildings are being turned into apartments, but very little has changed. The Jewellery Quarter is a living museum. The Jewellery Quarter is like a step into the past. The tools have not changed, the methods of making Jewellery have not changed, and the aims have not changed. The most unique factor of the Jewellery Quarter however, is that it is the only place where the whole community is geared towards the production of Jewellery.
On 1st July 2008, I went to the Jewellery Quarter, Birmingham to carry out a site survey and investigate its uniqueness. The different aspects of the Jewellery Quarter we investigated were:
- The size of the Jewellery Quarter
- The architecture of the Jewellery Quarter
- The working practices of the Jewellery Quarter
- The Jewellery Quarter as a community
- The Jewellery Quarter today
The Jewellery Quarter was at its peak in the 19th Century, with a workforce of over fifty thousand employees. In the present day, around four thousand people are employed in the Jewellery Quarter. This makes the workforce in the Jewellery Quarter unusual, as it employs a lot of people whereas other places use machines to do the work and only a few people to operate them. In the Jewellery Quarter, however, most of the work is done by hand; therefore more people need to be employed, which is why the size of the workforce is so vast.
The architecture in the Jewellery Quarter was very much like the architecture of most inner city Victorian buildings like those in Manchester and other similar areas. There were certain bits of architecture, however, that were unusual and unique in the Jewellery Quarter.
At site 4, we came across back-to-back houses and many purpose built workshops on Vittoria Street. Back-to-back houses were extremely common throughout the 19th century, particularly in industrial areas where land was scarce which meant that they were not unique or unusual during that period in time. Poorer people habituated the back-to-back houses, and they were particularly common in the main cities of England, where a lot of industrial work took place such as Birmingham, Manchester and London. The houses in Vittoria St were built around 1840 and had very distinctive architectural features, the primary ones being keystones, terracotta bricks, sash windows, Florentine design, and plaster moulding.
Back-to-back houses are no longer as common today as they used to be in the 19th century. This is because most of the back-to-back houses around the country were knocked down, and better housing was built to replace them. Back-to-back houses are now very unusual, which means that the back-to-back houses in the Jewellery Quarter are also unusual.
At site 9, we came across the artisan’s and jeweller’s houses. They had a domestic style of architecture, but bay windows had been added on. Bay windows were not unique, as a large portion of Victorian houses had and still do have bay windows, for example, there are many houses with bay windows in the Small Heath area of Birmingham. Bay windows in the Jewellery Quarter, however, were used for a unique purpose. Bay windows were put into the front of workshops so that more natural light was let in, meaning that it was easier for the jewellers to see what they were doing. As jewellers worked mainly with small items, they needed as much light as possible so that they saw what they were doing and didn’t make mistakes. A bay window was an ideal way of ensuring that they could get more natural light. This use of bay windows was unique to the Jewellery Quarter.
At site 11, we came across the Standard Works. From the outside, the appearance of the Standard Works is very misleading, as a person assumes that it is one big factory, whereas it has many separate workshops inside. The Standard Works was not a unique building as there were many buildings similar to it in area where land was scarce, and traders needed to make the most of the land available.
At site 6, we saw the Victoria Works which was built in 1837. The Victoria Works was also known as the Jubilee Works, because it was finished in 1887, Queen Victoria’s jubilee year. Both names were meant to give a sense of patriotism and a sense of honour for Queen Victoria. Today, the Victoria Works is used as an architectural office, and has many distinctive architectural features including terracotta bricks, plaster moulding and columns.
The most distinctive feature of the Victoria Works, however, is the courtyard. As land was scarce in the Jewellery Quarter, people built upon all the land they could. With the Victoria Works, they left space in the middle for a courtyard, to bring in, and take out goods. This makes it unique within the Jewellery Quarter, as no other building would have a courtyard because they would want to build upon all the land they possibly could in order to earn enough money. However, the Victoria Works is not unique to the Jewellery Quarter. Many larger buildings and factories had courtyards for the same purpose – To bring in and send out goods quickly and easily.
At site 5, we came across the Ramgarhia Sikh Temple which was built in 1879. The building was previously used as a Protestant church. The Ramgarhia Sikh Temple has many architectural features including keystones, columns, pediments, and it was symmetrical. These architectural features were not unique, as many Victorian buildings had a lot of these features.
At site 3, we came across St. Paul’s Square, where St. Paul’s church is located. The church was built in 1779 and was also known as the Jeweller’s Church, as many master jewellers who lived near to the church attended St. Paul’s Church. The Square is the last Georgian Square remaining in Birmingham, making it a unique area in Birmingham; however, it is not unique in the country, as there are many cities such as Bristol, Bath, London, Edinburgh, Worcester and Glasgow that all still have Georgian Squares.
The working practices in the Jewellery Quarter are different from modern working practices in other areas. This is because, in the Jewellery Quarter, the item being made is passed from place to place for each jeweller to add their part, by hand, until the item is completed, whereas in factories, an item would be made in one place by machinery operated by one person.
