Why the Brooklyn Bridge is a Monument to Its Era

In this paper I will argue that the Brooklyn Bridge is a monument to its era. More specifically, the story of the building of the Brooklyn Bridge, and the bridge itself, provides subsequent generations with a snapshot of New York City during the twenty years following the Civil War. Someone who desires to learn about what it was like to live in New York in the 1870s could read The Great Bridge by David McCullough, or any other history of the Brooklyn Bridge for that matter. In fact, merely visiting the bridge itself provides a massive amount of information regarding late-19^th century New York.

As first conceived by John A. Roebling, the Bridge was to be more than simply a means of getting from New York to Brooklyn. As Roebling himself wrote in 1867:

The completed work, when constructed in accordance with my designs, will not only be the greatest bridge in existence, but it will be the greatest engineering work of the continent, and of the age. Its most conspicuous features, the great towers, will serve as landmarks to the adjoining cities, and they will be entitled to be ranked as national monuments. As a great work of art, and as a successful specimen of advanced bridge engineering, this structure will forever testify to the energy, enterprise and wealth of that community which shall secure its erection¹.

From the beginning, then, the man who wielded the most influence over the future of the Bridge meant for it to be much more than, as Harper's Weekly so plainly put it, "a work of bare utility²." The final sentence of Roebling's quote rings true to this day; that the Bridge does much to "testify" about those who built it.

Some will argue that while the Bridge was intended to represent its erectors forevermore, today it is simply used for crossing the East River, and that it does not tell anything of when it was built. This claim can be countered by traveling to the New York to see the Bridge. A close look at the Brooklyn Bridge provides insight into both the technology of the age and the society that built it.

A survey of the most impressive bridges in the world today would probably not even include the Brooklyn Bridge. Even within the United States, the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco is longer³, and many would say more pleasing to the eye. During construction, the magnitude of the Brooklyn Bridge caused much attention, however by today's standards the Bridge is not nearly as impressive an engineering feat as some of its more modern counterparts.

So why is it that the Bridge and the circumstances surrounding its erection are studied by so many? It is because the Brooklyn Bridge incorporates the old and the new into its structure. The Bridge was the first suspension bridge to be built of steel. At the time, this decision by John A. Roebling was questioned by many⁴. Steel was a relatively new technology, and the press believed that this new technology was too risky, because so much public money was being spent on the project. After the Brooklyn Bridge, iron was hardly ever used again in bridge building, and was seen as a heavy, inadequate material for such purposes. At the same time, a vast majority of modern skyscrapers are built of steel. It is like this that the Bridge represents technological advancement; it was truly ahead of its time.

By contrast, the most notable features of the Brooklyn Bridge, the enormous towers at each end, are made of granite. And not only this, but the towers were very gothic-looking, almost imposing to observers. Historically, stone had been used to build homes, churches, businesses; just about any structure would use stone. While he was designing the Bridge, Roebling decided that the grandest part of his life's work would be made of stone⁵. Maybe Roebling did this because he knew that the Brooklyn Bridge would be one of the last large bridges to use stone for its towers, and in this way he chose to blend old and new technology. Whether he realized it or not, the massive stone arches would eventually be the cause for any awe reserved for the Bridge over one hundred years later. After all, few who see the Bridge today are amazed at the fact that the promenade utilizes steel; virtually all bridges since the end of the 19^th century are made of steel. It is the craftsmanship of the stone towers that distinguishes the Brooklyn Bridge from all others. A visitor to the Bridge in this way could make no mistake about the time period when the Bridge was built, or where along the technological spectrum the Brooklyn Bridge has its place.

The history of the Brooklyn Bridge can also give perspective on what events were shaping society at the time of construction. The fingerprints of the Tweed Ring and the corruption of Tammany Hall are all over the story of the building of the Bridge. What at the time was the biggest scandal in New York, the fall of William Tweed and his business associates, played an integral part in the Bridge⁶. Throughout The Great Bridge, David McCullough references events that took place outside the spectrum of the bridge building, but helped shape life at the time. For example, the scandal involving the preacher Henry Ward Beecher of Plymouth Church and adultery charges was major news in Brooklyn⁷. Studying the history of the Bridge would no doubt uncover many of the newsworthy items of the period.

The time of the building of the Brooklyn Bridge was a time of great scandal in New York. When the Tweed Ring was uncovered, there was public outcry for everything the crooks had been involved in to be examined closely for misappropriation of funds. Naturally, the biggest project of the City, the Bridge, was a prime target⁸. So even in this way did the Brooklyn Bridge affect life in New York.

The scandals even reached down to the physical Bridge itself. Against the warning of Washington Roebling, the contract for the steel wire to be used in the cables of the Bridge was awarded to Lloyd Haigh⁹. It later turned out that Haigh had business arrangements with Abram Hewitt, who ironically had been brought on to "root out all mismanagement and corruption inside the Bridge Company after the fall of the Tweed Ring¹⁰." More importantly than the financial shenanigans taking place with regards to the wire contract was the eventual discovery of bad wire being secretly delivered to the Bridge site. By the time this was discovered, it is suspected that most of the five hundred tons of rejected wire had made its way into the Bridge cables, and could not be removed¹¹.

It was in this context, surrounded by these events and others omitted from The Great Bridge, that the Brooklyn Bridge was built. These events are as much a part of the history of the Brooklyn Bridge as the Bridge is part of the history of these events. Even the Presidential election of 1872, during which Abram Hewitt was the campaign manager for Democratic candidate Samuel Tilden¹², had the mark of the Brooklyn Bridge on it. Neither is it insignificant that the election was marred by scandal.

An examination of the Brooklyn Bridge and history of its construction reveals an immense amount of information about the era. From the late 1860s to the early 1880s, most major events in New York and Brooklyn can be traced in some way to the Brooklyn Bridge. The Bridge itself and the materials of which it is constructed tell the researcher much about the time period. The mix of steel, a modern substance, and granite, a classic medium of construction represents both the passing into a new age of construction and one of the final examples of stonework on a grand scale. The below-standard steel wire mixed into the cables hints at the scandals of the time. Forever will the documentation of the corruption that grazed the Bridge as a result of the Tweed Ring's involvement exist.

The history of the Brooklyn Bridge is and always will be a monument to its twenty-year era in New York and Brooklyn. The two are forever intertwined, impossible to separate. From either a technological standpoint or a social one, the Bridge looms large above the East River, and above the scandals of the period.

Footnotes

1 - McCullough, David. The Great Bridge. 1972. Page 27.

2 - Schuyler, Montgomery. Harper's Weekly. 1883.

3 - McCullough, David. The Great Bridge. 1972. Page 552.

4 - McCullough, David. The Great Bridge. 1972. Pages 33-34.

5 - McCullough, David. The Great Bridge. 1972. Page 169.

6 - McCullough, David. The Great Bridge. 1972. Pages 132-138.

7 - McCullough, David. The Great Bridge. 1972. Page 277.

8 - McCullough, David. The Great Bridge. 1972. Pages 278-284.

9 - McCullough, David. The Great Bridge. 1972. Pages 377-378.

10 - McCullough, David. The Great Bridge. 1972. Page 230.

11 - McCullough, David. The Great Bridge. 1972. Page 444.

12 - McCullough, David. The Great Bridge. 1972. Page 372-73.