Modelling Edwardian/Victorian Roads

[SJS]

Hi All - I am sure there must be some of you out there who have modelled Edwardian roads. This photo gives a good example. I was thinking on the lines of dark earth ground cover pressed onto a dark painted surface.... 

 

[petethemole]

Whatever the actual road surface was (probably macadam, possibly bonded with sand, clay or tar), the texture here consists mainly of horse droppings spread out by traffic, with the occasional fresher concentration and impressed by many cart wheel tracks. The colour would be that of the main component.

[Guy Rixon]

The side road in that picture is clearly laid with setts. Is the main road the same, but completely covered in filth, or should we infer a different surface under the muck?

[petethemole]

We're at Poplar Dock. London, 1898 https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/search/more-like-this/90765304?family=editorial. The entrance on the right appears to be to another railway premises (see the sign on the next building). I would suggest that both were swept daily, unlike the road.  

[Edwardian]

I would agree with Petethemole.  I would interpret the surface of the main thoroughfare as a metalled road surface, probably macadam, covered in ordure from the passing horse traffic.  Explains how Joe the Crossing Sweeper was able to keep busy!

 

When better swept, I suggest the surface might resemble the picture of Bournemouth on the page linked on Petethemole's second post.

[SJS]

Sorry I should have posted the location. It is indeed the entrance to the Midland Railway at Poplar dock. There was also GNR and GWR presence at the dock. 

 

I hadn't really thought about what was underneath - I did read that there were a variety of surfaces - including setts as in the side road/entrance and even wooden setts! 

 

Other than spreading horse muck over my layout - anyone modelled something like this. I wondered about the "mud" that is used in wargaming diaromas. Spread thiny and then ruts added?

 

Or do you think it more likely as in this photo that the railway area would be much clearer of muck?

[petethemole]

The shot inside the yard shows a clean surface  despite the presence of several horses; labour was cheap, a clean working environment was better for the company's business and manure had a price. 

[Guy Rixon]

Other than spreading horse muck over my layout - anyone modelled something like this. I wondered about the "mud" that is used in wargaming diaromas. Spread thiny and then ruts added?

 

No, but my plans  involve modelling several streets in central London, some commercial-posh, some residential-posh and some industrialised on one side with other property opposite. It would be useful to know how mucked up were streets in each category. I suppose I should look for photos of the right district.

 

I'm thinking that most central-London streets would have hard surfaces so it's a matter of adding detail on top, not carving ruts.

 

David Damek, a finescale modeller of tanks and aeroplanes (google "Plasmo Youtube", he's well worth a look), has used caked dry-weathering powders to simulate mud but said in one video that he thought using plaster was a better option.

[SJS]

The shot inside the yard shows a clean surface  despite the presence of several horses; labour was cheap, a clean working environment was better for the company's business and manure had a price. 

 

Good point - yes it does seem to be the case. I was kind of hoping not to go with setts as they can be a pain to model...but hey ho....

[SJS]

No, but my plans  involve modelling several streets in central London, some commercial-posh, some residential-posh and some industrialised on one side with other property opposite. It would be useful to know how mucked up were streets in each category. I suppose I should look for photos of the right district.

 

I'm thinking that most central-London streets would have hard surfaces so it's a matter of adding detail on top, not carving ruts.

 

David Damek, a finescale modeller of tanks and aeroplanes (google "Plasmo Youtube", he's well worth a look), has used caked dry-weathering powders to simulate mud but said in one video that he thought using plaster was a better option.

 

 

Thanks for the comments - I had been looking at the diorama guys on the web so will take a look at his. As I mentioned earlier a lot seem to use the commercially available "mud"

[SJS]

Just one more picture that might be useful 

 

 

 

Shows some nice setts in a fan fashion and some various piles..... love the baskets as well

[Andy Hayter]

That pattern is available in H0 (near enough to 00) from Busch - item 6031

[Dave John]

Useful period pictures.

 

I was interested to see the gateposts have a different style of gas lamp on each. Odd, but one for the "prototype for everything" file. 

[SJS]

That pattern is available in H0 (near enough to 00) from Busch - item 6031

 

Thanks will take a look

[Mikkel]

I'm picking this thread up as I've been doing a little online "research" on the matter.

 

Firstly, I found this page useful: http://www.glias.org.uk/journals/8-a.html.

There's also a part 2, which is a PDF available from this link: http://www.glias.org.uk/journals/9-a.pdf

 

Browsing a number of photos of street scenes from Edwardian days shows that while setts were certainly prominent in some areas of some cities, many streets in both large cities (central and suburban) and market towns do not show (exposed) setts or cobbles. So as discussed above they are either early macadam or some sort of 'hardstanding', or possibly covered in horse dung and mud.

