Why did London attract such a large and diverse flow of immigrants Essay

Why did capital of the United mightdom attract such a large and diverse flow of immigrants - Essay ExampleLasting four days, the fire destroyed 87 parish churches and 13,200 residential houses, killing several citizens and leaving 70,000 homeless. This essay will give a description of the make of London just after the Great Fire and what it meant for the city as well as the candidate of immigration at that time. It will further address significant events in the growth of the city relating to immigrant bases that arrived in different time periods upto the period after World War Two (WWII) and the early 1960s. Each group impacted differently on the city, contributing to different aspects of life ranging from clothing, cuisine, architecture and the industrial revolution. Most of the woody structures and the springing slums were destroyed by the fire, resulting in devastating economic and social problems. To facilitate reconstruction, King Charles II initiated and advance resettlem ent to other areas amidst fears of rebellion from dispossessed refugees. This led to depopulation of the city just after the fire. Disputes between landlords and tenants were settled by a specially convened fire court to decide who must rebuild, and most of the plan of the grey-haired city was used for rebuilding. However, new regulations were also included such that the plan, additionally, had improved fire safety and hygiene standards, stone and brick structures, wider streets, communication infrastructure and no obstructions to the access of river Thames. A monument was also built sound Pudding Lane in commemoration of the fire, together with the famous St. Pauls Cathedral and 50 other smaller churches. The rebuilding process was slow, and within one year, the new houses did not number to a greater extent than 200. However, things soon picked up and 7,000 new buildings had been completed by 16718. The emergent city was by the standards a newfangled one, attracting back the p opulation and wealth that had shifted to Londons suburbs and the Town. New insurance companies were also set up to fight fires. Presently, the houses in Spitalfields on Folgate Street in eastern London, grand and terraced, reminds any visitor to London of the refugee silk weavers who designed and constructed them1. Although it existed before the Great Fire of London, silk distort was one of the economic successes that attracted immigrants to London in the slowly seventeenth century and early 18th century. It was initially introduced by the French Protestants, known as the Huguenots, along with the manufacture of guns and clocks2. They arrived in London fleeing a wave of persecution in their home country and were welcomed by King Charles II, joining the Jewish settlers who had earlier been expelled but allowed back into London by Oliver Cromwell. At the end of the 17th century, there were an approximate 50,000 Huguenots and 20,000 Jews in London, most notably in the Spitalfields a rea, who were later joined by the Bangladeshis. Recently, estimates bring forth shown that 25 percent of Londons contemporary population has a Huguenot ancestor. However, mass transfer of silk weaving technology into London was via Netherlands from the Far East, Middle East and Italy, during which time, early signs of an interwoven thread of cultures and ethnicities, often contrasting, began to show. By 1713, silk workers migrated from most parts of Europe into London, and the city employed close to 300,000 immigrants skilled in the industry4. This influx of immigrants was fuelled by the royal familys presence in London and the fact that the city was home to England