<\/p>
When fire shot through the City of London over the course of three days in early September 1666, razing everything in its path, the future of England\u2019s capital \u2013 its very existence \u2013 was in jeopardy. Although the estimated death toll remained remarkably low for a fire that wreaked such destruction, the City itself looked much different when the final smouldering was extinguished.<\/p>\n
More than 13,000 houses had been destroyed, along with nearly 90 churches. Some significant buildings were lost to the flames, including the original St Paul\u2019s Cathedral and the Royal Exchange, as well as the city gates at Aldersgate, Ludgate and Newgate. The subsequent history of England would have taken a different complexion had its entire capital been lost. As it was, the flames were largely limited to the City of London.<\/p>\n
A few historians have even suggested that, in some regards, the Great Fire of London<\/a> turned out to be a force for good. The principal tenet of this line of thinking revolves around the Great Plague<\/a>. The belief is that, when fire broke out, the epidemic \u2013 which had ripped so easily through the cheek-by-jowl living quarters of the City the previous year \u2013 would have found it much harder be transmitted; in short, that the fire killed off the epidemic, certainly in London.<\/p>\n Thomas Farriner\u2019s bakehouse (where the Great Fire of London began) was not located on Pudding Lane, as traditionally believed. Hearth tax records show it was actually sited on Fish Yard, a small enclave off Pudding Lane.<\/p>\n <\/p><\/div> <\/section> Did you know?<\/h4>\n