 

Apart from the photos discussed earlier, there are many other examples (Getty images are a good source if you tweak the search criteria right). Here are a few which illustrate the variety of appearances/textures, and the equal variety of pavements:

 

Regent Street: https://www.gettyimages.dk/detail/news-photo/london-regent-street-with-early-trams-cars-in-early-1900s-news-photo/171166776?adppopup=true

Belgrave Square: https://www.gettyimages.dk/detail/news-photo/buildings-on-one-side-of-belgrave-square-london-news-photo/3333295?adppopup=true

Bournemouth: https://www.gettyimages.dk/detail/news-photo/busy-town-centre-street-scene-in-bournemouth-a-large-news-photo/628815028?adppopup=true

Rugby: https://www.gettyimages.dk/detail/news-photo/rugby-warwickshire-england-the-high-street-rugby-circa-1905-news-photo/79663708?adppopup=true

Chichester: https://www.gettyimages.dk/detail/news-photo/stage-coaches-off-to-goodwood-from-chichester-news-photo/2673439?adppopup=true

Folkestone: https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/folkestone-castle-hill-avenue-late-19th-early-20th-century-news-photo/1036126354?adppopup=true

Cricklade: https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/cricklade-high-street-cricklade-wiltshire-with-some-local-news-photo/464415017?adppopup=true

St Anne's on Sea: https://www.gettyimages.dk/detail/news-photo/crescent-road-st-annes-on-sea-lancashire-1890-1910-a-street-news-photo/464415941?adppopup=true

 

I am interested in this because I am modelling the street in front of  a goods depot in a sizeable town. I had assumed setts would be the logical choice but am now not so sure. The aforementioned document from the London Industrial Society mentions that setts continued to be used in areas like railway goods yards as noise was not such an issue there. Photos confirm this, so as discussed earlier it seems a common situation in large yards in Edwardian days would be to have setts inside the yard, but other paving on the public road outside (many yards of course did not have setts at all).

 

If this is correct, it leaves me with the question: What colour and texture would early Macadam be? The Wikipedia page seems to indicate light/fine gravel colours? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macadam

 

Edited January 5, 2020 by Mikkel

[TheQ]

Outside of citys the roads surfaces were often what the local soil was.  From photographs of troops marching, the area I'm modelling even what are now A Roads , were bare chalk, not macadam, even between the wars,  which must have been  dusty in the summer and slippery in the summer.. 

 

I noted when I lived there that when holes were dug  the tarmac laid later was straight onto the chalk, except on the station  approach road which had been cobbled at some point. 

[Mikkel]

Thanks, that's interesting. The chalk adds a further dimension. 

 

Setts seemed to be the preferred choice where horses needed good grip, e.g. up inclines etc. Photos also suggest that setts were preferred where trams were involved, leading to a combination of different kinds of paving on the same road. See e.g.:

 

https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/horse-tram-south-london-circa-1900-a-double-decker-horse-news-photo/1022841500?adppopup=true

 

https://www.gettyimages.dk/detail/news-photo/market-square-lytham-st-annes-lancashire-1890-1910-market-news-photo/464416003?adppopup=true (also hard standing)

 

And not least:

 

https://www.gettyimages.dk/detail/news-photo/workmen-with-a-steam-roller-carry-out-roadworks-in-high-news-photo/464414455?adppopup=true

 

 

[Andy Hayter]

5 hours ago, Mikkel said:

I'm picking this thread up as I've been doing a little online "research" on the matter.

 

Firstly, I found this page useful: http://www.glias.org.uk/journals/8-a.html.

There's also a part 2, which is a PDF available from this link: http://www.glias.org.uk/journals/9-a.pdf

 

Browsing a number of photos of street scenes from Edwardian days shows that while setts were certainly prominent in some areas of some cities, many streets in both large cities (central and suburban) and market towns do not show (exposed) setts or cobbles. So as discussed above they are either early macadam or some sort of 'hardstanding', or possibly covered in horse dung and mud.

 

Apart from the photos discussed earlier, there are many other examples (Getty images are a good source if you tweak the search criteria right). Here are a few which illustrate the variety of appearances/textures, and the equal variety of pavements:

 

 

 

If this is correct, it leaves me with the question: What colour and texture would early Macadam be? The Wikipedia page seems to indicate light/fine gravel colours? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macadam

 

Mikkel

Do not confuse Macadam road covering with tar Macadam.  [As I did recently on another thread.]

Macadam surfaces were crushed stone held together with sand, mud, manure etc.  Originally it would be the colour of the stone - possibly local, and maybe why TheQ saw chalk under a tarred surface - although some chalks might be  bit soft for a Macadam surface.  Later it would weather more towards the mud and manure that would slowly accumulate.

Tar Macadam was discovered by accident when a barrel of tar spilled on a Macadam road in Derbyshire (Mam Tor).  It is this that was new in the Edwardian times.  Macadam roads had been around for almost 100 years when tar Macadam came along.

[Mikkel]

Thanks Andy. I had caught onto the difference between original macadam and the tarred version, but find it difficult to distinugish between the many types of paving in period photos such as those linked to above.  However from what you and the Q say it sounds like Macadam would in principle be the local colour of the top layer of stone (Wikipedia mentions max 2 cms for the size of top layer stone).