Smith and Peppers is very unique within the Jewellery Quarter. This is because the working practices there were completely different from the rest of the Jewellery Quarter. In Smith and Peppers they produced jewellery on a much larger scale, and they produced it all in one place. In the rest of the Jewellery Quarter, there was smaller scale production in small workshops and the jewellery was passed on from workshop to workshop to complete all the different parts.
The working practices in the Jewellery Quarter were not unique in the 19th Century, but they were unusual. Peter Akroyd states in “London – A Biography”, “The nature of its manufacture with different artisans in different districts making one small part of the assembly, means that Clerkenwell itself could be seen as a clockwork mechanism with its face to the sky.” This shows that in Clerkenwell, there were different craftsmen working on different parts of the watches, and then putting them together at the end. The working practices in Clerkenwell were similar to those in the Jewellery Quarter in the 19th Century, which means that the working practices in the Jewellery Quarter were not unique, but very unusual.
The working practices in the Jewellery Quarter are unique today, however, because watch making in Clerkenwell is no longer around, as most watches are now made in Switzerland, whereas the Jewellery Quarter remains, making the working practices in the Jewellery Quarter unique today.
A community is a group of people who live and work together. A community can be similar in the interests they have but they can also be completely different. The Jewellery Quarter is a community in many aspects. First of all, within the Jewellery Quarter, there is St. Paul’s School at site 7. This shows that children within the community came together to learn. There was a pub, the George and Dragon at site 8, where people went to socialise with one another. There were also back-to-back houses at site 4 which shows that people lived close to one another, as a community. At Site 3, there was St. Paul’s Church, and this shows that people came together as a community to pray to God.
Being a community does not make the Jewellery Quarter unique, however, as there are communities in every city in every country, all over the world. The community is unique in terms of the production of jewellery, however, because the whole community was geared towards the production of jewellery on a huge scale and this is something that cannot be found anywhere else in the country.
In the Jewellery Quarter, the socio-economic mix was very diverse. The working class people and the middle class people lived very close to one another. We know this because at site 10, we came across a wealthy man’s house. We know this was a wealthy man’s house as it had a garden. This house was only 30 seconds away from the back-to-back houses where the poorer working class lived. Usually, you will find that, the middle class live in the suburbs of a city, and the working class live in the inner city areas, and the more money they make, the further out they move.
This socio-economic mix in the Jewellery Quarter is very unusual, but it is not unique. There are a few areas with this kind of socio-economic diversity within the community, one example being Clerkenwell, as stated in “London – A Biography” by Peter Akroyd : “In almost every street there was private houses which had door plates, the sign of escapement-maker, engine-turner, springer, finisher and so on. These were modest but solid properties, with the workshop generally constructed at the back. But not all the tradesmen were so fortunately placed, and a nineteenth century essay upon clocks in Charles Knights Cyclopaedia of London remarks that ‘if we wish to be introduced to the workman who has had the greatest share in the construction of our best clocks, we must often submit to be conducted up some narrow passage of our metropolis, and to mount into some dirt attic where we find illiterate ingenuity closely employed in earning a mere pittance” This source tells us that the working class and the middle class people did live in very close proximity in Clerkenwell in the 19th Century as well as in the Jewellery Quarter today. Another example of an area with a wide socio-economic diversity is Small Heath in Birmingham, where wealthy people and poorer people mingle and live side by side.
In the Jewellery Quarter today, the same tools are still being used, as were being used in the 18th Century. Jewellers in the Jewellery Quarter still use bow drills, hacksaws, anvils and punches, and many similar old tools, whereas all the other companies are now using machinery, computers and robots. We came across Turley’s Jewellery Repair Shop at site 14, and we noticed that the exact same tools were used as shown in Source (?) – an 18th Century jeweller at his workbench. The same style curved bench was used and the same tools were used. This makes the Jewellery Quarter unique, as no one else still uses the same tools that were used 200 years ago. All other companies use machinery.
The Jewellery Quarter is unique in many ways. The Jewellery Quarter has not really changed, and looks almost the same as it did 200 years ago. The jewellers still work in small workshops, do not produce jewellery on a large scale, and use the same tools that were used over two hundred years ago. No other companies do this, as thy have all upgraded to machinery. During the Recession in 1920, people could not afford to buy jewellery anymore, meaning business slowed incredibly. As business slowed, jewellers moved out and closed down their shops. However, this picked back up again and the Jewellery Quarter is now doing very well. New roads have been built and some of the old buildings are being turned into apartments, but very little has changed. The Jewellery Quarter is a living museum. The Jewellery Quarter is like a step into the past. The tools have not changed, the methods of making Jewellery have not changed, and the aims have not changed. The most unique factor of the Jewellery Quarter however, is that it is the only place where the whole community is geared towards the production of Jewellery.
