Building the Bank of England: Money, Architecture, Society, 1694-1942 (review)

Daniel Abramson's thorough study examines the architectural history of the Bank of England as a reflection of the bank's priorities and interests and as the institution and the building developed into vital players in Britain's image. In the process of tracing the evolution of the various structures occupied by the bank during the period from 1694 to 1942, he has created a model interdisciplinary study that places the Bank of England as a structure and financial institution within the context of changing the physical, social, and political environments. The book's diverse and prolific illustrations make a handsome volume, but more importantly, it serves to support the text. Architectural analysis is dependent on the visual demonstrations and Abramson offers an excellent selection of illustrations, ranging from plans and sketches to contemporary portrayals of people interacting with the buildings.

Organized chronologically, the book begins with the bank's original rented quarters in Grocers' Hall (1694–1734) and proceeds through the various structures designed by George Sampson, Robert Taylor, John Soane, the four architects who followed Soane, and the twentieth-century extensive rebuilding by Herbert Baker. A concluding chapter, “Architecture and History: Learning from the Bank of England”, discusses the insight that architectural analysis can provide to the studies of capitalism.

In tracing the history of the bank's various structures, the author delineates the process by which decisions were made and the factors influencing them. Abramson makes his readers aware of the possible iconographic readings of the buildings, their adornment, and their placement with respect to the surrounding structures. Connections are drawn to the buildings of other countries and other eras, as they are influenced or related to the Bank of England's structures. Always at the core of the analysis is the manner in which the bank organized itself, how it wished to be perceived, and the implications for spatial organization and design features.

Class hierarchy was seldom absent in British society, and as the book points out, the bank's policies and design reinforced those divisions, putting the intangible concepts into a solid form. Discussing the Gordon Riots of 1780 and the physical attacks on the bank, Abramson describes the bank architecture of that time as reading to its viewers as “selfenclosed, hegemonic, secretive, and cosmopolitan” (p. 85). Soane's plans for the buildings established the impression of an autonomous institution, awe-inspiring in its power and influence. From the beginning, the bank drew people who were anxious to observe its financial workings and the architectural setting in which those activities took place. By the nineteenth century, the structures had reached the status of tourist attractions, listed in guidebooks and decorated in celebration of the national occasions.

The book examines how the bank integrated itself into the society and political structure and how the influence of architectural ideas, individuals, and financial situations impacted building decisions. The history of architectural decision-making by the bank's power structure chronicles the designs that were rejected, as well as those selected. What is not chosen can speak as tellingly as the designs victorious in architectural competitions. Throughout the book, the author reflects on the manner in which the purpose of the bank and its architectural expression were interpreted by the public.

Always conscious of how its public face would impact perceptions, and therefore its operations, the bank was careful to evaluate the potential readings of its design decisions. In its early quarters, spectators thronging the Great Hall on dividend day would be impressed by the scale and design. Of a later structure, Abramson opines that a familiar spatial orientation would have reduced “the potentially alienating effects of the Bank's functional and architectural modernity” (p. 49). The familiarity of the plan by Sampson addressed “deep-seated cultural anxieties about corrupting paper money” and consequently became “an instrument for producing trust, the Bank of England's most precious asset...