 

Then there is the question of how long macadam lasted. Above, I linked to articles by the London Industrial Archaelogical Society. Part 1 says (my emphasis):

 

Quote

By 1848, the City of London had only one short section of Macadam remaining but the City was an exception for, whatever its limitations, the Macadam method was economically attractive and certainly a great improvement on what had existed previously. It provided a good footing for horses and the noise generated by horses' hoofs and vehicle wheels was low. The Macadam road continued to be the standard for lightly trafficked roads well into the twentieth century but was ultimately superseded by bituminous pavings, although some survives in private roads.

 

And:

 

Quote

Towards the end of the century, when wood and asphalt surfaces prevailed, granite setts continued to be used in preference to such surfaces where a good foothold for horses was essential, as when the gradient exceeded 1 on 60. They were also used where wear was likely to be high, as at road junctions. In a street where setts comprised the general surface, short sections of tar-macadam or asphalt were sometimes laid to reduce noise outside sensitive locations such as hospitals and churches. Setts continued to be used for the first half of the following century especially where the traffic was heavy and where noise of little account as in railway depots and docks. Much remains in situ although often not visible, as the surface has been upgraded by an overlay of a bituminous material.

 

And:

Quote

Where tram tracks were laid, as far as can be determined, it was universal practice for setts to be laid between and on either side of the tracks. The setts served to provide stability for the rails especially when the street was unpaved, and they provided a good grip 

 

Part 2 then  discusses wood (which survived much longer than I thought) and asphalt (which was introduced much earlier than I thought!)  - but note that there is a London bias to this article.

 

So to sum up, it sounds like setts, macadam, tarred macadam and (in London at least) wood and asphalt would all be relevant for urban areas in the Edwardian period, depending on location and type of street. To which can then be added the particularities of rural roads. No free lunch in railway modelling 

 

Edited January 5, 2020 by Mikkel
To clarify

[IWCR]

In towns there was often a practice of having a cobbled crossing at junctions etc to allow pedestrians to cross the roadway without getting too mucky. (Long dresses on women  etc)

The photo at the head of this topic may even show this on the side road although the cobbled area in view looks to be a bit wide to be just a crossing.

 

Pete

[Mikkel]

12 hours ago, IWCR said:

a cobbled crossing at junctions etc to allow pedestrians to cross the roadway without getting too mucky

 

A couple of examples of that here, the last one clearly illustrating why it was needed!

 

https://www.gettyimages.dk/detail/news-photo/the-residence-of-famous-philanthropist-baroness-angela-news-photo/3063758?adppopup=true

https://www.gettyimages.dk/detail/news-photo/stage-coaches-off-to-goodwood-from-chichester-news-photo/2673439?adppopup=true

[ChrisN]

There is a book called 'Grandfather's London'.  (It is actually my Great Grandfather's London.)  They are pictures of ordinary people mostly in South London.  In one of the pictures it refers to the Tramways act where Tram companies were compelled to have setts between the rails and for 18", ( er 472mm ) either side of them.  The rest of the road appears to be Macadam.  Apparently it was a punishable offence for non Trams to use the central tram portion.

 

I know this is a little before the time period under discussion but I am not sure how much would have changed in fifteen years.

 

(The book is well worth getting if you can find a copy.)

[Mikkel]

Thanks Chris, those dimensions are very useful. It's tempting to model a road with a combination of setts and macadam. I wonder why the setts were a requirement for trams. In early days it could be because they allowed the horses that pulled trams a good grip as discussed above, but what about later. Safety for pedestrians crossing the road?

[corneliuslundie]

This talk so far is mostly about big towns and cities. I think that in villages and small towns the roads would not have received the luxury of a macadam surface until considerably later. I am thinking particularly of some of the new towns and villages which grew up in the South Wales valleys when coal mining and iron works were built. I do not have any photos I can post but a number of those I have seen show very little proper surface, though some are certainly from the first part of the 19th century. Quite often they started as tramways which also became used as roads, with dwellings sometimes built along them.

And in rural areas macadam was certainly much later arriving. So I am not surprised to read or bare chalk.

Jonathan

Edited January 6, 2020 by corneliuslundie
typo

[Andy Hayter]

8 minutes ago, Mikkel said:

Thanks Chris, those dimensions are very useful. It's tempting to model a road with a combination of setts and macadam. I wonder why the setts were a requirement for trams. In early days it could be because they allowed the horses that pulled trams a good grip as discussed above, but what about later. Safety for pedestrians crossing the road?

 

I am unconvinced by the horse traction argument given that horse drawn omnibuses had no such surface to work on, yet did their duties.

I can think of three possible reasons:

1.  To minimise the possibility of stone from the macadam surface being kicked into the flangeway leading to the possibility of derailment.

2.  To create the cordon-sanitaire in which the trams operated without obstruction - backed up by the comment above about this area being out of bounds for other traffic.

3.  It is a mechanism for keeping the tramway in place and in gauge.